In this essay for On Risk and Reason, I write about playgrounds and their role in adolescent development.
In all honesty, I am not sure whether the arguments I make about playgrounds and risk develpoment are correct or even worthwhile to be considered. This essay was written based on a quirky idea than a substantial one.
We will continue our exploration of this territory in unit 3 where you will examine what we know from the cognitive neuroscience research about decision-making. In particular, you will research (by research, I mean literature review, not empirical research) how decision-making about risk manifests in a particular population and what the cognitive neuroscience literature has to say about it. For different populations, risk may mean different things or individuals within these populations may put themselves at risk (knowingly or not) because of developmental, psychological, or neurological reasons. Your task for this essay is to explore how cognitive neuroscience helps us understand risk behavior in one of these populations or from studying one of these populations.
Most research on decision making development has been primarily concentrated on adolescence, a period marked by rapid changes and growth. Adolescents have been shown to make poor decisions and take needless risks (Steinberg, 2004). Research on the development of the prefrontal cortex and the limbic system, brain components that drive decision making, has led some researchers to believe that campaigns aimed at educating teenagers on drugs, drinking, and sex ultimately prove to be ineffective in reducing risky behavior because the adolescent brain has not fully developed (Steinberg, 2008). Despite efforts like the DARE program proving to be ineffective (West & O’Neal, 2004), some research tentatively suggests that environmental influences, such as familial influences, during the formative years leading up to adolescence may have long term benefits and may encourage more mature decision making and less impulsive risk taking during adolescence (Steinberg, 2001; for a review see Steinberg, 2008). Similarly, research suggests that quality early education programs have similar effects in reducing the number of poor decisions children go on to make as adolescents (Heckman, 2007). However, despite these promising conclusions, relatively little research has been done on the mechanisms that drive decision making development and on the role environmental factors play in this period of growth leading up to adolescence. Fortunately, research on playground play, driven by an interest in playground safety regulations, offers a hopeful start in bridging this gap in knowledge.
Research on playground play focuses on children in this formative period of development and examines the effects that playground play has on child development. Because this research is motivated by an ongoing debate on playground safety, much of the current literature is concerned with the physical risks that children take on the playground, such as playing on tall slides or the Flying Fox. Based on observational studies of children’s behavior on playgrounds, researchers have observed several developmental benefits that children may receive from taking risks on playgrounds, such as improved motor skills and better risk perception (Sandseter et al, 2011).
Although it is known that physical risk taking on the playground encourages improved risk perception in children, the exact mechanisms through which this development occurs are unknown. It is proposed that by first identifying the components of the brain that are responsible for decision making, then identifying the features of physical risk taking on playgrounds that would stimulate the development of those components of the brain, the mechanisms through which physical risk taking on the playground generates the observed benefits can be better understood. Drawing from the current bodies of research on adolescent decision making, playground play and brain behavior, it is predicted that the physical and voluntary components of physical risk taking on the playground motivates the development of the prefrontal cortex and limbic systems, brain components largely responsible for decision making.
Before analyzing the effects that playground play has on child development, it is important to identify the neurological components or neurological deficiencies that drive poor adolescent decision making. Once the neurological components are isolated, physical risk taking on the playground can be discussed in terms of its effect on these parts of the brain.
Current research has identified three neurological systems that influence decision making. Bechara et al. (1997) have identified the prefrontal cortex, the part of the brain primarily responsible for higher executive function, to be critical to decision making. By testing patients with ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC) damage, Bechara et al. (1997) found that these patients were unable to make risk judgments with the same accuracy as patients without vmPFC damage. These findings are consistent with research on adolescent decision making which shows that the prefrontal cortex interacts with the parietal association cortex during the decision making process (Steinberg, 2008). The parietal association cortex is also associated with cognitive control and reasoning (Steinberg, 2008). These two components appear to be responsible for many cognitive processes used in decision making and risk taking, such as risk perception. The third component that interacts with the prefrontal cortex and the parietal association cortex is the limbic system, responsible for processing emotions (Steinberg, 2008). The limbic system is believed to be responsible for anticipating the benefits of decisions (Steinberg, 2008). Therefore, the limbic system influences decision making by injecting an emotional component into the decision making process.
Because these three brain structures are the major drivers of decision making, it is their development that helps to explain why adolescents are more prone to making poor decisions than adults. When assessing the role that the prefrontal cortex and parietal association cortex have on risk taking and decision making, it is common to believe that the underdevelopment of these two areas is responsible for adolescents’ poor decision making (Steinberg, 2008). But researchers are quick to assert that it is only certain mental processes driven by these two components that have not yet matured. In fact, adolescents tend to have very mature risk perception (Steinberg, 2004). Adolescents and adults tend to judge many risks, such as drug use, similarly (Steinberg, 2004). On the other hand, researchers have observed that as adolescents mature, there is an increase in myelination in the prefrontal cortex which is responsible for improved executive function, such as improved self control and long term planning (Steinberg, 2008).
