Central Lancashire Online Knowledge (CLoK)

Title Who do you think you are? Children's definitions of being a ‘child'
Type Article
URL https://clok.uclan.ac.uk/45749/
DOI https://doi.org/10.1111/chso.12705
Date 2023
Citation Bacon, Kate and O'riordan, Zoe (2023) Who do you think you are? Children's
definitions of being a ‘child'. Children & Society. ISSN 0951-0605
Creators Bacon, Kate and O'riordan, Zoe

It is advisable to refer to the publisher’s version if you intend to cite from the work.
https://doi.org/10.1111/chso.12705

For information about Research at UCLan please go to http://www.uclan.ac.uk/research/

All outputs in CLoK are protected by Intellectual Property Rights law, including Copyright law.
Copyright, IPR and Moral Rights for the works on this site are retained by the individual authors
and/or other copyright owners. Terms and conditions for use of this material are defined in the
http://clok.uclan.ac.uk/policies/
 10990860, 0, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/chso.12705 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [27/02/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Accepted: 26 January 2023

DOI: 10.1111/chso.12705

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Who do you think you are? Children's

definitions of being a ‘child’

Kate Bacon1 | Zoe O'Riordan2

1
Reader in Teaching & Learning, School
of Childhood, Youth & Education Studies, Abstract
Manchester Metropolitan University, We asked 92 children in North West England, aged 2–17,
Manchester, UK
if they were children and what it meant to be a child.
2
School of Social Work, Care and
Community, University of Central
Our findings show that not all children think they are
Lancashire, Preston, UK a ‘child’. Although different age groups defined ‘child-
ness’ in different ways, children reproduced normative
Correspondence
Kate Bacon, School of Childhood, Western discourses of childhood, including ideas which
Youth & Education Studies, Manchester subordinate them. The children in our study seemed
Metropolitan University, Brooks Building,
unable to articulate their capabilities and contributions.
Birley Fields Campus 53 Bonsall Street,
Manchester M15 6GX, UK. We argue that children and adults need to co-produce
Email: [email protected] positive definitions of childness to facilitate adult
acceptance of children's participation in society and
continue the struggle against adultism.

KEYWORDS
adultism, childness, children's perspectives, participation, social
construction

INTRODUCTION

Questioning what childhood is and who the child is, was central to the development of Child-
hood Studies (CS). To articulate the social construction of childhood, research focused on how
society shapes childhood, through legislation, the economy and culture and how discourses of
childhood vary historically and culturally (Hendrick, 1997; James & James, 2004; Qvortrup, 2009;
Sen, 2021). Many argued that children constituted a subordinate minority group with fewer rights
than adults (Alanen, 2001; Alderson, 2020; Mayall, 2001, 2002) and limited recognition as ‘citi-
zens’ (Bacon & Frankel, 2014). From its inception, CS sought to challenge and move beyond defi-
cit views of children as ‘natural, passive, dependent, vulnerable, incompetent and incomplete’
(Canosa & Graham, 2020: 26) and promote children's status as citizens and competent social
This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and repro-
duction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
© 2023 The Authors. Children & Society published by National Children's Bureau and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Child Soc. 2023;00:1–20. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/chso 1

 10990860, 0, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/chso.12705 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [27/02/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
2 BACON and O’RIORDAN

actors who are ‘active in the construction and determination of their own social lives, the lives of
those around them and the societies in which they live’ (Prout & James, 1997: 8).
As it developed, CS has drawn attention to how normative adult-created Western discourses
of childhood as a time of fun, innocence, play, learning and freedom from responsibility have
come to dominate international policy and practice (Imoh, 2012). Discussions often refer to the
United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) which constructs the ‘child’ as
anyone below the age of 18. Yet, as Hollindale (1997) notes, although we have all been children,
we cannot assume that adult constructions correspond to children's own sense of childness. We
cannot assume how children will define the category or even if they see themselves as children.
Yet, the latter seems to have been taken for granted in CS research. There does not appear to be
any research that has directly and systematically asked children if children consider themselves
to be children.
Research exploring children's definitions of being a ‘child’ has tended to focus on a narrow
age group and/or begins from the presumption that ‘child’ and ‘adult’ are oppositional categories.
Lowe's (2012) study of 16 children aged 3–4 years revealed that four main constructs were prev-
alent among the children: the child as playful, unknowing, needful and unauthorised. This was
a small-scale study conducted in one nursery. Cassidy et al. (2017) report on the views of chil-
dren aged 4–10 from seven countries across North and South America and Eastern and Western
Europe and found minimal differences between what children said in different countries. They
associated being a child with fun and play, developing and learning. In contrast, being an adult
was associated with the responsibility to work, decision-making and freedom.
The methodology of Cassidy et al.'s study sets up this comparison between child/adult. After
reading a short stimulus story, children were asked to engage in dialogue around the following
questions:

If you were given the opportunity to take a pill that would turn you into an adult in
an instant, would you take it? If so, why would you take it? If not, why not?

Adams' (2013, 2014) study is closest to our own in that she does compare and found evidence of
age-related differences in how children define being a ‘child’. However, her research also invites
children to compare and contrast the ‘child’ with the ‘adult’. When interviewing the children, she
posed the following scenario:

Imagine that a creature from another planet came to Earth and saw human beings
for the first time. The creature sees adults and children and does not understand the
difference between them. The creature asks you ‘what is a child?’ How would you
answer the question?
(Adams, 2014: 167).

