The development of social conventions and creativity:

1. Audrey Barthélémy-Musso& Valérie TartaskUniversity of Toulouse II- FranceOctogone-ECCD Laboratoryh EuropeanConferenceof DevelopmentalPsychologyLausanne – 2013, 4th september 2013 The development of social conventions and creativity: how do 3 to 7 years-old children use objects during dyadic play ?

2. 2. Threekinds of play How do 3-to-7 year-oldchildrenconstructand developuses of objectsin social contexts? • Threedifferentcontexts of social peer’splay • Interests for object substitutions •  whatkindof substitutions (shared conventions) do childrencreatetogetherin theirplayin function of theirage?

3. 3. Few theoreticalunderpinnings Production of substitutions isoftenconsidered as an individualskilland rarely as a social construction throughtriadic interactions (Moro & Rodriguez, 2005; Rodriguez & Moro, 2008) Most studies focus on children’scomprehensionof object substitutions produced by an adult Bigham& Bourchier-Sutton (2008), Rakoczy (2006) 3 y.o. childrenstill show difficultiesto understandcomplexsymbolicuses in communicative situations (Tomasello, Striano & Rochat, 1999) and very few studies are interested in this question afterthisage

4. Development of symbolic uses Tomasello, Striano & Rochat (1999) In child-adult interactions Rakoczy (2006 ) Tomasello (2004) No developement, Bigham & Bourchier-Sutton (2008) Rodriguez & Palacios (2011) Developementbetween3-4 and 5-6 y.o., Barthélémy & Tartas (2009) 12 month-olds 3 y.o. 7 y.o. 2 y.o. In child-adult-object interactions

5. 4. General hypotheses In peer’splay, childrendevelopsymbolic uses of objectsincreasing in complexityafter 3 years-old. Theyshare social rules about uses of objectsrelying on new abilities to coordinatedifferentsemioticsystems (language and object uses) Play context influences symbolic uses productions : the objectsuses and the children’smeaningmakingdevelopdifferentlydepending on the social instruction

6. 5. Methodology bout object use isdeveloping. Weproposed3 differentkinds of playwith the sameobjectsattwosame-agechildren Free play NO CONSTRAINT Humoristicplay SOCIAL PURPOSE CONSTRAINT Mealplay THEMATIC PURPOSE CONSTRAINT

7. 5. Methodology Common experimental design for the 3 plays N = 288 children • 96 differentchildren(48 dyads) wererecruitedin eachstudy • 4 age groups of 3, 4, 5 and 7 years-old Material: 10 familiarobjects, 1 replicatoy : a baby-doll Passation atschool : 10 minutes All childrenwerevideorecorded Weevaluated in sharedplay(in joint attention situation, onlywhenchildrenfocused on the sameobjects) (1) the number of substitutedobject uses (2) the complexity of substitutedobject uses by examining verbal sharedmeanings

8. 5. Methodology Observation grid of subsituted uses of objects Verbalizationswithout use Uses withoutverbalization The mostcomplex The least complex Level1 Level 5 Level 6 Level 2 Level 4 Level 3 Drink the glue Here Drink Drink the baby bottle The baby-bottle! With non specificverbalizations Withonly verbal identification of the representedobject, without use Withoutverbalization Withconventinalverbalization and incongruous nomination Withverbalizationwhichemphasizes the actions Withverbalizationwhichprecises the identity of the representedobject

9. 6. Results : Free play(no constraint) Meannumber of substituted uses No differencebetweenagegroups

10. 6. Results : Humoristicplay(socio-pragmaticconstraints) Meannumber of substituted uses Differenceexistingbetween 5 and 7 y.o.

