Are you play-deprived ?

[userguide]

Let's try out the rat hypothesis:

Have you played with your father a rough-n-tumble-like play before the age of 2 ?

The hypothsis holds if not, your PFC is underdeveloped.

[Fuzzy12]

I don't remember. I'm not sure we played rough n tumble but I'm sure we played.

What's the theory?

[acdc01]

Why does it have to be rough and tumble? And why your dad and not the mom?

Do parents even play R&T with their kids anymore? Feels like more toys than anything. Carrying and swinging I guess - does that count?

[Lunacie]

Does anyone remember what happened before the age of 2? Or even 3?
I sure don't/can't.

[mildadhd]

Originally Posted by userguide

Let's try out the rat hypothesis:

Have you played with your father a rough-n-tumble-like play before the age of 2 ?

The hypothsis holds if not, your PFC is underdeveloped.

I think my play system is more bottom up active, due to a slight lack of top down regulation, and "rat ruff and tumble play" is a primary brain processing benchmark, for homologous primary brain processing mammalian ruff and tumble play systems.

Rats, humans, and all other mammals exhibit some basic fun form of play, aka ruff and tumble play, running, jumping, etc...

The fact that all mammals have the same basic instinct to play, with out having the same prefrontal cortex, biologically, is fascinating.

Sensory, emotional and bodily distress systems inhibit the play system.

Fun human ruff and tumble play in early life with a primary caregiver, promotes development in areas of the brain, from the brain stem to the prefrontal cortex, in rats and humans.

The inner subcortical play system matures before the prefrontal cortex.

As the prefrontal cortex matures, the prefrontal cortex develops more top down control of our subcortical play system, (a source of many ADHD paradoxes"?)









M

[userguide]

The role of play in shaping the social and emotional brain: In the absence of play experience, animals typically develop their species-typical behavioral repertoire normally (Martin & Caro, 1985), suggesting that play is not necessary for developing the brain mechanisms that produce behavior. Indeed, with the cortex removed - the largest and most recently evolved part of the brain - rats can still perform all the behavior patterns typical of play and do so at a frequency typical of intact rats. However, as already mentioned, when confronting novel, unexpected, or otherwise disturbing situations, rats that have not had play experience as juveniles are less able to cope, and this is reflected by them not using the appropriate behavior patterns. Similarly, rats with the cortex removed can function seemingly normally in a stable environment, such as their home cage, but when confronted by novelty, are unable to adapt (Kolb & Whishaw, 2008). With regard to the particular deficits exhibited by rats that did not play as juveniles, damage to the prefrontal cortex (PFC), the area of the cortex most critical to executive function which involves selecting appropriate actions or inhibiting inappropriate ones, produces adult rats that have similar social deficits. Therefore, it is likely that the beneficial effects of play experience in the juvenile period is to modify the development of the PFC, giving it greater control over the brain circuits, lower in the brain, that generate behavior patterns and regulate emotions. Indeed, play experience in the juvenile period has been shown to change the anatomical properties of the neurons of the PFC (Pellis et al., 2010b).

http://http://www.scholarpedia.org/a...nd_Tumble_Play


1. Probably siblngs would do as well (I am not sure if young girls egage in R&T)

2. I don't remember either, I found out I didn't play though

3. No, carrying and swinging and other mommy things do not count as play in light of these findings. Probably only boys of small enough age difference could do, or fathers (grands?)

[acdc01]

Originally Posted by userguide

http://http://www.scholarpedia.org/a...nd_Tumble_Play


1. Probably siblngs would do as well (I am not sure if young girls egage in R&T)

2. I don't remember either, I found out I didn't play though

3. No, carrying and swinging and other mommy things do not count as play in light of these findings. Probably only boys of small enough age difference could do, or fathers (grands?)

Thanks for the response. when I clicked on your link, it brought me to a blank page for some reason. Your excerpt you quoted though didn't seem to mention the type of play though (so not specific to rough and tumble). Was it mentioned elsewhere in your article?

Carrying and swinging was actually what my dad did with me, I don't think rough and tumble, carrying and swinging, etc. are gender specific.

I suspect you don't need rough and tumble type play to develop your mind. I can see how mice might need it as they need to be able to physically defend themselves in their lives but us humans, well we don't. I kind of even wonder if we might be less aggressive and better humans if we don't engage in rough play when young. I mean, I wish toxic masculinity didn't exist. We would be better off if humans were more peace loving.

That's all conjecture though.

[mildadhd]

Play-deprivation partially due to...depending on individual circumstances..

-underaroused play system (biological temperament)?

-underaroused/overaroused play system partially as a result of underactive neocortical maturation? [underactive neocortical maturation partially due to early overarousal of bodily, sensory and emotional distress systems?]

-underactive play-environment/relationship?

-?

-?






M?

[userguide]

I didn't notice the link has double "http", might be my adhd://, use this one:

www.scholarpedia.org/article/Rough_and_Tumble_Play

The R&T is hypothesised to engage some evolutionary old neural circuits, it is exlplained in the article.


It's apparently different from grooming or swinging or other "noncombative" activities moms usually play with kids.


Your declaration inspired a hypothesis: Why such a surge of ADHD diagnoses in recent decades?