It is therefore no surprise that one of her key findings was that the children were ‘operating with
social constructions of adulthood alongside the constructions of childhood’ (Adams, 2013: 529).
Adams studied 56 children aged 7–11 and found that children described the concept mainly
according to physical descriptors (age, size and maturity), behavioural characteristics (being less
sensible than adults, always learning) and lifestyle activities (playing, having fun, restrictions and
going to school rather than having a job). While most children saw being a child as being a smaller
version of an adult, the older children were more likely to refer to size than the 7/8 year-olds. As
the children got older, they also equated childness with being more heavily restricted than adults.
 10990860, 0, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/chso.12705 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [27/02/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
BACON and O’RIORDAN 3

These restrictions were not only largely seen as negative but also indicated that adults cared for
them. Indeed, being an ‘adult’ was not always seen as the ideal state of being. When asked if they
would prefer to be a child or adult, 63% of the children said they would rather be a child. While
the younger children tended to see adulthood as ‘boring’, the older children saw it as ‘stressful’.
Unlike Lowe, Cassidy et al. and Adams, our study offers insight into if as well as how children
associate with the label ‘child’. It does not assume that children who do not see themselves as
children will automatically see themselves as ‘adult’. It captures the perspectives of a broader age
range of children (aged 2–17) addressing one criticism that CS research has tended to exclude
younger children (Oswell, 2013). Importantly, it also repositions the meaning of childhood as an
important research endeavour.
Over the past 20 years, critiques of social constructionist perspectives, and the biological/
social dualisms (Prout, 2005) it can set in play have meant that ‘few works pursue the question
of what childhood is or who the child is’ (Sen, 2021: 73). However, scrutinising the language
children use to talk about children is important in understanding how they construct the cate-
gory child, and their relationship with it. Language is central to human interaction. It consti-
tutes one ‘significant symbol’ (Crossley, 2022) that both reflects and builds the conventions and
norms that are embedded within social life. Language is an emergent property of generational
social relations, and we can learn much about the role, position and status of children by study-
ing how children talk about being a child. Indeed, language is one important ‘childing’ practice
(Punch, 2005) whereby children constitute themselves and other children as ‘children’.
As history shows us, language can be used to perpetuate prejudice and discrimination as
well as to liberate and redress aspects of social inequality. Although we are accustomed to think-
ing about racism and sexism, there is no generally accepted word to describe prejudice against
children (Young-Bruehl, 2012). Confusingly, the term ‘childism’ (Young-Bruehl, 2012) can be
used to describe discrimination against children, although it is more commonly used in CS
to mean respect for children, with ‘adultism’ being used to denote prejudice against children
(Alderson, 2020; Wall, 2022). If there is to be widespread and meaningful participation of chil-
dren in society, then children (and adults) need a language for recognising the skills and compe-
tencies that children have. Our research provides rich insight into how children's sense of self
and experiences compare to the (lack of) social and moral status they attribute to the label ‘child’.

METHODOLOGY

This study addresses three questions:

1. How do children construct the category ‘child’?

2. Do (which?) groups of children define themselves as children?
3. In what ways do they associate and/or disassociate from being a ‘child’?

Ontologically, we see childhood as socially constructed by macro social forces and micro-processes
of human meaning-making (Prout & James, 1997). Childhood is shaped by social structures and
lived, done, reproduced and potentially transformed by children and adults as they actualise,
take up and invest in their identities as ‘children’, or otherwise (Alanen, 2001). However, we do
not deny the role of biology in shaping childhood and our project potentially allows us to exam-
ine the significance that children themselves attach to this.
 10990860, 0, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/chso.12705 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [27/02/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
4 BACON and O’RIORDAN

The study has an interpretivist epistemological orientation (Mason, 2017). It seeks to engage
with children's perspectives to build a picture of what being a child, or otherwise, means to them.
In structured interviews, 92 children were asked two questions:

1. Are you a child?

2. What makes (or does not make) you a child?

The study was conducted by the authors in collaboration with undergraduate students in North
West England. The students conducted one-to-one interviews with a child they knew, in the
child's or the interviewer's home, as an activity linked to their studies. This research design
allowed children to speak for themselves in familiar and potentially less pressurised environ-
ments. This contrasts with Adams' (2014) research, which took place at school and interviewed
children in small groups. We were keen to avoid this approach as in schools ‘the balance of power
is heavily skewed towards adults’ (Robinson & Kellett, 2004: 91). While our approach allowed
children more opportunity to speak for themselves, it did not provide the independence that
speaking to an unknown researcher can allow. None of the participants talked about romantic
relationships or sex/sexuality, which may have been because they were talking to someone they
knew well (often a parent/sibling).
Consent was gained from children and parents/carers. The children's responses were
recorded verbatim along with the age and gender of the child. Where children named others in
their answers, these were recorded by their relationship to the child (friend, brother, etc) rather
than by name. The study obtained ethical clearance from the University Ethics Committee.
Using Nvivo, we coded the children's responses to each question and explored these both
within and between age groups. By focusing on age, we do not assume that age is the most
important feature that unifies diverse groups of children. We have chosen age because we recog-
nise that children's childhoods, and therefore potentially their views, attitudes and identity, are
struc tured for them along age lines. This is most visible through the schooling system where chil-
dren are separated into age sets and treated differently within the different types of institution
(pre-school/nursery, primary and secondary school) (Simpson, 2000). Reflecting educational
trends in North West England, we divided our sample into three main age-groups: pre-school,
aged 0–4; primary school, aged 5–10; and secondary school aged 11–17.
Our sample was skewed towards older children and females (see Table 1). The way the sample
was accessed meant we were unable to control its composition, or to collect data related to the
children's intersectional identities. While there may be some gender patterns within the data,
they are not strong enough to report, and the skewed nature of the sample, along with its size
make these fragile. Similarly, the sample was predominantly white, making comparisons focused
on variables of race and ethnicity unfeasible. Age, however, seems to be consistently significant
in the ways children define childhood.
The children's responses were thematically analysed, using descriptive and more abstract
(pattern) codes (Miles & Huberman, 1994). Our coding framework revealed that children talked

TA B L E 1 Sample characteristics by age and gender.

