This article was downloaded by: [University of Toronto Libraries]

On: 05 November 2014, At: 12:50

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer
House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Occupational Science

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rocc20

Occupational Development: Towards an

Understanding of Children's Doing
a b c
Jennifer O. Wiseman , Jane A. Davis & Helene J. Polatajko
a
Student at the University of Toronto
b
Department of Occupational Therapy , Rehabilitation Sciences Building, 160–500
University Ave, Toronto , ON , M5G1V7 , Canada E-mail:
c
Professor and Chair in the Department of Occupational Therapy, Faculty of Medicine ,
University of Toronto
Published online: 26 Sep 2011.

To cite this article: Jennifer O. Wiseman , Jane A. Davis & Helene J. Polatajko (2005) Occupational
Development: Towards an Understanding of Children's Doing, Journal of Occupational Science, 12:1, 26-35, DOI:
10.1080/14427591.2005.9686545

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14427591.2005.9686545

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of
the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied
upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall
not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other
liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or
arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
 Occupational Development: Towards an Understanding of Children’s Doing
Occupational Development: Towards
an Understanding of Children’s Doing
Jennifer O. Wiseman, Jane A. Davis & Helene J. Polatajko
Abstract
Although child development has been examined by various
disciplines for over a century, very little is known specifically
about how children’s occupations develop over time. In order
to begin to address this significant gap in the literature, an
exploratory qualitative study was conducted to examine
children’s doings. Twelve in-depth, semi-structured
interviews were conducted with members of six families:
Downloaded by [University of Toronto Libraries] at 12:50 05 November 2014
eight girls aged 6 to 12, and six parents. Two themes emerged
from the data: reasons for engagement in or why children do
the things they do (opportunities, resources, motivations,
parental views and values), and the process by which
children’s occupations come to be established (innate drive,
exposure, initiation, continuation, transformation,
cessation, and outcomes). The Process for Establishing
Children’s Occupations (PECO), comprised of specific
influences and process stages, is offered as a preliminary
model for understanding the process of and influences on
occupational development.
Key Words
Developmental process
Process for establishing children’s
occupations
Reasons for engagement
Jennifer Wiseman, MScOT, OT Reg. (Ont.), was an MScOT
student at the University of Toronto at the time of
completing this project. Jane Davis, MSc, doctoral candidate,
OT Reg. (Ont.), is a Sessional Instructor and Helene
Polatajko, PhD, OT Reg. (Ont.), OT(C), FCAOT, is
Professor and Chair in the Department of Occupational
Therapy, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto.
Jane Davis
Department of Occupational Therapy
Rehabilitation Sciences Building
160-500 University Ave
Toronto, ON M5G 1V7
Canada
Email: ja.davis@utoronto.ca
26 Journal of Occupational Science, April 2005, Vol 12, No 1, pp 26-35.
J. Wiseman, J. Davis & H. Polatajko
Over the span of a lifetime, humans engage in a large number
of different occupations. Throughout time, these
occupations have served to construct individual identities,
communities and societies. Yet, relatively little is known
about human occupational development. Studies of
development have almost exclusively addressed domains
that might be considered components of occupational
development, such as cognitive, language, motor and social
development, but not occupational development per se.
While a fairly extensive and detailed body of knowledge
exists within each of these developmental domains, this
literature can only be considered to offer insights into some
of the internal factors influencing occupational
development. It is generally agreed that occupational
performance, and by association, occupational
development, is influenced by both internal and external
factors, in interaction. Thus, the understanding of domain
specific development of internal factors is necessary but
insufficient to the understanding of occupational
development (Davis & Polatajko, 2004).
In the study reported here, we took a global approach to
understanding occupational development. We considered,
given the dearth of literature on occupational development,
that talking with children and their parents about what and
why the children do was a good starting point. Using a
qualitative approach, we conducted twelve in-depth, semi-
structured interviews with children and parents from six
families to begin to explore how and why occupations are
initiated, become established, and change over time, in the
everyday world. In this paper, we present the findings from
these interviews, but first, the current theoretical
perspectives and relevant research literature examining the
influences on occupational development are described.
Current Theoretical Perspectives on
Occupational Development
Occupation is a new domain of study within development,
thus the literature discussing occupational development is
just emerging. The main contributors to the emergent
conceptual literature on occupational development, thus
far, are Case-Smith (2005), Humphry (2002), and Davis and
Polatajko (2004). All consider occupational development
as progressive changes in occupational performance. Case-
Smith and Humphry focus on childhood, while Davis and
Polatajko take a life span perspective.
Case-Smith (2005) has focused on the development of the
play occupations of children at various ages and stages of
 Occupational Development: Towards an Understanding of Children’s Doing
social, motor, and cognitive development. She proposes
that children’s occupations emerge as a result of the
interaction between child and environment, and uses the
term “affordance,” initially coined by Gibson (1979), to
represent the way in which a child’s environment offers
him or her opportunities for occupational engagement. She
argues that children’s occupations develop as a result of
“what the environment affords, as well as the child’s
perceptual capability to recognize affordances in that
environment” (Case-Smith, p. 91).
Humphry (2002) also considers occupational development
to be a consequence of the interaction between child and
environment, and suggests that evolution has favoured
processes that facilitate child development. Focusing
primarily on the occupational development of young
children, she suggests that children are born with innate
Downloaded by [University of Toronto Libraries] at 12:50 05 November 2014