- Some parents stopped playing R&T with kids so that they won't be aggressive.

(Remember I was first with this explanation )

[Lunacie]

Originally Posted by userguide

I didn't notice the link has double "http", might be my adhd://, use this one:

www.scholarpedia.org/article/Rough_and_Tumble_Play

The R&T is hypothesised to engage some evolutionary old neural circuits, it is exlplained in the article.


It's apparently different from grooming or swinging or other "noncombative" activities moms usually play with kids.


Your declaration inspired a hypothesis: Why such a surge of ADHD diagnoses in recent decades?

- Some parents stopped playing R&T with kids so that they won't be aggressive.

(Remember I was first with this explanation )

Interesting thought, but I think better diagnoses explains the "surge" in adhd
diagnoses. Some doctors are still catching up the idea that girls may have adhd
and that many children often don't "outgrow it." So those girls and adults who
are being diagnosed accounts for much of the rise in diagnoses.

[CharlesH]

Originally Posted by userguide

Let's try out the rat hypothesis:

Have you played with your father a rough-n-tumble-like play before the age of 2 ?

The hypothsis holds if not, your PFC is underdeveloped.

I think the focus on play before the age of 2 is too narrow. My hunch is that people need play through their early twenties, if not more. Instead, children are not allowed to have unsupervised free time outside, and are forced to sit in boring classrooms for hours on end.

Yes, I do think that this problem contributes significantly to neurodevelopmental issues, such as generalized anxiety, ADHD, etc.

[tudorose]

Yeah. I hated the it. Too many sensory issues.

[mildadhd]

Originally Posted by userguide

www.scholarpedia.org/article/Rough_and_Tumble_Play


Your declaration inspired a hypothesis: Why such a surge of ADHD diagnoses in recent decades?

- Some parents stopped playing R&T with kids so that they won't be aggressive.

(Remember I was first with this explanation )

I think your hypothesis could be possible for some people with AD(H)D.

But not all people with AD(H)D.

I had lots of early supervised play. (Helped me to develop lots of coping mechanism and I am guessing probabably why I was not diagnosed until the age of 35, after having a back injury that interfered with physical coping mechanism I had developed)

I think I was born with a more sensitive temperament to distresses, due to pre and post natal adoption distresses, that shaped my affective and cognitive brain development.

There are many different internal and external causes of distresses that could interfere with healthy play.

The individual specifics depend on individual temperament and individual circumstances.

Children do not play when distressed.






M

[mildadhd]

Originally Posted by acdc01

Why does it have to be rough and tumble? And why your dad and not the mom?

Do parents even play R&T with their kids anymore? Feels like more toys than anything. Carrying and swinging I guess - does that count?

I think rough and tumble, carrying and swinging, (play without toys), all count.

Carrying and swinging, tumbling and tumbling, tumbling and swinging, seek and hide, hide and peek, etc..

Especially with a primary caregiver.

In rats, the use of adult play fighting seems to be limited to these dominance related contexts, but in other species, as indicated above, such play can be used in a wide variety of social contexts to test and probe social relationships (Palagi, 2011; Pellis & Pellis, 2009).

M

[userguide]

Originally Posted by Lunacie

Interesting thought, but I think better diagnoses explains the "surge" in adhd
diagnoses. Some doctors are still catching up the idea that girls may have adhd
and that many children often don't "outgrow it." So those girls and adults who
are being diagnosed accounts for much of the rise in diagnoses.

If I remember well, the surge has been noted in the boys-only population as well, so I am still waiting for my Nobel

Originally Posted by CharlesH

I think the focus on play before the age of 2 is too narrow. My hunch is that people need play through their early twenties, if not more. Instead, children are not allowed to have unsupervised free time outside, and are forced to sit in boring classrooms for hours on end.

Yes, I do think that this problem contributes significantly to neurodevelopmental issues, such as generalized anxiety, ADHD, etc.

I agree it's been chosen arbitrarily, there was a hint though:
Look up the research on Romanian orphans - the age under which the brain devlopment gap was reversible was quite low, like 2-3 years AFAIR.

Originally Posted by mildadhd

I had lots of early supervised play. (Helped me to develop lots of coping mechanism and I am guessing probabably why I was not diagnosed until the age of 35, after having a back injury that interfered with physical coping mechanism I had developed)

I think I was born with a more sensitive temperament to distresses, due to pre and post natal adoption distresses, that shaped my affective and cognitive brain development.

There are many different internal and external causes of distresses that could interfere with healthy play.

The individual specifics depend on individual temperament and individual circumstances.

Children do not play when distressed.

M

So let's say you didn't receive the quality play and so the theory is still working :P
BTW, what knd of coping mechanism did you have that depended on a ghealthy spine ?

Was it solely a sport?

Originally Posted by mildadhd

I think rough and tumble, carrying and swinging, (play without toys), all count.

Carrying and swinging, tumbling and tumbling, tumbling and swinging, seek and hide, hide and peek, etc..

Especially with a primary caregiver.

M

I suspect not all play is created equal.

What if only R&T addresses the fight or flight algorithms that, when not properly trained in childood, disregulate into anxiety and adhd thrill seeking ?