Gender Age 0–4 Age 5–10 Age 11–17 All

Male 3 15 19 37
Female 8 21 26 55
Total 11 36 45 92
 10990860, 0, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/chso.12705 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [27/02/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
BACON and O’RIORDAN 5

TA B L E 2 Pattern codes and descriptive subcodes.

Pattern code Descriptive subcodes

Embodiment Age
Size
Development
Lived experiences Activities—leisure, school, not working
Life circumstances—living in families, dependence, freedom from responsibility, living
within constraints
Behaviour—being silly, immaturity, lacking knowledge, people who make bad decisions
Capacities No subcodes, limited data

about their identities, as children or otherwise, in two main, often inter-related ways, in relation
to:

• the ways they embody childhood—by virtue of their age, size and their developmental
stage;
• their lived experience—defined by the things they did, the way they lived, behavioural
markers and living with constraints.

A very small number also spoke about their capacities as children (Table 2).
We are reporting frequency data alongside the key themes to give a sense of their importance
to children as a group and to show variations between age groups. This gives us ‘not a quasistatis-
tical rendering of the data, but rather a description of the patterns or regularities in the data that
have, in part, been discovered and then confirmed by counting’ (Sandelowski, 2000: 338).

FINDINGS

Are you a child?

The question ‘Are you a child?’ brought a more varied response than might be expected. While
most of the children (75%) said that they were children (see Table 3), a quarter said they were
not children or were ambivalent about the label. Among the children who said they were chil-
dren, many offered a categorical ‘yes/yeah’ response. While, for the pre-schoolers, this may partly
be explained by their linguistic range, the fact that these short answers appeared across all age
groups points to the perceived obviousness of being a child for some children, as well as their
awareness of being classified thus.
Only five of the 11 pre-school children interviewed said they were children, making them
the group who were least likely to say that they were a child. The consensus on being a child was
strongest among the primary school-aged children (5–10). Most of these children (86%) just said
yes in response to question one, some pointing out how obvious it was that they were a child—
‘Course I am stupid!’ (Female, 7). All of those who said ‘no’ placed themselves outside of the
category ‘child’ by giving themselves alternative labels—‘big girl’, ‘medium kid’ and ‘kid’. Thus,
association with the label ‘child’ required no justification, whereas disassociation demanded
explanation.
 10990860, 0, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/chso.12705 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [27/02/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
6 BACON and O’RIORDAN

T A B L E 3 Reponses to interview question 1 (Are you a child?) by age group: number and proportion of age
group for each response.

0–4 5–10 11+ Total

Are you a child? N (%) N (%) N (%) N (%)
Yes
All responses 5 (45) 33 (92) 31 (69) 69 (75)
Single word response 5 (45) 26 (72) 18 (40) 49 (53)
Yes, of course 5 (14) 4 (9) 9 (10)
Explained yes 2 (6) 9 (20) 11 (12)
No
All responses 6 (55) 3 (8) 9 (20) 18 (20)
Single word response 3 (27) 2 (5) 5 (5)
Playful 2 (18) 2 (2)
Alternative label 3 (8) 5 (11) 8 (9)
Comparison to others 1 (9) 2 (5) 3 (4)
Ambivalent
All responses 5 (11) 5 (5)
Yes and no 1 (2) 1 (1)
Yes and teenager 3 (7) 3 (3)
Redefinition of question 1 (2) 1 (1)
All
Total responses 11 36 45 92
Bold values indicate to highlight the general patterns.

While 20% rejected the label ‘child’, and 11% were ambivalent, 69% of the secondary school-
aged children said they thought they were a child. Sometimes their ambivalence reflected the
betwixt and between status of being a teen: ‘No, I'm a teen, but yes, I'm a child’. Like the primary
school-aged children, some of these older children used alternative labels to distance themselves
from being a ‘child’: ‘boy’, ‘teenager’, ‘young adult’.
Children's determination of whether they were a child was sometimes influenced by the
views of others—teachers, parents, siblings and others.

Yes [I am a child] although some adults e.g. teachers see me as a young adult
(Female, 14)

Mum and dad treat me like a child…even the teachers say we are 'children' in class
so that's why I am a child.
(Male, 10)

You think I'm a child [his sibling] the way you treat me
(Male, 12)

Also the fact that I am seen as naïve in the eyes of the public due to my youth
(Female, 14)
 10990860, 0, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/chso.12705 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [27/02/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
BACON and O’RIORDAN 7

They also viewed their status as defined by the law.

You stop being a child when you are 18 because laws make you an adult then
(Male, 15).

Some children (only those over 15) seemed to suggest that their status as ‘child’ or not child was
chosen rather than imposed:

Yes, I would class myself as a child

(Female 17)

…I just feel like a child

(Female, 17)

What is clear is that it cannot be assumed that children will always associate themselves with
being a ‘child’.

What is a child?

The children associated being a child predominantly with their physical forms, the ways they
lived and, to a much lesser degree, specific capacities. The ways children talked about being a
child varied across the age groups (see Table 4). Embodied aspects of childhood were more signif-
icant to the two older groups of children, and the specific aspects of the bodies they talked about
changed as they grew older. Similarly, children talked about their lived experiences in different
ways, with the younger two age groups of children more focused on play, the older two on school
and the oldest on their experiences of dependence and restriction. Very few children mentioned
any specific capacities associated with being a child.

