A Longitudinal Study of Playground Surfaces to Evaluate Accessibility - Final Report

Selection of Playgrounds

Newly constructed public playgrounds were selected for participation as test sites in the study.  A purposive snowball sampling technique was used to recruit local park and recreation agencies by phone, e-mail and in person.  This sampling technique utilizes acquaintances and word of mouth referrals so the sample grows or rolls larger like a snowball.  The sampling technique is largely dependent on informed participants passing information on to other perspective participants.  Selection was based upon: accessibility to children with and without disabilities; use of surface materials and products consistent with the study; geographic location; seasonal weather conditions; and willingness of owner/operator to participate as a partner in the study by sharing information and collecting data.   The study is limited to the geographic area surrounding the Indiana University-Bloomington campus, Indianapolis and Chicago, within driving distance of the Bloomington-based research team and easily accessed at any given time during the season.  The geographic area also supports a close network of practitioners in the field from which test sites could be recruited. 

The sample population for this study depended upon an established, or to be established, congenial relationship with the playground owner and the research team.  The data for analysis required the research team to make a number of inquiries to the operation, planning, budgeting and maintenance procedures conducted by the playground owner.  Most importantly, if there were any instances where locations on the playground were found to be in non-compliance with the accessibility or safety guidelines, the playground owner was to be informed and then carried the burden of bringing those instances into compliance.  Therefore an established relationship based on trust and mutual concern for safety, accessibility and the research questions was necessary.

Streeton, Cooke and Campbell (2004) summarized the advantage to the snowball sampling technique as an efficient way to locate hard-to-reach groups, especially when using a named contact to open doors otherwise apparently closed.  Gruppetta (n.d.) summarized the positive aspects of snowball recruitment as reaching a wider range of participants; reduced possibility of coercion by the researcher; sensitive data is not yet made available to the researcher; a reduction of researcher bias; informal networks of communication; and cost effective.  Alternatively, the negative aspects of snowball sampling are viewed as labor intensive; inappropriate for a probability sample; raising ethical considerations for the protection of privacy; concerns for the timeliness of the process; perceived coercion for the nominee; inability to select participants; and multiple nominations within the group that may narrow rather than open the pool of perspective participants (Gruppetta, n.d.; Streeton, et. al. 2004.).  The depth of qualitative data for analysis forecasted to derive from the longitudinal study can be argued as outweighing the negative aspects of this particular sampling technique.