traits that lead them toward cultural learning, providing them
with the inclination to imitate the purposeful occupations
of others. She uses the term self-organization to capture
the process through which infants and young children
become able to perform new occupations. Humphry
suggests “watching significant others provides an
introduction to the intentional nature of activities” (p. 176).
Davis and Polatajko (2004) have also adopted an
interactionist perspective. They present a framework for
occupational development that is comprised of three
principles: continuity, multiple patternicity, and multiple
determinicity. The first, continuity, based on Atchley’s
(1999) Continuity Theory, holds that while specific
occupations change across the life course, individuals have
a general pattern of being occupied throughout (Davis &
Polatajko). The second, multiple patternicity, holds that the
pattern of occupational development is marked by changing
mastery and multiple variations in the patterns of growth,
development and decline, which are neither smooth nor
unidirectional. They suggest that occupational
development varies in “rate, characteristics, quality,
quantity, complexity, and specialization” depending on
variables such as an individual’s age or stage of life (Davis
& Polatajko, p. 106). The third principle, multiple
determinicity, specifically captures the interactional nature
of occupational development. Davis and Polatajko (2004)
hold that factors stemming from the person (e.g., heredity,
learning/plasticity, and active participation), the
environment (e.g., physical, social, cultural and historical),
the available occupations and the interaction of all three,
influence or act as determinants for the development of
occupations.
Relevant Research on Occupational
Development
In parallel with the emerging conceptual literature, some
empirical work in occupational development is also
beginning to emerge. Again, all the work that has emerged
has addressed the interactional nature of occupational
development. Some have provided evidence for the
Journal of Occupational Science, April 2005, Vol 12, No 1, pp 26-35.
J. Wiseman, J. Davis & H. Polatajko
influence of micro environmental factors, such as parents;
others have examined broader factors such as culture and
historical period.
Three studies were found looking particularly at the role of
parents. Primeau (1998) found that parents used a strategy
of occupational scaffolding, which involved task
modification, and verbal or physical guidance, when
attempting to engage their preschool children in household
work. Through occupational scaffolding, parents fostered
occupational exposure and enabled the development of their
child’s occupational competence. Pierce (2000) examined
how parents, specifically mothers, interacted with their
infants and toddlers through management of their home
environment. She found that mothers are involved in
selecting, maintaining and making toys, objects and
equipment available for their infant’s play, controlling their
infants’ access to the various spaces in the home, and
maintaining a safe environment for the infant. Green and
Chalip (1997) studied the effects of parent-children
interaction on the prolonged involvement in youth soccer.
They found that children were most likely to continue in
soccer if they enjoyed their team and found their practices
to be enjoyable. Encouragement from parents, in the form
of watching and discussing, also had an impact on
children’s prolonged involvement, as did perceived skill
level; however that effect was not as great.
Evidence from studies examining the influence of culture
suggests that the occupational development of children,
specifically the development of play, is not universal but
culturally bound (Goncu, Tuermer, Jain, & Johnson, 1999).
Gaskins (1999, 2000) examined the development and
socialization of Mayan children and found that cultural
beliefs, such as the central focus on adult work, the
development of children through participation in daily life,
and the freedom of children to decide on what to do, are
strong influences on occupational development. Bazyk,
Stalnaker, Llerena, Ekelman and Bazyk (2003) also studied
Mayan children. They found that the physical environment,
as well as the cultural context, were influential in determining
the development of Mayan children’s occupations.
Davis, Polatajko and Ruud (2002) examined the influence of
the historical environment on the occupational
development in children. In an historical study, drawing on
literary works, Davis and her colleagues examined the
occupations of children over the last four centuries. They
found social and historical influences that were time
specific. Davis (2000) also identified twelve themes that
seemed to cross the ages. These all related to the reasons
children did what they did, such as ‘wanting to know
everything about everything,’ ‘wanting approbation,’ and
‘trying to outdo one another.’
Taken together, this literature provides some empirical
support for the proposed conceptualization of occupational
development as interactional. However, none of the work
reported thus far provides insight into how this interaction
occurs, other than Humphry’s (2002) suggestion that
27
 Occupational Development: Towards an Understanding of Children’s Doing
children are born with innate traits that lead them toward
cultural learning, providing them with the inclination to
imitate the purposeful occupations of others. The purpose
of the study reported here was to begin to identify the
potential factors that contribute to occupational
development. By talking with children and their parents
about how and why occupations are initiated, become
established, and change over time, in the everyday world
of the child, we sought to identify what influenced the
occupational development of children.
The Methodology
The specific research question for this exploratory
qualitative study was: What influences the occupational
development of children? For the purposes of this study
occupational development was defined as “the gradual
Downloaded by [University of Toronto Libraries] at 12:50 05 November 2014
change in occupational behaviours” across an individual’s
life course “resulting from the growth and maturation of
the individual in interaction with the environment”
(Canadian Association of Occupational Therapists, 1997,
p. 40). Occupational behaviours were broadly defined as
any activities, or things that children do, excluding actions
or behaviours, such as fighting, crying, or sleeping. Only
the term activity was used in interactions with the children
and their parents, however, both the terms occupation and
activity are used interchangeably throughout this article.
Finally, influences referred to anything that a child or parent
identified as a reason for initiating, continuing, or stopping
an occupation.
The approach