Embodying childhood

Children talked most about the ways that they were defined by their bodies: through their age,
size and developmental stage. All age groups mentioned size and physical development, and
both groups of school-aged children also talked about age (see Table 5).
Age was the most cited signifier of being a child. A total of 67% of the 11–17 years olds
mentioned age compared to 42% of the 5–10 year-olds, and none of the under 5s. Furthermore,
the way they related to the concept of ‘age’ varied. Some children offered their age as an unques-
tionable explanation of their ‘child’ identity.

TA B L E 4 Embodiment, lived experiences and capacities.

Age group 0–4 Age group 5–10 Age group 11–17 Total
(n = 11) (%) (n = 36) (%) (n = 45) (%) (92) (%)
Embodiment 5 (45) 27 (75) 33 (73) 65 (71)
Lived experiences 7 (64) 23 (64) 38 (84) 68 (74)
Capacities 0 (0) 2 (6) 4 (9) 6 (7)
Note: NB, children's responses could be attached to more than one code, as they talked about multiple aspects of childness.
 10990860, 0, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/chso.12705 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [27/02/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
8 BACON and O’RIORDAN

TA B L E 5 Embodiment: age, size and physical development.

Age group = 0–4 Age group = 5–10 Age group = 11–17 Total
(11) (%) (36) (%) (45) (%) (92) (%)
Age 0 (0) 15 (42) 30 (67) 45 (49)
Size 4 (36) 12 (33) 6 (13) 22 (24)
Physical development 1 (9) 10 (28) 5 (11) 16 (17)
Children coded to embodiment 5 (45) 27 (75) 33 (73) 65 (71)

I am 8
(Male, 8)

My age makes me a child

(Male, 15)

Others used it to reason whether they were a ‘child’:

… because you're not 0 now. You're 6, 5 or 4. And because you're not like 22 or 42
(Female, 6)

I am younger than 18… no I am younger than 13. When I am 13 that makes me a

teenager and not a child anymore. At 18 you are a grown up
(Female, 8 ½)

While most children agreed that age determined childness, there was no consensus on when
childhood ended. 13, 16 and 18 were commonly suggested but sometimes, children of the same
age had differing views:

I'm a teenager. I don't think I'm a child because I'm in my teens

(Female, 13)

I think I'm in between child and teenager, but I don't think I'm that old
(Male 13)

Obviously I am a child
(Female, 13)

And while some suggested that factors other than age could determine if they were a ‘child’, even
these statements showed their awareness of the role of age in categorising children.

[I am not a child] Because I believe myself to be more mature than others my age
(Male 14)

Anyone under 18 is a child, unless they live on their own for any reason… When you
look after yourself, you're an adult
(Male, 15)
 10990860, 0, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/chso.12705 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [27/02/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
BACON and O’RIORDAN 9

Only one child challenged the idea that childhood is defined by age:

Because I know people say you're a child if you're under 18, but I don't actually know
who made that rule and the day you turn 18, you don't change that much. Some
people could mature when they're not 18 - so before they're 18 or even older than 18
(Female, 12)

Overall, the data suggest that children are highly aware of the importance of age in positioning
them as a ‘child’, and this awareness increases with age.
In contrast, size becomes less significant as children age. For the younger children, being
small was a key indicator of childness.

I'm very little

(Female, 4)

[I'm a child because] of my height

(Male, 10)

But even among the younger children, there were those who positioned themselves as a non-child
by drawing on their increased size or age, offering alternative labels to distance themselves from
being a ‘child’.

I'm not a baby

(Female, 2)

I am a big girl!
(Female, 5)

I'm a medium kid… [a child is] a little person who will grow up into a big person
(Male, 7)

Some children in the 11–17 group still relied on size to position themselves in relation to child-
ness (…I'm little, Female, 11), but others questioned whether this, by itself, was an indicator of
child/adult status.

I'm small, but some adults are small?

(Female, 11)

Physical development is most important to the primary-aged children. Some talked generally
about growth or development, or moving from infancy to childhood:

…I'm still growing

(Female, 6)

A child is big feet, long hands, bigger clothes and long hair… not baby
(Female, 6)

Some children, on the cusp of puberty, mentioned their lack of secondary sexual characteristics.
 10990860, 0, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/chso.12705 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [27/02/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
10 BACON and O’RIORDAN

…I'm not fully developed yet, with hairs and that

(Male, 10)

You have boobs and bigger clothing than me

(Female, 11)

And although most older children did not mention their development, some were aware that
their bodies were still changing:

…my body still isn't fully developed

(Male, 17)

Thus, children associate being a child with being small, young and having developing bodies.
Size is especially significant for the youngest children, age for the oldest children and physical
development for the middle age group.

Childhood as a lived experience

Children's explanations of childhood identified aspects of their lives that define them as
children—the things they do, the way they live and the ways they behaved (Table 6).
Each age group talked about the things they did (activities) as markers of childhood, but the
extent to which they referred to their life circumstances and behaviours tended to increase with
age. Many children (though not the preschool children) talked about going to school as a defin-
ing characteristic of childhood, perhaps reflecting the amount of time spent in school. They also
talked about school-based learning and homework:

Because I'm in high school, learning stuff

(Male, 12)

I have to do homework
(Female, 11)

However, while some children saw attendance at high school as an indicator that they were chil-
dren, others felt this demonstrated that they were not, and leaving school and starting work was
a clear indication of adulthood.

[I'm not a child] Because I'm in high school

(Male, 11)

TA B L E 6 Activities, life circumstances and behaviours.