This development of self control is important because the limbic system often sends emotionally driven impulses to the prefrontal cortex that mask the rational thinking done in the cortices. As Steinberg (2008) demonstrates, adolescences that are primed to anticipate peer acceptance show activation of the limbic system. These adolescents made riskier decisions than their non-primed counterparts showing the interference caused by the limbic system (Steinberg, 2008). Because adults have better self control due to their greater development of the prefrontal cortex (Steinberg, 2008), they are able to control the emotional impulses generated by the limbic system and make more rational decisions. If there was a way to motivate the development of the prefrontal cortex, research suggests that it would also improve decision making.
An additional component of self control is in the connections between the cortices and the limbic system. In the years following adolescence, there is an improvement in the connection between the cortical systems, the prefrontal cortex and the parietal association cortex, and the limbic system (Steinberg, 2008). The result of this brain development, in broad terms, is the improved ability to regulate emotions and control impulses (Steinberg, 2008). Therefore, by improving the synaptic connections between the cortices and the limbic system, it is likely that decision making would also be improved.
Knowing that it is the prefrontal cortex, parietal association cortex and the limbic system that are responsible for decision making, it can be presumed that physical risk taking on the playground should influence the development of these parts of the brain. This assumption can be made because it has been observed that physical risk taking on the playground leads to the benefits expected of the development of these brain regions. For instance, it has been observed that physical risk taking on the playground is an important part of healthy child development as it improves risk assessment among other benefits such as improved motor control (Sandseter et al, 2011; Stephenson, 2003). Therefore, in order to predict the neural mechanisms through which the input, physical risk taking on the playground, results in the output, improved risk perception, the best approach is to trace the effects that the individual components of physical risk taking on the playground have on neural development. This is the best approach because there is currently no research that immediately connects physical risk taking on the playground to neural development. Thus, understanding physical risk taking on the playground in terms of individual components that have been separately researched gives an indication of the nature of the causal links being sought. In order to identify the individual components most likely to motivate brain development, it is important to examine the differences between the playground environment and the other environments where children may spend their time.
The playground is a unique environment in a child’s day-to-day life. Today’s children spend more time indoors, play in more organized outdoor activities, play under more supervision, have less free time, have less independent mobility, and have fewer public spaces to play in (Clements, 2004; Gaster, 1991; Karsten, 2005; Wridt, 2004; for a review see Senauer, 2007). Thus, children have increasingly used playgrounds as a way to get outdoors and away from digital media to be in a free, unstructured environment (Wridt, 2004; for a review see Senauer, 2007). Not only do children seek playgrounds for their unique environments, children also act differently in playgrounds and similarly open environments. As observed, children take physical risks on playgrounds (Jambor, 1986). Children take on a variety of physical risks, though they may express fear when initially considering them (Sandseter et al, 2011). Interviews with children indicate that they take these “scary” risks involving heights and speed because these risks are thrilling (Sandseter, 2007; Sandseter, 2009; Lessard, 2011). Therefore, while the playground may not be the only environment where children engage in risks, the particular types of risks children take on the playground are distinct in that the risks are physical risks that the children voluntarily engage in. In other words, the self-directed, physical nature of the playground allows children to engage in these physical risks as they please. As such, physical risk taking on the playground may be defined in terms of the physical nature of the activity and the self-directed, voluntary nature of the activity.
Now that both the input and output are understood in terms of their relevant components, the interaction between them can be examined, namely, how the physical and voluntary components of physical risk taking on the playground influences the development of neural connections in and between the cortices and the limbic system.
The physical nature of playground play is certainly not unique to the playground environment. Children can do physical activities in all sorts of forms. By using research done on other physical activities, like basketball, the effects that the physical component of playground play causes may be explored. Research on pure physical activity in a variety of different contexts has demonstrated that physical activity and exercise has an influence on brain activity. Research on aerobic activity has shown that children who get more exercise have better executive control, better memory recall, and larger hippocampuses (Chaddock, 2011). Furthermore, exercise has been found to maintain the axonal elongation and neurogenesis in the brains of animals (Galeano, 2013). It has also been found to increase proteins that improve neuroplasticity in children (Galeano, 2013). The executive control that Chaddock (2011) observes is associated with the prefrontal cortex and the parietal association cortex that was previously discussed. Furthermore, the hippocampus is also a part of the limbic system, though associated with memory recall and not emotion. The observed development of the prefrontal cortex and limbic systems in conjunction with the findings that physical activity increases neuroplasticity, axonal elongation and neurogenesis gives credence to the idea that exercise may actually help to improve risk perception and improve decision making. Thus, there is reasonable evidence to suggest that the physical component of the physical risks that children take on playgrounds makes the brain more receptive to development.