In studying child development, qualitative researchers often
directly observe children to understand what they do (e.g.
Bazyk et al., 2003). Other common methods include parent
report and time-use diaries (Fletcher, Nickerson & Wright,
2003), both of which allow for a listing of what children do.
However, the question of interest in this study was why
children do what they do. We reasoned that observation
was not an adequate method to gain an understanding of
the influences on children’s occupational development. We
decided that since the children’s reasons for engagement
are not immediately or directly observable, it was important
to ask them. Although children are often assumed to lack
the ability to convey rich information within an interview
setting, when their information is studied in more depth it
can provide many insights into the child’s world (Zwiers &
Morrissette, 1999). Since some children may find it difficult
to articulate their reasons clearly, we also decided to ask
those intimately involved with the children, their parents.
We reasoned that, outside of the children themselves,
parents would have the best understanding of the course
of, and influences on, children’s occupational development.
We chose a semi-structured interview format to provide
some direction and a common basis for the interviews, as
well as, to allow for flexibility in the collection of additional
information that might not have been revealed in a
structured interview. An interview guide was created with
probes to facilitate a discussion of what occupations children
28 Journal of Occupational Science, April 2005, Vol 12, No 1, pp 26-35.
J. Wiseman, J. Davis & H. Polatajko
do now and what they used to do, as a lead in to the main
focus of the study, that of why children started, continued or
stopped their occupations.
Choosing the participants
The participants of this study were children and their parents.
It was decided to interview children between the ages of 6 and
12 years. Six was chosen as the minimum age because we
believed that children any younger than this may have difficulty
both understanding the questions, and articulating the scope
of influences on what they do. Twelve years was chosen as
the maximum age for this study because at this age children
begin to explore increasingly larger environments (Davis &
Polatajko, 2004), which could introduce influences of which
their parents were less likely to be aware, thus would be best
taken up in a separate study.
Following ethics approval, flyers were posted on bulletin
boards in various university buildings and handed out to
individuals who heard about the study through word of mouth
and requested flyers. Recruitment took place between February
and April 2004. Parents responding to the flyer, or who became
interested via word of mouth, contacted the primary researcher
by telephone or email to learn more about the study. Children
and their parents were included in the study if they could
speak and comprehend English, if the child met the age
requirement, if the parents consented to their own and their
child’s participation in the study, and if the child assented to
participation in the study. Seven families inquired about
participation and six gave informed written consent and assent
to participate; the seventh parent was unable to arrange a time
for the interviews within the duration of the study. Although
both boys and girls were actively sought, eight girls aged 6 to
12 were eventually recruited from six families. Three of the
families also had boys six or under; one girl had two sisters
over 12, one had an older brother and sister over 12, and one
was an only child.
All eight girls lived in two parent families with their biological
parents. The families were from various cultural backgrounds,
including Iranian, Jamaican, Jewish, and Scottish. Participants
were predominantly middle class, resided in a large urban area,
and all parents had at least some post-secondary education.
The parents worked in health care, law, sales, business, and
education.
Conducting the interviews
Twelve in-depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted
with fourteen members of six families (refer to Table 1): eight
girls, which included two pairs of sisters, and parents from
four of the six families. Two of the parent interviews involved
both parents. Two sets of parents did not participate in the
interviews due to the time constraints of the study. The
interviews were based on an interview guide that was modified
as the interviews and preliminary analysis progressed to allow
for further exploration of new information that had been
uncovered. This continual modification and unstructured
nature allowed participants to guide the interview and express
what was important.
 Occupational Development: Towards an Understanding of Children’s Doing
Table 1: The Families
Family Child’s Age Family members*
Pseudonym
1 Annice 11 Mother, Father, David (5)
Maryanne 12
2 Natalia 8 Mother, Bobbie (6)
3 Callie 6 Mother, Father
Isabelle 9 about the child in the study, other children were also
4 Alexis 10 N/A**
5 Sarah 10 N/A
6 Rosina 8 Father
* parents interviewed and additional children(age)
mentioned in quotes
**due to logistical issues not all parents could be
interviewed
Downloaded by [University of Toronto Libraries] at 12:50 05 November 2014
All interviews were conducted by the first author in a quiet
room with minimal distractions; each participant was able
to choose whether the interview took place at the research
facility or the participant’s home. All participants were told
that their participation was confidential and that all
information emanating from this study would be shared
anonymously. Children were reminded that what they said
to the interviewer would not be told to their parents.
Children under 10 years were provided with paper and
crayons in attempt to make the environment more
comfortable while they spoke with the interviewer. All
participants were told that they could end the interview at
any time and they were reminded of this throughout the
process. The interviewer attended to each participant’s
facial expressions and body posture in order to provide
continual assessment of the participant’s comfort level.
Each child was asked periodically “would you like to stop
now?” It was felt that wording the question in this way
made it easier for the child to answer ‘yes’. The children’s
interviews lasted from 25 to 60 minutes with the majority
lasting 40 minutes. The parent interviews lasted from 45 to
60 minutes.
All interviews were audio-taped and transcribed verbatim,
and the first author reviewed all transcripts for accuracy.
To maintain the confidentiality of the participants, all
demographic information and interviews were numerically
coded. For the purpose of this article, each participant has
been given a pseudonym; the child participants quoted
below are identified by their pseudonym and their actual
