(CO-)OCCUPATION – A
FRESH PERSPECTIVE
Karline Doidge
Dr. Linda H. Wilson
WHY I’M NOT ATTENDING IN PERSON...
OVERVIEW
What is „Co-occupation‟?
 Literature Review
 Methodology
 Results
 Conclusion

CO-OCCUPATION...
A
concept original to occupational science
(Pierce & Marshall, 2004)
 Based on theoretical understandings
 Largely been neglected in empirical research
 Arose in the mothering context (Pierce &
Marshall, 2004)
 Refers to the interplay and interdependence of
the occupations of two or more people (Pierce,
2009)
 Is often thought of as being human interaction
only
DIFFERENT UNDERSTANDINGS OF COOCCUPATION
Pierce (Pierce & Marshall, 2004) defined cooccupations as highly interactive occupations on a
social continuum of occupation
Solitary
occupations
Cooccupations
Not
interactive
Highly
interactive
DIFFERENT UNDERSTANDINGS OF COOCCUPATION
Zemke and Clark (1996): co-occupations
are the most interactive of all social
occupations that can be parallel (beside
each other, not connected) shared (such as
participating in the same occupation but not
interacting)
Parallel
occupations
Shared
occupations
Cooccupations
Not
interactive
Occupations
Highly
interactive
DIFFERENT UNDERSTANDINGS OF COOCCUPATION
Olson (2004) believes that co-occupations are cocreated experiences; both participants bring their
personal capacities to co-occupations
Physical skills and
capacities
Physical skills and
capacities
Mental skills and capacities
Co-created occupational
experience
Mental skills and capacities
Emotional skills and
capacities
Emotional skills and
capacities
Co-occupation
Person 1
Person 2
DIFFERENT UNDERSTANDINGS OF COOCCUPATION
Pickens and Pizur-Barnekow (2009) challenged
Pierce‟s concept: co-occupations occur when two
or more people have specific levels of shared
physicality, emotionality, and intentionality
Shared
physicality
Cooccupation
Shared
meaning
Shared
temporality
Shared
intentionality
Shared
emotionality
DOIDGE’S THEORY (2010/2011)
Honours research on dog-owner‟s occupations that
are related to their dog
Co-occupation
Together
(shared time and
space)
Doing with
Doing to
Alone
(shared time and
space not required)
Doing for
Doing because of
MOTHERS AND MOTHERING
Mother defined as a woman who is the primary
caregiver of their child (Francis-Connolly, 2004)
 Mothering can be defined as nourishing and looking
after someone with love and affection (Primeau,
2004)
 Mothering often involves „enfolded occupation‟,
commonly referred to as multi-tasking (Bateson,
1996)

MOTHERING OCCUPATIONS
Have many purposes (Price & Stephenson, 2009):
o Nurturing (physically, emotionally)
o Supporting development
 Lasts a lifetime! (Francis-Connolly, 1998)
 This research was undertaken with a focus on
mothering children aged 0-5 as this has been
identified as the timeframe of most intensive
mothering (Evans & Rodger, 2008)

RESEARCH QUESTION
„Do the four co-occupations categories describe the
mothering occupations of mothers of children aged
0-5 years?‟
METHODOLOGY
Pragmatist paradigm (Malone, 2001)
 Content analysis methodology – making inferences
from text (Krippendorff, 2004)
 A priori assumption – mothering occupations can be
described as „doing with‟, „doing to‟, „doing for‟ and
„doing because of‟

RESEARCH POPULATION
10 Mothers of children aged 0-5
 Different key characteristics such as:
o Single/married
o Mum of many/one
o Working/stay at home
o Disabled child/non-disabled child
o Homosexual/heterosexual
o Older/younger
o Adopted/birth mother

BLOGS AS A DATA SOURCE
Blogs are a novel and rich data source when
undertaking social research (Jones & Alony, 2008)
 “Fascinating archives of human thought” (Lewis,
2006, p.1)
 Free of researcher bias as blogs contain existing
„monologues‟ that are structured to the bloggers‟
liking (Lascia, 2001)