Age group = 0–4 Age group = 5–10 Age group = 11–17 Total
(11) (%) (36) (%) (45) (%) (92) (%)
Activities 5 (45) 16 (44) 23 (51) 44 (48)
Life circumstances 3 (22) 8 (27) 27 (60) 30 (41)
Behaviours 0 (0) 6 (17) 11 (24) 17 (18)
Children coded to lived experience 7 (64) 23 (64) 38 (84) 68 (74)
 10990860, 0, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/chso.12705 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [27/02/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
BACON and O’RIORDAN 11

I go to work Monday to Friday 9-5, this makes me an adult

(Male, 17)

They also talked about how they spent their leisure time. Play was an important aspect of child-
hood for over a third of the under 5s and one in eight 5–10 year-olds, but only mentioned by 9%
of over 11s. However, school and play were both often stated as facts of childhood life rather than
attributed with positive or negative value. These children are responding to the question: ‘What
makes you a child?’:

Toys
(Female, 3)

When I play
(Male 4)

I play with games and play with my friends and go to school

(Female, 10)

Some children also associated being a ‘child’ with being physically active:

Small, cute, toys, run around

(Female, 3)

Some of the children mentioned their friends as an element of their child identity (Playing with
my friends, Male, 6) while for others, activities outside of school, including friendships, mark
them as ‘not child’:

I walk home from high school, hanging out with all my friends, I play Fortnite, X Box
games for adults. I get stressed from homework
(Male 11)

Across the sample, the children talked about living in families, being dependent, free of respon-
sibilities and living with constraints. A fifth of the children talked about living in families. Living
with parents who cared for them dominated these statements, but having siblings and family
celebrations also feature:

Because I have parents

(Female, 11)

I live with my mum and they don't live with their mum and dad. I live with my
brother and sister, and mum and dad don't
(Male, 6)

Because of Christmas
(Male, 5)

But the children made clear that they did not just live with their families—their dependence on
their parents, in multiple ways, was also key to identifying them as children. Some of the children
 10990860, 0, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/chso.12705 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [27/02/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
12 BACON and O’RIORDAN

just stated that they were dependent on their parents, others talked more specifically about being
practically, emotionally or financially dependent. The children talked more about dependence as
a defining characteristic of childness as they aged.

Because my mother do everything for me. I'm the responsibility for my mum
(Female, 4)

Emotionally, I am a child in the way that I still have my parents as a comfort when
I need it
(Female, 15)

The fact that I rely on my parent's finance

(Female, 13)

While some children thought that having dependents meant you were no longer a child, others
believed that independence and the end of childhood were not necessarily linked:

[I'm not a child] I am a big girl and a mummy. Annabelle [doll] is a child as she needs
me to look after her and feed her
(Female, 5)

Being a child is about the age that you are, not the responsibilities you have. If you
are 16 or 17, even if you have a job and pay the bills, you're still a child
(Male, 15)

Some children felt that their lack of responsibility (for themselves and/or others) determined
their child status. Most of these children were in the 11+ group, with just one in the 5–10s and
no under 5s mentioning responsibilities, or lack of them.

…I don't have any responsibilities only my homework

(Female, 13)

I don't have to give full consent as I'm not 18 yet

(Female, 17)

…don't have to pay bills suggests I'm a child

(Female, 14)

I play and adults are like servants because they do jobs for children
(Male, 6)

However, not all children felt they were free of responsibilities, with this child wanting to distin-
guish her experiences from those of younger children:

We have rules to follow and stuff like chores to do which is unfair as young children
don't
(Female, 12)
 10990860, 0, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/chso.12705 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [27/02/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
BACON and O’RIORDAN 13

And some children used evidence of having responsibility, even for decisions relating to their
own lives, to distance themselves from being a ‘child.

I would class myself as a young man and not a child as I have more responsibilities …
additionally being in Year 10 I have to almost plan my future in the respect of choos-
ing between college and an apprenticeship and then whether to go to university or
start my working career
(Male 15)

Many of the children talked about the things that they (or children generally) do not do. These
responses came predominantly (44%) from the 11–17 year-olds, in contrast to 8% of the 5–10 year-
olds, and none of the under 5s. Children saw their actions as constrained by external forces
including the law, their parents and their teachers. They also talked about the fact that they do
not work, pay tax, vote or own property. Children listed a range of things that they cannot do,
sometimes making implicit or explicit comparisons to ‘adults’.

I can't drink, drive or smoke

(Male, 11)

I cannot go shopping by myself

(Female, 13)

18+ can do things I can't do

(Male, 11)

I don't really have any authority over anything…

(Male, 15)

I have to do what I am told by mum, dad and teachers (Female, 12).

I don't work
(Male, 14)

I do not have the rights of an adult. I cannot vote.

(Female, 16)

The children did not associate being a ‘child’ with activities that involved going beyond the world
of family, home and school. Many saw childhood as a time of powerlessness, in which their
actions and autonomy were limited, in relation to themselves and others.
Particular behaviours were also associated with being a child, although not for the under 5s.
The oldest children were most likely to mention behaviours. Most of the children who talked
about (im)maturity were older, and they did so in a way that assumed the meaning of the term
was known: they simply stated that they were immature and that was why they were a child, or
that they were mature, and so were not a child.

That I'm sometimes, I'm immature

(Female, 11)
 10990860, 0, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/chso.12705 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [27/02/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
14 BACON and O’RIORDAN

One child goes further, explaining the many ways she is still maturing.

Intellectually, I am still learning and developing new skills from school and everyday
life. Emotionally, I am a child in the way that I still have my parents as a comfort
when I need it. And I may not be as emotionally strong as an adult. The final factor
that makes me a child is socially. I may still be easily influenced by others. Also, I am
still learning about different people and how to socialise
(Female, 15).

