A comparison of 8- and 11-year-old girls' and boys' participation in specific types of rough-and-tumble play and aggressive fighting: Implications for functional hypotheses

Abstract

Study 1 compared the extent to which 8 and 11-year-old girls and boys (N = 86) participated in specific types of rough-and-tumble play. It used an observational methodology. The data were used to test two prominent hypotheses about the evolutionary function of this general category of play behaviour that have been applied to children, especially boys, of this age. One is that rough-and-tumble play provides practice for the development of real fighting skills and the other that it serves as a safe way to establish/display social dominance. Both hypotheses predict that boys mill engage in more rough-and-tumble play than girls, especially those types that are used in fighting/dominance contests. Boys were found to engage in significantly more chase initiation activities, more bouts of brief rough and-tumble play, more bouts of restraining and more bouts of boxing/hitting than girls. These data provide some support for the two hypotheses, although significant sex differences were not found for all types of rough-and-tumble play observed. No significant age differences were obtained, suggesting that the two hypotheses may be applicable throughout the 8- to 11-year-old period and not just at the end of it as previous research had suggested. Study 2 presented observational data concerning the motor patterns used in aggressive fighting. In all but one case, there were no significant differences in the extent to which 8/9- and 10/11-year-old girls and boys employed wrestling, hitting and restraining, supporting the view that the practice fighting hypothesis is relevant throughout the 8-11 year-old period. It mas argued that age and sex differences provide a useful means of scrutinising functional hypotheses, and that splitting behavioural categories that contain disparate action patterns facilitates more refined tests of those hypotheses.