LIMITATIONS OF BLOGS AS A DATA SOURCE
Content and/or blogger personality may be fictitious
(Jones & Alony, 2008)
 Biased sample due to computer access being a
prerogative to be able to blog
 Content may be hard to analyze due to
format/writing style/links to other websites

MULTISTAGE RANDOM SAMPLING
First randomly selected a blog through a random
number generator
 Randomly sampled 5% of posts if more than 100
posts total, 10% of posts if less than 100 posts total

EXAMPLE OF A BLOG
DESCRIPTION OF SAMPLED BLOGS
10 Blogs were sampled
 A total of 362 word.docx pages – median length
36.2 pages
 Largest sample 136 pages, including 257
photographs
 Smallest sample 3 pages

RESULTS
The events vary in reported depth and complexity
 Participants in the reported „doings‟ may vary
 Mother and child may be involved in the same
event with same or with different occupational foci
 Spatially, mother and child may or may not be in the
same place
 Four categories

THE EVENTS VARY IN REPORTED DEPTH AND
COMPLEXITY
 “And
I tossed the
refuse in a trash
bin” (Sweets, p.
14, l. 20)
 Very detailed –
micro description
 “We
just vegged
all day long.”
(Amanda, p.1, ll.
11, 12)
 Short overview –
macro
description
EXAMPLE OF COMPOUNDS
Changing habits
bathing
Visiting dentist
Transitioning from
co-sleeping
announcing
Being talked to
Reduce dummyuse
De-swaddling
Combing hair
Sitting with
Letting stand
Running a bath
Lifting into the
bath
Putting bubbles
into the bath
observing
Using a
thermometer
Washing hair
noticing
dressing
observing
Being told
Putting pjs on
Seeking med
attention
Physical baby- care
Brushing teeth
Going to well visit
Sending to
bathroom
teaching
Taking to
bathroom
toileting
Putting toothpaste
on brush
examining
Getting help
Regulating sth
Holding hands
Examining teeth
Putting to bed
Letting sleep
Putting back down
Holding baby
Putting between
mum and dad
Getting drs to do a
photo study
Changing nappy
driving
Putting down
observing
Staying up
Disposing of
nappy
Bag dirty clothes
Being kicked at
Being screamed at
Disposing of
nappy bag
Disposing of wipes
dressing
leaving
observing
Open nappy
Pick up baby
Placing the baby
Pulling off shorts
Pulling back nappy
Pulling away
nappy
Put on new nappy
Putting down pad
Wipe poop off
Wipe poop off
mum
Wipe poop off
table
Washing hands
Using hand
sanitizer
PARTICIPANTS IN THE REPORTED
‘EVENTS’ MAY VARY

Mother an observer of her child‟s occupation:
“H has had a ball tearing wrapping paper off many a gift.” (The
Feminist Housewife, p. 3, l.2)


Children not present but linked:
“I got to laugh out loud today when I told my hairdresser that I
wanted one of my children to learn how to do hair so I could
get mine done every week.” (Kathy, p. 7, ll. 22-24)
Mother and children present and active:
“I couldn't just send them into the bathroom, I would have to
take them in, stop them from squabbling as to who stands
where (each now has their own step stools - that was the
answer!)” (Mary, p. 2, ll. 17-21)
MOTHER AND CHILD MAY BE INVOLVED IN THE
SAME ACTIVITY WITH THE SAME, OR WITH
DIFFERENT, FOCI
1st photo: smiling at
each other
2nd photo: focus on
Nella
SAME ACTIVITY – DIFFERENT FOCI
“I was enjoying watching
her eat it so much, I
had tears in my eyes.”
(Kelle, p. 102, ll. 4-5)
 Nella‟s focus – eating
strawberry
 Kelle‟s focus –
watching Nella eat the
strawberry
SPATIALLY, MOTHER AND CHILD MAY OR MAY
NOT BE IN THE SAME PLACE

“I’ve read online that you
can’t spoil a baby before
they’re six months old.
I’ve also heard that, up to
3 months, a baby is in the
“4th trimester” and
needs to be held a LOT.”
(Sweets, p.9, ll. 10,11)
Mother and child are
spatially much further
apart and not
interacting.
 Sweets is acquiring
knowledge without the
baby needing to be
present in this
occupation.

