Abstract
The purpose of this study was to explore the incidence of and relationship between tactile sensitivities and self-regulation difficulties in children with and without a sensory processing disorder (SPD). Thirty-nine percent of children reported significant tactile sensitivities, and those with an SPD had more self-regulation difficulties. Findings support OTs to enhance well-being by addressing tactile sensitivities and self-regulation of children with and without SPDs.
Primary Author and Speaker: Lorry Liotta-Kleinfeld
Additional Authors and Speakers: Lynsey Beros, Andrea Boyer, Taylor Boggus, Madeleine Ruff, Mary Little, Rachael Sollman
The ability to self-regulate is crucial for occupational function. Dunn (2007) proposed a model that links passive self-regulation strategies and low sensory thresholds with sensory “sensitivity”. Sensory sensitivity is not uncommon. Tomchek and Dunn (2007) reported that over 24% of children scored above the norm on a tactile assessment. Sensory sensitivity has been linked to feelings of distress with emotional regulation difficulties as a mediator (Brindle, Moulding, Bakker, & Nedeljikovic, 2015). Self-regulation delays and tactile abnormalities were found to be related in children with autism on the Sense and Self-Regulation Checklist, a parent report (Silva & Schalock, 2013). Although sensory sensitivities and self-regulation difficulties have been studied in the literature, few studies have directly investigated the relationship between the two. In addition, many studies have relied on parent report of a child’s sensory function rather than a child’s self-report. The purpose of this study was to explore the incidence of and relationship between child-reported tactile sensitivities and self-regulation difficulties in children with and without a sensory processing disorder (SPD).
Research questions were:
What is the incidence of child-reported tactile sensitivities?
Is there a statistically significant correlation between the child’s self-report of tactile function and self-regulation?
Is there a statistically significant difference on the child report of tactile function between children with and without a SPD?
Is there a statistically significant difference on self-regulation tasks between children with and without a SPD?
A non-experimental research design using correlational and survey methodology was employed. Participants were 36 six- to eight-year-olds, 10 of whom had a previously identified SPD. Children were recruited from a private elementary school and pediatric outpatient clinic. Children needed to be between the ages of six and eight, able to follow two-step verbal instructions, and have a minimum IQ of 80. Children with a physical disability (e.g., cerebral palsy) were excluded.
Researchers administered the TIE, a 26-item tactile self-report, and the PSRA, a direct assessment of self-regulation. The Pearson Correlation was used to determine relationships and the Mann-Whitney was used to determine differences. For research question one, thirty nine percent of children reported tactile symptoms that fell more than one standard deviation above the mean. For question two, a statistically significant relationship was found between the TIE and one subtest of the PSRA (r=-.417, p=.01). For research question three, there was not a statistical difference (p=.418). For research question four, there were statistically significant differences on three of the four tasks of the PSRA for children with and without a SPD.
The high percentage of sensory “sensitivities” might be not be unexpected given that some children were recruited from a pediatric outpatient clinic. However, 33% of children from the clinic and 44% of children from the school setting reported sensory sensitivities. Those with sensory sensitivities had more difficulty with impulse control on one task of the PSRA. Although children with SPD’s did not have more tactile sensitivities than children without SPD’s, they did have more difficulty on three out of four self-regulation tasks.
The impact of this study is pertinent to practice since the incidence of sensory sensitivities was higher than expected. The effect of sensory sensitivities on not only self-regulation but well-being should be further explored. In addition, results of this study substantiate the need to address self-regulation in children with SPD to enhance occupational function.
Brindle, K., Moulding, R., Bakker, K., & Nedeljkovic, M. (2015). Is the relationship between sensory-processing sensitivity and negative affect mediated by emotional regulation? Australian Journal of Psychology, 67(4), 214-221. doi:10.1111/ajpy.12084
Dunn, W. (2007). Supporting children to participate successfully in everyday life by using sensory processing knowledge. Infants and Young Children, 20(2), 84-101. doi: 10.1097/01.IYC.0000264477.05076.5d
Silva, L., & Schalock, M. (2013). Prevalence and significance of abnormal tactile responses in young children with autism. North America Journal of Medicine and Science, 6(3), 121-127. doi: 10.7156/najms.2013.0603121
Tomchek, S. D., & Dunn, W. (2007). Sensory processing in children with and without autism: A comparative study using the short sensory profile. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 61, 190-200. doi:10.5014/ajot.61.2.190