Some of the children used what may be seen as derogatory language in relation to themselves
or children more generally. They even couched behaviours that maybe seen as positive, such as
laughing, in ways that make them seem negative. Thus, they created a picture of themselves as
people who should not be taken seriously.

Well, what makes a child, what classifies as a child? Cos like, if you were to say like,
IQ wise, is that like meant to be like, a bit dim? Or is it meant to be like, your size, or
your age, cos, I dunno?
(Female, 12)

I am silly
(Female, 8½)

I'm annoying
(Female, 8)

Laughing too much

(Male, 12)

Children also described themselves as incapable in relation to decision-making and as having an

inadequate knowledge base:

Not knowing that much that you need to know

(Male, 10)

I still make immature decisions. Also, I do not think of problems my parents may
have. I do not take it as a burden on me. Sometimes I am irresponsible, for example,
making the wrong choices which may lead to serious consequences
(Female, 13)

Overall, our study shows that children drew on normative Western ideas about what children
‘do’—children go to school, play, live in families, are dependent, free from responsibilities and
live with constraints.
 10990860, 0, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/chso.12705 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [27/02/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
BACON and O’RIORDAN 15

Tales of capacity

Although many of the children interviewed described childhood in terms of the constraints it
placed upon them, six of the 92 children did suggest competencies that came from being a child.
It gave them social, physical and cognitive capabilities:

I always make new friends

(Female, 12)

I'm quicker at running than my grandma!

(Male, 11)

Imagination – a child's imagination is infinite.

(Male, 14)

I am fun and energetic

(Female, 12)

And the ability to bring happiness to others:

Children are more important than adults because they would be sad if I wasn't here
(Female, 7)

Sometimes their skills are a consequence of incompetence; this male can learn, but this process
only emerges because of his own moral ineptitude.

I always get in trouble, makes me learn from my mistakes

(Male, 11)

One child suggested that being a child freed her from gender role constraints:

I act like a lad

(Female, 12)

Overall, the children were more focused on the things they could not do, rather than the things
they could.

DISCUSSION

Our findings demonstrate children are aware of the social and biological markers of childness.
As in previous research, children's consciousness of being a ‘child’ was linked with how they
experienced their bodies and other people's reactions to them (James, 1995; Prout, 2000). The
increasing significance attributed to age as children get older is also not surprising given that, as
they age and move beyond the realms of their family, they are confined to age-based institutions
such as schools. Age dictates when they join school and is used to chart their learning progress
and journey through the school system (Wyness, 2019). It is through age that childhood is set
 10990860, 0, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/chso.12705 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [27/02/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
16 BACON and O’RIORDAN

apart as a distinct period in the life course and children are ‘given justification of and for their
separateness and exclusions from mainstream social life and central social institutions’ (Hockey
& James, 1993: 61).
In the context of family life, the children interpreted some restrictions placed upon them as
expressions of care (protection), but as they aged, they became more focused on how their lives
were regulated and their lack of citizenship. Similarly, Mayall found that children tend to identify
childhood with having limited (or no) responsibility, being dependent, being a certain age and
having restrictions, few rights and having to seek permission from adults. She argues that chil-
dren ‘identify power as lying with adults, and regard themselves as dependants that have to obey’
(Mayall, 2002: 122). However, within the context of family relationships, both Punch (2005) and
Mayall's (2001) UK research also suggests that parents are identified as protectors and providers,
with legitimate claims to authority over them.
The children in our study drew on normative Western discourses of childhood in different
age-related ways to bring meaning to the category ‘child’. However, acceptance of childhood as
a time of innocence, play, dependence and freedom from responsibilities was almost universal.
These discourses are constructed and reconstructed through various social institutions including
the law, social policy, education, the economy and media, in ways which do injustices to children
(Moss & Petrie, 2002). They are a product of adult power and privilege. As (Lam, 2012: 150)
notes, ‘Adults, having enormous social and political power over children, can define the reality
of children by shaping and restricting the ways in which it is possible to talk and think about
issues concerning them in society’. Prejudice against children is built into the ways in which
children are imagined (Young-Bruehl, 2012). Western discourses position children as lacking
in adult competencies and in need of protection and regulation (McNamee, 2016). The children
in our study were unable to challenge dominant discourses through drawing on images of child
competence and contribution. The naturalness associated with being a child compounded this;
children were just children and that was all there was to it. As some of our children's responses
indicated, even asking if they were children at all was sometimes seen as asking the blindingly
obvious and ridiculous.
Our study shows that children as well as adults participate in ‘childing’ practices which repro-
duce rather than challenge their low social status. Some children in this study presented them-
selves as people who should not be taken seriously, describing themselves as ‘silly’ or ‘annoying’
in the primary age group, immature and irresponsible in the older age group. These words seem
to come from adult descriptions of their behaviour. There could be more positive ways of describ-
ing their behaviour, but these were not articulated. Just as Nikolajeva (2019) suggests a child's
lack of attention can be interpreted as ‘insatiable curiosity’ (p. 31), silly could be entertaining and
annoying could be determined.
This de-valuing and distancing is replicated in other studies. For instance, Mayall found
that children ‘do not give themselves credit’ for their own moral agency (Mayall, 2002: 109).
Britton's (2015) research also showed that older children (aged 12–17) are aware they are viewed
negatively by the public and distance themselves from these negative stereotypes to present
themselves as ‘moral beings’. In this context, it is unsurprising that a significant proportion of
the children in our study were unwilling to classify themselves as children. It is also unsurpris-
ing that, as Cassidy et al. (2017: 711) note, some children ‘seem not to be aware that they might
participate and contribute more fully than at present’.
For those who felt they did not fit the normative definition of ‘child’, the only response was
disassociation from it. Some drew on notions of adulthood to justify their position as a non-child;
caring for others, working, having responsibilities, career planning, travelling alone, playing
 10990860, 0, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/chso.12705 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [27/02/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
BACON and O’RIORDAN 17