ages, and the parents through their relationship to their
children.
Uncovering the themes
Preliminary data analysis began simultaneously with data
collection, as recommended by Glaser & Strauss (1967).
Throughout the research process, regular peer debriefing
took place between the first author and the co-authors.
During this time, the interviews were reviewed, initial
thoughts shared, the interview guide modified, and analysis
discussed and developed. All transcripts were read at least
twice by two of the authors before being reduced into codes.
Journal of Occupational Science, April 2005, Vol 12, No 1, pp 26-35.
J. Wiseman, J. Davis & H. Polatajko
During the initial reading, two of the authors individually
carried out open coding of separate copies of the
transcripts to improve credibility of the results. Reduction
of the data began with open coding (Denzin & Lincoln,
2000). As categories emerged, they were linked, refined,
split, or combined through constant comparative method
(Glaser & Strauss, 1967). Although the children spoke
primarily about themselves and the parents spoke primarily
discussed within the interviews by both parents and
children. Thus, findings include information about other
children, in particular, younger boys.
Influences on Occupational Development
Although the focus of this study was on the influences on
occupational development, as with most qualitative
research, an unexpected theme emerged that was relevant
to the initial research question, but did not address it
directly. Thus, two major themes will be discussed: the first
addresses the question directly, the second adds new
insight to the process underlying occupational
development. The major themes that emerged were: 1) why
children do the things they do; and 2) process stages of
how occupations become established.
Why children do the things they do
Four categories of reasons for engagement emerged:
opportunities, resources, motivations, and parental views
and values, with each being comprised of a number of sub-
categories.
Opportunities
Engagement in an occupation depended on whether an
opportunity was made available to a child within his/her
environment. Children and their parents spoke about
opportunities provided by the natural environment, such
as snow providing an opportunity for tobogganing, or a
lake allowing a child to water ski. School and community
programs were identified as opportunities for engaging in
art classes, sports, conferences, committees and dancing.
For example: “I was interested in [attending the conference]
because I wanted to do something different, and I haven’t
really done anything like that, ‘cause I haven’t had the
opportunity to” (Maryanne, 12). Gifts were also identified
as providing opportunities for pursuing occupation. When
asked how she became interested in roller blading, one child
said “I got it, my roller blades, last, yes last year Christmas”
(Isabelle, 9); and when asked if she had considered
engaging in this activity prior to receiving the gift, the same
child said that she had not.
Conversely, children and parents spoke of not engaging in
activities because of a lack of opportunity. Often this
situation occurred because parents did not register their
children for the occupation, classes were full or simply not
offered, the occupation was not available to the child
because of the age or grade requirement for engagement,
or the child was not chosen following a try-out or interview.
29
 Occupational Development: Towards an Understanding of Children’s Doing
One parent explained how an opportunity to play sports
was unavailable to her son (Bobbie, 6):
he [Bobbie] wanted to play T-ball, but he also wanted
to play soccer so I said, ‘… we’ll play soccer this
year.’ So I signed him up for soccer, and now I feel
bad ‘cause he didn’t get in. He’s on the wait list, and
I’m too late for T-ball (Natalia’s mother).
Resources
Participants discussed a variety of resources required for
engagement in an occupation. Both children and parents
discussed time as a key resource, which influenced
children’s participation in various occupations:
Time has certainly been a huge reason why we haven’t
been able to do anything. But we live in an area
Downloaded by [University of Toronto Libraries] at 12:50 05 November 2014
where there’s tons of activities around, but it’s hard
to get them there, and it’s hard to car pool them…you
know, I think that’s the biggest issue. (Maryanne’s
mother)
The availability of transportation to take a child to the
location of the occupation, and adequate finances for the
child to take part in the occupation, were other significant
factors to their initiation and continued performance, as
depicted by Maryanne’s mother:
Well I think another reason why they do…what they
do is finances. We send [Maryanne] to overnight
camp. This isn’t cheap. Like, none of these camps are
cheap. The kids all do camps. So, you know, what if
we didn’t have that money?
Having the physical materials necessary to do the
occupation was also discussed as an important resource,
as were other people. When asked how she learned to make
her own lunch, one child identified her sister (Isabelle, 9) as
a resource: “Um, because, yeah I saw my sister do it, and
then I saw her how she did it…then that’s how I knowed
how to do it” (Callie, 6).
Motivations
Children have a variety of motivations for engaging or not
engaging in occupations. Pure enjoyment was a main
motivator for a child choosing to engage in an occupation
or continue to do it: “I like art the best…because it’s
something that you make…You make and you, like, it’s
having fun making. Making is like having fun…So, I like
making, and art too” (Rosina, 8). Similar motivations were
that it ‘feels good,’ or the child experiences a sense of flow
when performing the occupation:
I can’t hear anything around me. That’s why I got a
bad mark in reading in grade three, because…we’re
supposed to write down how many chapters and stuff,
and by the time I realized that everyone had stopped
reading, we were already moved on to the next
thing…I feel like I’m in the book. (Sarah, 10)
30 Journal of Occupational Science, April 2005, Vol 12, No 1, pp 26-35.
J. Wiseman, J. Davis & H. Polatajko
Many children engaged in occupations as a means to an
end, such as to receive praise, or earn a reward: “my mom’s
like ‘you have to clean up your room to watch the hockey
game’ and I really wanted to see it, ‘cause it was my first
time…so I cleaned up my brother’s room” (Natalia, 8).
Participants also spoke about doing activities because of a
fit between abilities and the demands of the occupation: “I
like math homework ‘cause I’m good at it…sometimes I
like [writing stories] because I’m creative so I come up
with good ideas” (Annice, 11). Another motivation was
curiosity, or wanting to try something new. As one child
explained: “It was either gymnastics or acting, so I had to
