this ▁has ▁obvious ▁imp lications ▁for ▁research ). ▁▁ ▁The ▁approach ▁suggests ▁that ▁adult ▁( res earch ers ) ▁need ▁to ▁be ▁c aut ious ▁in ▁their ▁claims ▁about ▁understanding ▁the ▁world ▁from ▁a ▁child ' s ▁perspective . ▁It ▁is ▁not ▁claimed ▁that ▁there ▁are ▁no ▁connections ▁between ▁these ▁two ▁world s , ▁but ▁rather ▁that ▁they ▁can ▁be ▁at ▁once ▁very ▁connected ▁and ▁close ▁and ▁very ▁far ▁apart . ▁This ▁is ▁a ▁common ▁theme ▁in ▁some ▁literature ▁which ▁cons iders ▁child hood . ▁ ▁Ide as ▁of ▁the ▁other ness ▁of ▁child hood ▁have ▁connections ▁with ▁some ▁children ' s ▁aff inity ▁with ▁dis ordered ▁spaces ▁( th ose ▁not ▁managed ▁and ▁tid ied ▁by ▁adult ▁society ) ▁like ▁waste ▁ground ▁in ▁cities . ▁They ▁also ▁have ▁imp lications ▁for ▁trying ▁to ▁remember ▁what ▁it ▁was ▁like ▁to ▁be ▁a ▁child ▁as ▁a ▁form ▁of ▁research ▁and ▁knowing ▁child hood . ▁This ▁is , ▁at ▁best , ▁a ▁highly ▁complex ▁and ▁mult if ac et ed ▁process ▁which , ▁again , ▁cannot ▁be ▁assumed ▁to ▁give ▁easy ▁access ▁to ▁children ’ s ▁world s . ▁This ▁question ▁has ▁raised ▁some ▁critical ▁response ▁within ▁children ' s ▁ge ograph ies ▁( see ▁Phil o , ▁ 2 0 0 3 ). ▁ ▁S ources ▁Clo ke , ▁P . ▁and ▁Jones , ▁O . ▁( 2 0 0 5 ), ▁' Un c laimed ▁Territ ory ": ▁Child hood ▁and ▁Dis ordered ▁Sp aces ( s ), ▁Social ▁and ▁Cultural ▁Geography ',