‘adult’ games and being stressed could all be used to justify not being a ‘child’. Some children
felt too ‘big’ or ‘mature’ to be a child. To be recognised for who they actually were, they applied
alternative labels: being a ‘kid’ meant being older, being a ‘medium kid’ meant being bigger and
being a ‘big girl’ meant caring for a child rather than being one. Although these children seem to
be referring to growing towards adulthood, they do not make claims to being an adult—they are
just not a ‘child’. They are rejecting the simplicity of the adult–child dichotomy. This resonates
with children from Bulgaria, China, Brazil and Scotland who proposed a category of person who
is neither child nor adult to which teenagers belong (Cassidy et al., 2017).
Disassociation from the label ‘child’ was most prominent among the youngest and the oldest
children, with most of the primary-aged children seeing themselves as children. This needs to
be understood through a bio-socio-cultural lens (Canosa & Graham, 2020). Children are aware
of the biological, social and cultural markers of childness. In English primary schools, the mark-
ers come together—children are consistently told that they are ‘children’, not only their bodies
are immature and adult power is a consistent constraining, but also protective force (Halstead
& Xiao, 2009). If a child is ‘someone who believes on good grounds that his or her childhood is
not yet over’ (Hollindale, 1997: 30), then within this context, their acceptance of the label ‘child’
seems likely, and our data bear this out.
Interpreting the rejection of the label in the pre-school children is more difficult. They are the
smallest set within the sample, their limited linguistic skills may have limited their responses,
and when they did deny their ‘childness’ they did so, on the whole, with humour and/or with-
out explanation. Where the children elaborated on why they were not a child, this seemed to be
related to the move ‘up’ from being a baby—someone in need of constant care and attention.
Other studies (Bacon, 2010; James, 1993) have shown how young children, want to orientate
themselves to their future status as a ‘big’ child.
In England, as children move to secondary school and beyond, the relationship between their
self-image/lived experiences and the markers of childness becomes less consistent and they are
more likely to reject the label. The terms used to describe them become more varied; they may be
called children, adolescents, young people or teenagers, for example. Their bodies are no longer
necessarily small and undeveloped. They are given more responsibility for themselves (getting
dressed, getting to school, choosing subjects, etc); more freedom to move around alone; a life that
is less controlled by adults; they may be working. They have less ‘grounds’ for believing in their
own childness.
Our research offers child-produced definitions of being a ‘child’ that move beyond a simplis-
tic notion of age (as featured in the UNCRC). The children's accounts both recognise and rein-
force the generational ordering of society, and sometimes the stigma and subordination the
label attracts. We are not claiming that these perceptions of childhood are universal. Indeed,
Kohan's (2018) research with around forty 8–year-old children in an Italian public school in Bari,
uncovered children's positive definitions of childhood including children being imaginative,
energetic and intelligent. Their conclusions suggest that these Italian children see childhood as
a ‘very privileged position in human life’ (2018: 122). However, the globalised nature of child-
hood, influenced by non-governmental aid organisations, which operationalise dominant West-
ern discourses of childhood means that paternalistic and deficit models of childness are echoed
in different countries across the globe (Cassidy et al., 2017; Diana, 2020).
While there are discourses around rights, voice and participation which potentially draw
attention to children's competencies and contributions, these are still created by adults for chil-
dren, and are not readily expressed in the children's accounts. This both demonstrates the force of
dominant discourses in preventing alternative conceptualisations and how the dissenting voices of
 10990860, 0, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/chso.12705 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [27/02/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
18 BACON and O’RIORDAN

CS have, as yet, been unable to shape everyday thinking about and of children and negative stere-
otypes abound. Among adults, children continue to be seen as untrustworthy, (Needham, 2021)
and a burden on society that will ‘eat us out of house and home’ (Young-Bruehl, 2012). Working
with children is seen as akin to working with animals, and working with young people a ‘night-
mare’ that only a saint could tolerate (Conradie & Golding, 2013). ‘Childish’ is unquestioningly
utilised as an adjective to cast shame on others.
An important challenge for CS to address, is how to promote conversations between children
and adults (parents and practitioners) about the positive aspects of childness. Literature about
child- and rights-centred practice promotes the importance of developing ‘dialogic approaches’
(Sharp, 2014: 358) or a ‘shared language’ (Frankel, 2018: 85) and we argue that developing more
positive ways of talking about children is a vital aspect of this. Importantly, this needs to be done
in a relational context of reciprocity and respect where children feel enabled to perceive them-
selves as agents (Sharp, 2014). Embedding these conversations into everyday across a range of
social arenas and networks of social relations (at home, at school and in the community) could
enable children and adults alike to anticipate, deliberate, question and accommodate different
experiences and formations of self. This in turn may help to offer different ways of being, think-
ing and talking about being a child (Crossley, 2022). Only by sustaining this dialogue between
children and adults will we raise political consciousness about adultism and remove ideological
barriers to children's participation.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We thank all the students and children that took part in this study.

DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon
reasonable request.