FOUR CATEGORIES
Doing alone
Doing together
Doing with
Highly interactive
Doing to
Less interactive
Being done to
Doing alongside
Doing alongside
Letting do
Doing for
Doing because of
‘DOING FOR’

“[...] she can't eat huge
bites of things, you
have to chop them in
little pieces.” (Amanda,
p. 2, l. 19)
The child‟s presence in
the same time and
space is not necessary
but possible
 The mother is the actor
and the child is the
immediate recipient of
the activity‟s product
 „Doing for‟ events are
done to enable the
child‟s activity

‘DOING BECAUSE OF’
“I kept asking if she was
okay, and they told me she
was fine. (...) So, I asked
why her nose was
smooshed...why she
looked funny. (...) I cried
and cried while everyone
smiled and took pictures of
her, like nothing was
wrong. I kept crying and
asking, "Is there
something you aren't
telling me?" ...and they just
kept smiling.” (Kelle, p.12,
13, ll.13-17, 1-8)
 The
child‟s
presence in the
same time and
space is not
necessary.
 The child (and the
child‟s activity) are
the cause for the
activity
‘DOING ALONGSIDE’

“The most amazing
part of motherhood has
been watching him
watch his brand new
world.” (Michelle, p. 23,
ll. 2, 3)
1. Child as primary
focus
 The mother‟s
occupational focus is
the child‟s occupational
focus
 The mother is an
observer rather than a
participant in the child‟s
activity

‘DOING ALONGSIDE’

“I found myself last week
screaming talking very
loud when the toddler as
usual was “washing
dishes” with me. She was
wet and the floor was
wet... I saw the look of
utter amazement of her
face when I lost my cool!
“What’s the matter,
Mom?” or, more
specifically “WTF?”
“What is the BIG deal?”
(Karen, p. 19, ll. 12-17)


2. Karen‟s and Mieka‟s
presence in a shared
environment (the kitchen)
with different
occupational foci
Karen attends to her child
by frequently changing
her focus and checking
on her child out of safety
concerns
‘DOING WITH’
‘DOING WITH’ ‘DOING TO’ AND ‘BEING DONE TO’
“In the bathroom, the changing table was in the
handicapped stall. I got Little Man situated, putting
a disposable pad under him, and I pulled off his
shorts (left his shoes on) and opened the diaper to
one of the biggest poops I’ve seen!” (Sweets, p. 14,
ll. 1-4)
 “I had to pull away the dirty diaper, because he
began kicking me and put his shoe IN some poop.
Ack!” (Sweets, p.14, ll. 9, 10)

PROPOSED DEFINITION
Co-occupations have many components that vary,
depending on the relationship between the occupations:
They may or may not occur in the same time and
space.
Sometimes, the participants are present in each
other‟s activities, sometimes not.
Sometimes, the participants have a common goal in
their co-occupation, sometimes not.
Sometimes, co-occupations are experienced as
being positive, sometimes as negative, and sometimes
as neutral.
In co-occupations, neither participant has sole
control over the outcome of the co-occupation.
CONCLUSION
Co-occupation is the interplay of the occupations of
two or more people
 Can be described as being either 'doing with',
'doing alongside', 'doing for', or 'doing because of„

RESEARCH RECOMMENDATIONS
More work needs to be done to agree on a common
language
 More research needs to be done to validate the four
categories