decide, and I chose acting, ‘cause I had never done it
before” (Maryanne, 12). Some children were motivated by
helping others: “I like knowing that I’m helping [my sister]
with her homework, and I’m teaching her stuff” (Maryanne,
12). For some, the competition was a disincentive for
engagement:
She’s at a point where, um, she’s about halfway
through her levels, and she needs to work on her
stroke improvement, and her last swim teacher said
she should go onto this swim squad. It’s just on stroke
improvement and competition…and she didn’t want
to do that. She goes ‘I don’t want to compete. Like, I
want to just swim, and learn to swim and take my
lessons’. (Natalia’s mother)
Parent views and values
Views or values held by parents about the occupations their
children engage in, or should engage in, were highlighted
in interviews with both children and parents. Parents often
created rules, which their children had to follow in order to
participate in specific occupations: “The girls water-ski,
so it’s like ‘you guys want to ski, you better become good
swimmers.’ So they did that” (Maryanne and Annice’s
mother). Parents also created rules concerning whether an
occupation will be performed by their children: When asked
why she plays Nintendo at a friend’s home, Sarah (10) said:
“Because I never get to play at home. My mom knew I’d
play it all the time instead of doing my homework”.
Parents’ assessment of their children’s interests or capacity
also seemed to influence what children did, as these parents
explained: “She has an interest in those things [cooking].
Most of the times I’m like, ‘oh, no…no you’re too young,
you’re gonna make too much mess…she’s like eager to
learn those kind of things” (Isabelle’s mother). “Yeah,
sometimes I always want to do it fast, but I sort of show
her. You know, well you add this, you add this. I tell her
what to add” (Isabelle’s father). In this example, the parents’
understanding of their child’s interest in cooking along with
their understanding of their child’s capacity to do the
occupation led to their facilitation of her engagement in
cooking.
Many parents and children discussed overriding
philosophies or beliefs that parents held about children’s
time use: “I have this philosophy in my own head, that
there’s so much structure in all of our lives and so much
 Occupational Development: Towards an Understanding of Children’s Doing
stress as it is, that I don’t want them to have such
structured activity every day of the week” (Maryanne and
Annice’s Mother). Other philosophies related to achieving
success and happiness in life:
I believe in a multi-dimensional life … not only just
going to work, and come home and studying …
because success we define not just being a very good
doctor or student … feeling a really happy life … to
be able to enjoy yourself and to make use of the
resources as much as possible. (Rosina’s father)
Beliefs about how children might contribute to household
chores were also reported:
I [Alexis, 10] wash dishes on my day … my sister
washes it [the dishes] Monday, Tuesday, I wash it
Downloaded by [University of Toronto Libraries] at 12:50 05 November 2014
Wednesday, Thursday, and my brother washes it
Friday, Saturday … my mom, her friend was doing it
[scheduling of chores] with her kids so she [Alexis’
mom] decided to do it with us.
Parents also discussed specific occupational goals they
had for their children, such as getting physically stronger,
increasing socialization or developing musical ability, as
well as specific occupational goals they held for their family,
such as spending time with their children, or being active
together as a family.
We’re a musical family. And I still sing and, um, listen
to a lot of music so it’s very important to us, and my
husband. And we thought music education was
important as well. Um, we wanted [Natalia] to learn
music theory and be able to read music, and I also
think it’s a lot of fun. (Natalia’s mother)
Process stages of how occupations become established
The participants not only provided insights into why
children do what they do, they also provided information
that suggests a staged process for the establishment of
occupational development. Seven aspects of this process
were identified: innate drive, exposure, initiation,
continuation, cessation, transformation, and outcomes.
Innate drive
Some children appeared to have an innate drive to do certain
things without seeming to have had any exposure to the
occupation. Rosina’s father spoke about how he and his
wife became aware of their daughter’s interest in painting:
We provided many things when she was small, but
the painting was one which she herself was very much
interested. The first thing, which we noted when she
was 1½ years old. She somehow had gone and found
her mother’s cosmetic things and she took all those
here and started painting herself … Suddenly there
is [Rosina] in the doorway and we saw she has
painted her face and all her body. And she was trying
to show us what she has made. So we just tried to
provide these things. In fact she has started telling
Journal of Occupational Science, April 2005, Vol 12, No 1, pp 26-35.
J. Wiseman, J. Davis & H. Polatajko
what she likes…. and she likes to paint with
watercolours. She paints very well.
Exposure
Innate drives notwithstanding, in most cases children had
to be introduced to an occupation, or in some way come to
know about it prior to initiating it. Exposure took place when
children observed other children engaging in an occupation,
saw the occupation being performed in the community, were
introduced to a new occupation by their parents, saw the
occupation through advertising, or received a component
of the occupation as a gift. When asked how his son (David,
5) came to know about soccer, one parent said: “Well he’s
[David] seen it, like in the summer time we’ve been – we
ride our bikes to the park and there’s always, like soccer
games going on. So…he’s seen them playing soccer”
(Maryanne’s father). Another child described how she
discovered one of her favorite occupations – baking cookies:
I started doing baking ‘cause I remember when I was
little, my dad came home. It was the first time I baked
Pillsbury cookies. I remember this [smiles]. He came
home with…cookie dough and I’m like ‘Daddy what
is this?’ and he showed me how to bake it, and…since
then I’ve always loved baking cookies and stuff.
(Annice, 11)
Initiation
Once exposed to an occupation, if the appropriate influences
were in place, the child was able to initiate the activity, that
is, steps were taken for him or her to begin engaging in the
occupation. According to participants, engagement was
initiated either by an adult, or by the child. Participation in
parent-initiated occupations was either directed by the
parent: “he’s [David, 5] terrified. He hates water. We forced
him this time to go back to swimming…then we pulled him
out because it was just too much” (Maryanne’s mother), or