The other defining feature of physical risk taking on playgrounds is the self directed and voluntary nature with which children engage in them. Parents do not force their children to slide down tall slides or play on the monkey bars. Instead, the children being observed seemed to judge the risks of the play for themselves and engaged in them at their own discretion (Sandseter et al, 2011; Stephenson, 2003). This voluntary nature of risk taking may play an important part in brain development. In one study of the influence that the voluntary aspect of risk decision making, participants’ brain activity was measured as participants both made and watched a series of risk decisions (Rao, 2008). It was found that when participants voluntarily engaged in the decision making process, there was increased activity in the mesolimbic-frontal pathway as risk increased. The researchers conclude that these results not only provides direct evidence that the mesolimbic and frontal regions of the brain mediate risk, but also that voluntary choice is crucial in activating these systems (Rao, 2008). From the research on adolescent risk taking and brain development, it is known that this pathway between the limbic system and the prefrontal cortex is an important regulator in decision making.
Engaging this part of the brain through partaking in physical risks on the playground may encourage development in this critical brain region. While there is no direct research that indicates that taking voluntary risk as a child motivates the development of the mesolimbic-frontal pathway, it is possible to draw some inferences from other brain development literature. A particular quality of the limbic system is its experience-expectant nature (Joseph, 1999). Normal development, such as the development observed by researchers of physical risk, may be dependent on certain parts of the brain activating (Joseph, 1999). Without appropriate stimulation, the neural connections that are necessary to appropriately process risk and emotions are crippled and underdeveloped. In the same vein, some have speculated that the development of such neural connections is the product of some evolutionary benefit from engaging in risk (Steinberg, 2008). Though Joseph’s (1999) research primarily deals with the immediate years following childbirth, others have demonstrated that children can learn to make better decisions about risk by better utilizing their emotions (Rao, 2008). Given that the physical nature of the play seems to encourage neuroplasticity and the fact that the voluntary nature of the play activates the malleable mesolimbic frontal pathway, this indicates that physical risk taking on the playground could serve to reinforce and increase the neural synapses in the mesolimbic-frontal pathway. This mechanism would help explain the observed link between physical risk taking on the playground and improvements in risk perception. By stimulating the prefrontal cortex and limbic systems, voluntary physical risk taking may improve the neural connections of the mesolimbic-frontal pathway, which is responsible for regulating emotion and judgment in decision making.
From the literature available, it appears reasonable to suggest that the physical and the voluntary components of physical risk taking on the playground contributes to developing the prefrontal cortex and limbic system in separate and interconnected ways. The physical component encourages cognitive development and increases the neuroplasticity of the brain. The voluntary component leads to activation of the neural structures connecting the prefrontal cortex and limbic system. Combined, they would encourage the development of synapses noted to help improve decision making.
In this analysis, physical risk taking on the playground was first understood in terms of its physical and voluntary components. It was then shown that these components stimulate the development of the prefrontal cortex and limbic system, brain regions that facilitate decision making. This analysis of the literature illustrates one possible mechanism through which physical risk taking on the playground might cause observed improvements in risk perception. Because this analysis concludes that physical risk taking on the playground encourages brain development, it also suggests that there may be long term impacts in this type of behavior with regards to adolescent risk taking because the underlying neural structures are changing. As previously stated, environmental factors during these years of formative childhood might cause significant changes in decision making, and this analysis suggests that playground play might have similarly long term effects. Additionally, by understanding physical risks on the playground in this manner, this gives further credence to the idea that playgrounds are invaluable spaces for children to spend time in. Among the developmental benefits gained from playing on fun playgrounds, improvements to decision making is a critical one.
Certainly, this analysis is by no means all encompassing. The neurological approach that this analysis takes in understanding the mechanisms driving learning on playground is by no means a fully understood science. Some researchers are quick to establish that the neurological underpinnings of decision making are not fully understood and that there are many additional externalities that affect the decision making process (Steinberg, 2008). Additionally, the causal links between the voluntary component and brain development is not fully understood or well researched. Finally, there is the possibility that a multitude of other factors of playground play and physical risk taking are responsible for the benefits observed. However, given the current body of research on brain development, decision making, and physical risk taking, this analysis highlights possible areas of further research and outlines plausible hypotheses for each of them. Research can be done on the role that engaging in voluntary risk has on brain development. This kind of exploration is important because not only is the research of environmental factors that affect cognitive development important in understanding adolescent decision making but also because decision making is at the heart of the human experience. From choosing religions and beliefs to choosing friends and spouses, decision making is a nearly inescapable component of living. While good decision making allows humans to flourish and prosper, impaired decision making, caused by alcohol or other means, often leads to unnecessary risk taking and terrible consequences. Because the difference between good and bad decision making may be the difference between life and death, the process through which people develop better decision making abilities is a critical area of a person’s growth and maturation. Playground play may just be the starting point in understanding it.
Unfortunately, Adrienne’s feedback on this essay was lost in the intervening years.