REFERENCES I





Bateson, M. C. (1996). Enfolded activity and the concept of
occupation. In R. Zemke & F. Clark (Eds.), Occupational science:
The evolving discipline (pp. 5-12). Philadelphia: F. A. Davis
Company.
Doidge, K. (2011). What is the place of a dog in the occupational
life of its owner? (Bachelor of Occupational Therapy Honours),
Otago Polytechnic, Dunedin.
Evans, J., & Rodger, S. (2008). Mealtimes and bedtimes:
Windows to family routines and rituals. Journal of Occupational
Science, 15(2), 98-104. doi: 10.1080/14427591.2008.9686615
Francis-Connolly, E. (2004). Mothering across the lifecourse. In
S. A. Esdaile & J. A. Olson (Eds.), Mothering occupations:
Challenge, agency, and participation (pp. 153-173). Philadelphia,
PA: F. A. Davis.
Francis-Connolly, E. (1998). Qualitative research. It never ends:
Mothering as a lifetime occupation. Scandinavian Journal of
Occupational Therapy, 5(3), 149-155. doi:
10.3109/11038129809035740
REFERENCES II






Jones, M., & Alony, I. (2008). Blogs - The new source of data analysis.
Journal of Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology, 5,
433-446.
Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content analysis: An introduction to its
methodology (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Lascia, J. D. (2001). Blogging as a form of journalism. USC Annenberg
Online Journalism Review, from
http://www.ojr.org/ojr/workplace/1017958873.php
Lewis, A. (2006). Blogs: Unique archives of human thought. Australian
Counselling Association (ACA) Journal, 6(1), 1-4.
Malone, J. C. (2001). Ontology recapitulates philology: Willard Quine,
pragmatism, and radical behaviourism. Behaviour and Philosophy, 29,
63-74.
Olson, J. A. (2004). Mothering occupations in caring for infants and
young children. In S. A. Esdaile & J. A. Olson (Eds.), Mothering
occupations: Challenge, agency, and participation (pp. 28-51).
Philadelphia, PA: F. A. Davis.
REFERENCES III







Pickens, N. D., & Pizur-Barnekow, K. (2009a). Co-occupation: Extending the dialogue. Journal
of Occupational Science, 16(3), 151-156. doi: 10.1080/14427591.2009.9686656
Pierce, D., & Marshall, A. (2004). Maternal management of home space and time to facilitate
infant/toddler play and development. In S. A. Esdaile & J. A. Olson (Eds.), Mothering
occupations: Challenge, agency, and participation (pp. 73-94). Philadelphia, PA: F. A. Davis.
Pierce, D. (2009). Co-occupation: The challenges of defining concepts original to occupational
science. Journal of Occupational Science, 16(3), 203-207. doi:
10.1080/14427591.2009.9686663
Polatajko, H. J., Davis, J. A., Hobson, S. J. G., Landry, J. E., Mandich, A., Street, S. L., . . . Yee,
S. (2004). Meeting the responsibility that comes with the privilege: Introducing a taxonomic
code for understanding occupation. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 71(5), 261-264.
Price, P., & Stephenson, S. M. (2009). Learning to promote occupational development through
co-occupation. Journal of Occupational Science, 16(3), 180-186. doi:
10.1080/14427591.2009.9686660
Primeau, L. A. (2004). Mothering in the context of unpaid work and play in families. In S. A.
Esdaile & J. A. Olson (Eds.), Mothering occupations: Challenge, agency, and participation (pp.
115-133). Philadelphia, PA: F. A. Davis.
Zemke, R., & Clark, F. (1996). Co-occupations of mothers and children. In R. Zemke & F. Clark
(Eds.), Occupational science: The evolving discipline (pp. 213-215). Philadelphia: F. A. Davis
Company.
QUESTIONS
FOUR CATEGORIES
Doing alone
Doing together
Doing with
Highly interactive
Doing to
Less interactive
Being done to
Doing alongside
Doing alongside
Letting do
Doing for
Doing because of
PROPOSED DEFINITION
Co-occupations have many components that vary,
depending on the relationship between the occupations:
They may or may not occur in the same time and
space.
Sometimes, the participants are present in each
other‟s activities, sometimes not.
Sometimes, the participants have a common goal in
their co-occupation, sometimes not.
Sometimes, co-occupations are experienced as
being positive, sometimes as negative, and sometimes
as neutral.
In co-occupations, neither participant has sole
control over the outcome of the co-occupation.