suggested by the parent: “She [Callie, 6] didn’t want to do
dancing.…She watched them, knows every single move
there is but she didn’t want to do it. So I said well do you
want to do karate instead? (Callie’s mother).
Child-initiated occupations were either directed by the child
with the actual involvement facilitated by an adult: “Well,
because I liked ballet in [birth country] and I wanted to do
it in Canada. I asked one of my teachers in school, in
ordinary school [where I could do ballet]” (Rosina, 8), or
were independently initiated by the child, if adequate
opportunities and resources were present: “… next year
when I’m in grade 8, I’m gonna join the grad committee …
and at school we have a yearbook committee which I want
to do next year”.(Maryanne 12). The data from the
interviews suggested that the older the child, the more likely
she was to self-initiate with no adult involvement. As well,
it was noted from the interviews that children were also
exposed to many occupations, which they did not initiate.
Further, there were occupations that were only seldom
performed, stopped for a period of time, and then re-initiated.
31
 Occupational Development: Towards an Understanding of Children’s Doing
Continuation
Once an occupation was initiated, there was a period of
time during which the child maintained her engagement in
the occupation. This period of continuation lasted anywhere
from one session of swimming lessons to six years of acting.
She [Rosina, 8] started swimming when she was three.
And she liked water a lot. So when we came here [to
Canada] also we tried to take her but not as much as
she wanted, because we didn’t have free time. But
maybe at least once in two weeks, sometimes once in
a week we would go together for swimming. (Rosina’s
father)
One related notion which emerged within this category was
how the development of a routine contributed to children’s
continuation of some of their occupations, as explained by
Downloaded by [University of Toronto Libraries] at 12:50 05 November 2014
Annice (11):
At first I didn’t do it [my homework], and then I
decided you know if I just get it done it’ll be much
easier, and then I tried it the first day, I got it done,
then it kept going on, and now it just becomes habit.
A parent also explained how routine enabled her daughter
to continue her engagement in household tasks: “she loves
her little routine. She gets up, she’s out of bed, smoothing
down the sheets and puttin’ clothes away” (Natalia’s
mother).
Cessation
Surprisingly, despite the young age of the children
interviewed, cessation of an occupation was described in a
number of the interviews. Once an occupation was initiated,
children occasionally stopped it, often because the initial
reason for taking it up was no longer present, e.g., the
occupation was not fun anymore, became too competitive,
or the child or family no longer had the resources. As Alexis,
10 stated, “I used to do that [gymnastics] but it took up a
lot of time, ‘cause they wanted me to come on competitive
and that was 8 hours a day. I wouldn’t have time for soccer
and stuff.” Children did at times re-initiate the occupation
when resources became available again or as interests
changed. Callie, 6, recalls “swimming class but that was a
really long time ago, when I was like much more younger”.
More recently, “I [Callie] went to this place, and they had
a swimming pool. I went swimming. … there’s two girls
who teached me and my sister [Isabelle, 9] how to swim.
‘Cause me and my sister swimmed before but way long,
long time ago.”
Transformation
A few participants spoke of occupations transforming over
time. Some occupations seemed to metamorphose into new
occupations requiring similar skills and interests as the
original ones. The original occupation either continued in
parallel with the new one, or ceased before or as the new
one took its place. When asked how long she had been
playing tennis, Sarah talked about this transformation.
32
J. Wiseman, J. Davis & H. Polatajko
Well, I’ve been playing badminton for a while and
it’s sort of like tennis…but I…haven’t really played
real tennis for a while…Um, badminton – there are
the [racquets]…they’re a lot longer and lighter, and
instead of having the heavy ball…there’s these little
light birdies. (Sarah, 10)
Outcomes
The final process category, outcomes, refers to the
unexpected benefits or privileges which resulted from
children’s occupations, including gaining confidence,
feeling less shy, receiving praise, or winning a prize that
was unexpected. Upon her mention of feeling shy when
she began dance class, Isabelle, 9 was asked how dancing
had changed that. She responded: “Maybe ‘cause…I grow
older, and I get used to it, and I’m not shy anymore”.
Similarly, in relation to receiving praise from others for
reading from the Torah at her Bat Mitzvah, Maryanne, 12,
said: “I had my Bat Mitzvah, and everyone said I did a
great job, and, like, they were all really impressed, so I
was really happy about that”.
The process for establishing children’s occupations
Our analysis indicated that there was a logical relationship
between the seven process stages for establishing
children’s occupations and that these interacted with the
four categories that were identified as influencing the
children’s occupations. We, therefore, created a model of
the Process for Establishing Children’s Occupations (PECO)
(Figure 1). PECO is offered as a preliminary attempt at
depicting the relationship among the factors that influence
how children’s occupations begin, become established, and
are stopped or changed, over time.
Discussion
The findings of this study suggest that the development of
children’s occupations over time follows a process, which
is influenced by various factors within each child, and in
his or her environment. Together, the process stages and
influences create a process model, PECO, which offers a
way of initiating discussion about how children come to
develop their occupations. Although no literature exists to
which a comparison of this process model can be made,
aspects of this process model can be examined in relation
to existing literature.
The reasons for engagement described in this study hold
similarities to those described in the historical study by
Davis (2000). Nine of the twelve reasons identified by Davis
are consistent with ideas found within the four categories
identified in this study, for example, trying to outdo one
another, pressure from others, and expectations of self and
others.
The findings of this study are also compatible with the
theoretical perspective of Case-Smith (2005), Humphry
(2002), and Davis and Polatajko (2004). Although
improvements in perceptual and cognitive development, and
Journal of Occupational Science, April 2005, Vol 12, No 1, pp 26-35.
 Occupational Development: Towards an Understanding of Children’s Doing J. Wiseman, J. Davis & H. Polatajko

