This research was aimed to study the life satisfaction in field of peers relationships with children with disabilities and their participation in the leisure activity (e.g., sport and physical activity, leisure center and artistic activity). The problematic of this research is :Does the practice of leisure by children with disabilities promote their life satisfaction in the field of peer relationships ?
This problematic ensues three hypotheses: The first hypothesis is that children with disabilities participate in less leisure (sports, arts and leisure center) than children with typical development. The second hypothesis says that children with disabilities participate in more individual leisure than children with typical development. Finally, the third hypothesis presumes that children with disabilities participate in less leisure, which explains why they have a low life satisfaction in field of peers relationships.
Indeed, previous research has shown that children with disabilities are less satisfied with their life satisfaction in the field of peer relationships and that theirs participation in leisure is low and when they do leisure this is usually individual leisure. (Coudronnière, Bacro and Gumard, 2015 ; Modell, Rider and Manchetti, 1997 ; Orsmond, Wyngaarden Krauss and Malick Seltzer, 2004 ; Solish, Perry and Mines, 2010).
To answer this study, we used questions of survey of the research which name is Children’s World. Our population consists of 2203 children enrolled in 5th grade whose 262 are children with disabilities and 1851 have a typical development.
Statistical analyses were performed by the JASP software. For the first hypothesis a Student’s t test has been made. For the second hypothesis a chi-square test was done. Then, a mediation analysis was completed for the last hypothesis.
The results show that children with disabilities do not participate in less leisure than children with typical development. In addition, children with disabilities do not participate in more individual leisure than children with typical development. To finish, children with disabilities are less satisfied in their life satisfaction field of peer relationships (this result has already been found by Coudronnière and al, 2015), however their lower life satisfaction in the field of peer relationships is not explained by their less leisure participation.
Discussion: The principal explanatory source of the first hypothesis is a mediatization to the general public, on the part of public policies, the importance of the practice of a sport and physical activity for their various goods made (physical, mental health…) and this whatever the age, the sex and the presence or not of a disability. This may in part explain why children with disabilities participate in as much leisure as children with typical development.
The second hypothesis can be explained by the fact that previous studies have focused on one type of disability, unlike us. In addition, it is important to take into account the type of disability, the degree (light, moderate or severe) that could have an impact on the type of leisure chosen (individual vs collective). This has not been taken into account in our study which may explain the non-validation of hypothesis.
Finally, only link was found in the mediation: children with disabilities are less satisfied with their life satisfaction in the field of peer relationships. This result has already been discovered in the study by Coudronnière and al (2015). But this link is not mediated by the low leisure participation by children with disabilities. Our first hypothesis reveals that children with disabilities participate in as much leisure as children with typical development. Therefore, since they participate in as much leisure as children with typical development, this can not constitute an element that can mediate the already existing relationship between having a disability and the low satisfaction of life in the field of peer relationships.
To conclude, none of our hypotheses have been validated. Therefore, the leisure practice by children with disabilities is not a way to promote their life satisfaction in the filed of peer relationships. For future research it would be interesting to take up this problematic issue but focusing on a specific type of disability such as intellectual disability.
Words I have learned :
Field = domaine
Public policies = les politiques publiques
Peer relationship = relation paritaires
Disability = handicap
Leisure = loisir
Amandine CHARRIER
Bibliography :
Coudronnière, C., Bacro, F., Guimard, P., & Florin, A. (2015). Quelle conception de la qualité de vie et du bien-être chez des enfants de 5 à 11 ans ? Enfance, 2015(02), 225‑243. https://doi.org/10.4074/S0013754515002049
Modell S. J., Rider R. A. & Menchetti B. M. (1997) An exploration of the influence of educational placement on the community recreation and leisure patterns of children with developmental disabilities. Perceptual and Motor Skills 85, 695–704.
Orsmond, G. I., Krauss, M. W., & Seltzer, M. M. (2004). Peer Relationships and Social and Recreational Activities Among Adolescents and Adults with Autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 34(3), 245‑256. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:JADD.0000029547.96610.df
Solish, A., Perry, A., & Minnes, P. (2010). Participation of Children with and without Disabilities in Social, Recreational and Leisure Activities. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 23(3), 226‑236. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-3148.2009.00525.x