Ka. Kappsimon et De. Mcguire, OBSERVED SOCIAL-INTERACTION PATTERNS IN ADOLESCENTS WITH AND WITHOUT CRANIOFACIAL CONDITIONS, The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal, 34(5), 1997, pp. 380-384
Objective:This study examined social interactions of adolescents in a
natural environment (school lunch room) to determine if there were ide
ntifiable differences in social behavior between children with and wit
hout craniofacial conditions (CFC). Design:This was an observational s
tudy comparing social interaction skills of children with CFC to peers
without craniofacial conditions. Setting:The observations were conduc
ted in the respective school lunch rooms of the adolescents with CFC.
Participants: Clinical subjects were 13 adolescents (4 male) with vari
ous craniofacial conditions (5 cleft lip and palate) and 12 (4 male) p
eers without CFC present in the same lunch room. Main Outcome Measures
: An unknown observer obtained 45 minutes of structured observational
data on subject initiations, responses, nondirected comments, and exte
nded conversations over two to three lunch room periods. Data was code
d on the Epson HX-20 for type, frequency, and duration of social conta
ct. Specific measures included: subject initiations and responses, pee
r initiations and responses, conversations events, and nondirected com
ments. Results: Statistically significant differences were found betwe
en CFC and comparison subjects (CS) on each social interaction variabl
e measured. CS initiated more contacts, received positive responses mo
re frequently, and engaged in longer conversations than CFC subjects (
[F (1,24) = 14.1, p<.01; F (1,24) = 67.2, p<.001; F (1,24) = 5.50, p<.
05]. CS were approached by and responded appropriately to peers more o
ften [F (1,24) = 28.1, p<.001; F (1,24) = 43.2, p<.001]. Subjects with
CFC were more likely to produce nondirected comments (N = 7, x = 0, p
<.01). Conclusions: A significant number of children with CFC behaved
differently than their peers in a natural, daily occurring situation.
They were often at the periphery of the group, observers rather than p
articipants in conversation.