Figure 1: A Process for Establishing Children’s Occupations (PECO)

Exposure Innate Drive

Parent Views
No Initiation Initiation and Values

Resources Cessation Continuation

Re-initiation Transformation
Downloaded by [University of Toronto Libraries] at 12:50 05 November 2014

Motivations Opportunities

* The rectangles are the process stages which children appear to go through as they initiate new occupations, and
continue, cease or transform current ones; the arrows indicate the direction of the process that emerged from the interviews.
The shaded ovals represent the four categories of reasons that influence the process of establishing children’s occupations
at any stage. It is suggested that across the lifespan, an individual will go through this process hundreds of times, both
simultaneously and consecutively, while being influenced by many different reasons; i.e., occupational development.

independent mobility (Case-Smith, 2005) were not
specifically identified by the participants as reasons for
engaging in their occupations, the findings from this study
do suggest that the ability level of the child contributes to
the selection of occupations. Children in this study did
engage in some activities for the purpose of improving their
own abilities and spoke of doing an occupation for the
purpose of self-improvement. Thus, although development
of cognitive or motor subsystems may occasionally be the
reasons for children’s engagement in occupation, it is
important to note that developing occupational competence,
or their overall ability to do an occupation, emerged as a
key motivator for children in this study.
The findings also support the notion suggested by Case-
Smith (2005), Davis and Polatajko (2004) and Humphry (2002)
that children’s occupations are established, in part, because
of opportunities afforded to children by their environments.
Children’s environments afford opportunities for children
to act (Case-Smith). Caregivers, typically an important
component of children’s socio-cultural environment,
provide such opportunities for action by creating socio-
cultural niches for their children, which encourage the
development of certain culturally relevant and desired
occupations and discourage the development of the others
(Humphry, 2002). Humphry also suggests that control
parameters, or changes in the environment, result in new
occupations or behaviours.
Finally, in relation to the principle of multiple determinicity,
Davis and Polatajko (2004) discuss how physical, social,
historical and cultural environment determinants, such as
the opportunities, resources and parental views and values
discovered in this study, influence and alter occupational
development. Findings from this exploratory study serve
to support this idea. Both children and parents described
opportunities and resources as facilitating children’s
engagement in various occupations such as, parental
facilitation of an occupation, access to opportunities in the
natural environment, school and community programs for
children in the child’s age group, ‘making the team’,
receiving a gift that introduced the child to a new
occupation, and having the time and money for the
engagement in an occupation. facilitating children’s
engagement in various occupations. Further, without these
opportunities and resources, children were often unable to
do the occupations they wanted to do.
Consistent with the interaction determinant of the principle
of multiple determinicity (Davis & Polatajko, 2004), it is clear
from the data that an interaction between the children and
their environments played an important role in the initiation,
continuation, or cessation of children’s occupations over
time. This interaction occurred when parents facilitated their
children’s occupations upon seeing that the children were
good at, or interested in them. Person-environment
interaction also influenced occupational development in
that the children who participated in this study were
generally free to engage in the occupations that interested
them. Although this may not be the case for all children, it
was clear from this study that the interests and abilities of
our child participants directed them to choose their own
environments (see Scarr & McCartney, 1983).
Two of the person determinants proposed by Davis and
Polatajko (2004) in their framework for occupational