11. 6. Results : Mealplay(thematicconstraints) Meannumber of substituted uses Differenceexistingbetween 3, 4 y.o. and 7 y.o. children

12. 6. Conclusion of results In free play: whatevertheirage, childrenrelied on conventional uses of objects to develop new substitutions (With the paintbrush, childrenuse the bottle of shampoo as a paintbottle) The conventional use of objectsdirectedthe children’sactivity In humoristicplay, being able to makelaughhispartner relies on a construction playwhereasat 7 y.o, children use substitutions of objects in order to makelaughtheirpartner In mealplay, 3 and 4 y.o. childrendevelopotherthematics in theirplaythan the requestedmealone. After 5 y.o., the instruction directed the object uses and the pretendactivitywhich in turnsredirect the creation of new objects uses

13. 6. Results : Complexity of verbal sharedmeanings in free play Meannumber of substituted uses * : p < .05 Legend of levels: 1 : withoutverbalization 2 : Withconventinalverbalization and incongruous nomination 3 : With non specificverbalizations 4 : Withverbalizationwhichemphasize the actions 5 : Withverbalizationwhichspecifiedidentity of representedobject 6 : Withonly verbal identification of the representedobject, without use

14. 6. Results : Complexity of verbal sharedmeanings in humoristicplay Meannumber of substituted uses * * : p < .05 * Legend of levels: 1 : withoutverbalization 2 : Withconventinalverbalization and incongruous nomination 3 : With non specificverbalizations 4 : Withverbalizationwhichemphasize the actions 5 : Withverbalizationwhichspecifiedidentity of representedobject 6 : Withonly verbal identification of the representedobject, without use

15. 6. Results : Complexity of verbal sharedmeanings in mealplay Meannumber of substituted uses * : p < .05 * * * * Legend of levels: 1 : withoutverbalization 2 : Withconventinalverbalization and incongruous nomination 3 : With non specificverbalizations 4 : Withverbalizationwhichemphasize the actions 5 : Withverbalizationwhichspecifiedidentity of representedobject 6 : Withonly verbal identification of the representedobject, without use

16. 6. Conclusion of results Substituted uses are increasinglycomplexwithageeven in the lessconstrainingcontext (free play) : Children of 3 y.o. co-constructless verbal sharedmeaningsthanthose of 7 y.o. The more constrainingis the task, the more youngestchildren are in difficulty to share verbal meanings about object’ssubstitution => Sharing of verbal meaningsdefines the play frame and islinked to a more important production of substitutions leading to co-creation of complexthematics

17. 7. General discussion (1/2) INFLUENCES OF PLAY PURPOSE Adultinstructions implydifferentkinds of understanding : differentkinds of symbolicuses production, of symbolic frame creation(fiction) and inter-comprehension Inter-comprehensionisverydifficult in the thematicplay : 3 and 4 y.o. childrenleave the mealplay and developthematics in whichpreviousagreements are existingbetween the child (painting, nursing, toilet)

18. 7. General discussion (2/2) Verbal interactions about substitutions contributed to define the commongoal, increasing the complexity of the substituted uses Substitutions in social fiction playimplythe coordination of: production of object substitution understanding of the other’s intentions in context understanding and creating a frame for the play by producingappropriated substitutions If 3 y.o. childrencoordinatethese 3 levels (object, other and play frame) with an adult (Rakoczy, 2006), they have stilldifficultiesin sharing and following the samecommongoal in peer’splay

19. Thankyou for your attention

20. 3. Theoreticalcontext Development of PRODUCTION of object’s substitutions Between 2 and 3 y.o : Childrenfollowed the substitutions engaged by the adultfrom 2 y.o. Theysharedadult’srules and became able to create new conventions, new substituted uses. Theyare increasinglycreative(Rakoczy, 2006). Between3 and 5 y.o : Childrenchooseincreasinglysubstitutedobjectscorresponding to their action and not to representthe referentobject (Copple, Cocking & Matthews, 1984)  They use objectsincreasinglydifferentfrom the referent. Between 3 and 8 y.o. : In pretendplaywherethe thematicisproposed by an adult, 3-4 y.o. haddifficultiesto exceed the level of « intentional use of objects » whereas5-6 and 7-8 y.o do not (Barthélémy & Tartas, 2009).