Journal of Occupational Science, April 2005, Vol 12, No 1, pp 26-35. 33

 Occupational Development: Towards an Understanding of Children’s Doing
development were not identified by participants in this
study. It may be inferred that when a child engaged in an
occupation because she was interested in it or good at it,
this was a result of heredity, or that learning and
neuroplasticity were key factors in children’s establishment
of their occupations. However, these influences were not
articulated by participants in this study. This may be
because such processes are not consciously considered
by children or their parents. We would also suggest that a
different type of study with very different methods of
inquiry is required to understand the contributions of
genetics and neuroplasticity to occupational development.
The third person determinant suggested by Davis and
Polatajko (2004) is that active participation by children in
their own development is necessary for “shaping,
controlling, and directing their life course from birth” (p.
Downloaded by [University of Toronto Libraries] at 12:50 05 November 2014
100). This requires a child to be motivated to engage in
occupations, and “[t]he stronger the motivation an
individual has for an occupation, the more likely it is that
the person will engage in [it] and acquire the necessary
competencies for the occupation to develop” (p. 100). The
findings of this study have the potential to extend this
principle, in that they begin to provide a more detailed
description of the influences or reasons children have for
engaging in their occupations.
Limitations
Although this study provides a preliminary understanding
of how and why children come to engage in their
occupations, it was exploratory and as such, due to time
constraints, drew on a small number of participants, and
included only twelve interviews involving eight children
and six parents, limiting the variability of the sample. All of
the children interviewed were female, and all six families
resided in an urban area, and came from middle class
environments. A further possible limitation of this study
was that the parents of all six families had either a college or
university education.
Summary and Implications for Future Research
Very little literature currently exists on occupational
development, as it is a relatively new domain of research in
child development. The purpose of this exploratory
qualitative study was to begin examining specific influences
on the occupational development of children aged six to
twelve. From the analysis of eight child and four parent
interviews, involving 6 parents, two themes emerged. The
participants discussed why children do, including
opportunities, resources, motivations, and parent views and
values. Unexpectedly, the participants discussed processes
whereby occupations are established which allowed for the
creation of a model of the Process for Establishing
Children’s Occupations (PECO).
The findings have a number of implications for future
research. Future studies could tease apart and gain a better
understanding of each category of influence on
occupational development. The PECO could be tested on
34 Journal of Occupational Science, April 2005, Vol 12, No 1, pp 26-35.
J. Wiseman, J. Davis & H. Polatajko
broader populations including boys, children from rural
areas, and individuals across the lifespan to determine if
and how the process may change. The methods used in
this study could be repeated with children with disabilities
in order to understand how opportunities, resources,
motivations, and/or parent views and values differ from
those of children without disabilities. Finally, the more global
impact of community, socioeconomic status, and culture,
and their effects on opportunities and resources, and thus
occupational development, could be explored.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the children and parents
who participated in our study and who shared their time
and reflections with us. In addition, the first author would
like to thank Jane Davis and Helene Polatajko for their time,
guidance, and support.
References
Atchley, R. C. (1999). Continuity and adaptation in aging:
Creating positive experiences. Baltimore, MD: The Johns
Hopkins University Press.
Bazyk, S., Stalnaker, D., Llerena, M., Ekelman, B., & Bazyk, J.
(2003). Play in Mayan children. American Journal of
Occupational Therapy, 57(3), 273-283.
Case-Smith, J. (2005). Development of childhood occupations.
In J. Case-Smith (Ed.), Occupational therapy for children
(5th ed., pp. 88-116). St. Louis, MO: Mosby, Inc.
Davis, J. (2000). Historical development of children’s
occupations. Unpublished master’s thesis. The University
of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada.
Davis, J., & Polatajko, H. (2004). Occupational development.
In C. Christiansen & E. Townsend (Eds.), Introduction to
occupation: The art and science of living (pp. 91-119).
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.
Davis, J. A., Polatajko, H. J., & Ruud, C. (2002). Occupations in
context: Influence of history on the development of the
predominant occupations of children. Journal of
Occupational Science, 9(2), 54-64.
Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. (2000). Handbook of qualitative
research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications
Inc.
Fletcher, A., Nickerson, P., & Wright, K. (2003). Structured
leisure activities in middle childhood: Links to well-being.
Journal of Community Psychology, 31(6), 641-659.
Gaskins, S. (1999). Children’s daily lives in a Mayan village: A
case study of culturally constructed roles and activities.
In A. Goncu (Ed.), Children’s engagement in the world:
Sociocultural perspectives (pp. 25-61). New York:
Cambridge University Press.
 Occupational Development: Towards an Understanding of Children’s Doing
Gaskins, S. (2000). Children’s daily activities in a Mayan
village: A culturally grounded description. Cross-
Cultural Research, 34, 375-389.
Gibson, J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual
perception. Boston, MA: Houghton-Mifflin.
Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded
theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago,
IL: Aldine.
Goncu, A., Tuermer, U., Jain, J., & Johnson, D. (1999).
Children’s play as cultural activity. In A. Goncu (Ed.),
Children’s engagement in the world: Sociocultural
perspectives (pp. 148-170). New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Downloaded by [University of Toronto Libraries] at 12:50 05 November 2014
Green, B. C., & Chalip, L. (1997). Enduring involvement in
youth soccer: The socialization of parent and child.
Journal of Leisure Research, 29(1), 61-77.
Journal of Occupational Science, April 2005, Vol 12, No 1, pp 26-35.
J. Wiseman, J. Davis & H. Polatajko
Humphry, R. (2002). Young children’s occupations:
Explicating the dynamics of developmental processes.
American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 56(2), 171-
179.
Pierce, D. (2000). Maternal management of the home as a
development play space for infants and toddlers.
American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 54(3), 290-
299.
Primeau, L. A. (1998). Orchestration of work and play within
families. American Journal of Occupational Therapy,
52(3), 188-195.
Scarr, S., & McCartney, K. (1983). How people make their
own environments: A theory of genotype - environment
effects. Child Development, 54, 424-435.
Zwiers, M. L., & Morrissette, P. J. (1999). Effective
interviewing of children: A comprehensive guide for
counselors and human service workers. Philadelphia:
Taylor and Francis.
35