ORCID
Kate Bacon https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0385-1949
Zoe O'Riordan https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8083-2648

REFERENCES
Adams, K. (2013). Childhood in crisis? Perceptions of 7-11-year-olds on being a child and the implications for
education's well-being agenda. International Journal of Primary, Elementary and Early Years Education,
41(3), 523–537.
Adams, K. (2014). What is a child? Children's perceptions, the Cambridge Primary Review and implications for
education. Cambridge Journal of Education, 44(2), 163–177.
Alanen, L. (2001). Explorations in generational analysis. In L. Alanen & B. Mayall (Eds.), Conceptualizing child-
adult relations. RoutledgeFalmer.
Alderson, P. (2020). Adultism. In D. Cook (Ed.), The sage encyclopedia of children and childhood studies. Sage.
Bacon, K. (2010). Twins in society: Parents, bodies, space and talk. Palgrave Macmillan.
Bacon, K., & Frankel, S. (2014). Rethinking children's citizenship. International Journal of Children's Rights, 22,
21–42.
Britton, J. (2015). Young people as moral beings: Childhood, morality and inter-generational relationships. Chil-
dren & Society, 29, 495–507.
Canosa, A., & Graham, A. (2020). Tracing the contribution of childhood studies: Maintaining momentum while
navigating tensions. Childhood, 27(1), 25–47.
Cassidy, C., Conrad, S. J., Daniel, M. F., Figuerovia-Rego, M., Kohan, W., Murris, K., Wu, X., & Zhelyazkova, T.
(2017). Being children: Children's voices on childhood. International Journal of Children's Rights, 25, 698–715.
 10990860, 0, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/chso.12705 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [27/02/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
BACON and O’RIORDAN 19

Conradie, L., & Golding, T. (2013). The short guide to working with children and Young people. Policy Press.
Crossley, N. (2022). A dependent structure of interdependence: Structure and agency in relational perspective.
Sociology, 56(1), 166–182.
Diana, C. (2020). Global south childhoods. In D. T. Cook (Ed.), The sage encyclopedia of children and childhood
studies. Sage.
Frankel, S. (2018). Giving children a voice: A step-by-step guide to promoting child Centred practice. Jessica Kingsley.
Halstead, J. M., & Xiao, J. (2009). Maintaining the balance: Teacher control and pupil disruptions in the classroom.
Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences, 4(3), 142–156.
Hendrick, H. (1997). Constructions and reconstructions of British childhood: An interpretive survey, 1800 to the
present. In A. James & A. Prout (Eds.), Constructing and reconstructing childhood. Falmer Press.
Hockey, J., & James, A. (1993). Growing up and growing old: Ageing and dependency in the life course (Vol. 20). Sage
Publications Limited.
Hollindale, P. (1997). Signs of childness in children's books. Thimble.
Imoh, A. T. D. (2012). The convention on the rights of the child: A product and facilitator of a global childhood. In
A. T.-D. Imoh & R. Ame (Eds.), Childhoods at the intersection of the local and the global. Palgrave Macmillan.
James, A. (1993). Childhood identities. Edinburgh University Press.
James, A. (1995). On being a child: The self, the group and the category. In A. P. Cohen & N. Rapport (Eds.), Ques-
tions of consciousness. Routledge.
James, A., & James, A. L. (2004). Constructing childhood: Theory, policy and social practice. Palgrave Macmillan.
Kohan, W. O. (2018). A conversation with children about children. Journal of Philosophy in Schools, 5(2), 95–126.
Lam, C. (2012). The disablement and enablement of childhood. International Studies in Sociology of Education,
22(2), 147–167.
Lowe, R. J. (2012). Children deconstructing childhood. Children & Society, 26(4), 269–279.
Mason, J. (2017). Qualitative researching. Sage.
Mayall, B. (2001). Understanding childhoods: A London study. In L. Alanen & B. Mayall (Eds.), Conceptualizing
child-adult relations. RoutledgeFalmer.
Mayall, B. (2002). Towards a sociology for childhood: Thinking from children's lives. Open University.
McNamee, S. (2016). The social study of childhood: An introduction. Palgrave.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Sage.
Moss, P., & Petrie, P. (2002). From Children's services to Children's spaces: Public policy, children and childhood.
Routledge Falmer.
Needham, M. (2021). ‘Managing doubts’ to take safeguarding action. In J. Dobson & A. Melrose (Eds.), Working
with children, families and young people: Professional dilemmas, perspectives and solutions. Routledge.
Nikolajeva, M. (2019). What is it like to be a child? Childness in the age of neuroscience. Children's Literature in
Education, 50(1), 23–37.
Oswell, D. (2013). The agency of children: From family to global human rights. Cambridge University Press.
Prout, A. (2000). The body, childhood and society. Macmillan.
Prout, A. (2005). The future of childhood. RoutledgeFalmer.
Prout, A., & James, A. (1997). A new paradigm for the sociology of childhood? Provenance, promise and problems.
In A. James & A. Prout (Eds.), Constructing and reconstructing childhood. Falmer Press.
Punch, S. (2005). The generationing of power: A comparison of child-parent and sibling relationships in Scotland.
Sociological Studies of Children & Youth, 10, 169–188.
Qvortrup, J. (2009). Childhood as a structural form. In J. Qvortrup, W. A. Corsaro, & M. S. Honig (Eds.), The
Palgrave handbook of childhood studies. Palgrave Macmillan.
Robinson, C., & Kellett, M. (2004). Power. In S. Fraser, V. Lewis, S. Ding, M. Kellett, & C. Robinson (Eds.), Doing
research with children and Young people. Sage in Association with the Open University.
Sandelowski, M. (2000). Whatever happened to qualitative description? Research in Nursing & Health, 23(4),
334–340.
Sen, H. (2021). ‘Producing’ childhood: The making of childhood and children in theatre. Childhood, 28(1), 72–85.
Sharp, R. (2014). Ready, steady, action: What enables young people to perceive themselves as active agents in their
lives? Educational Psychology in Practice, 30(4), 347–364.
Simpson, B. (2000). Regulation and resistance: Children's embodiment during the primary-secondary school tran-
sition. In A. Prout (Ed.), The body, childhood and society. Macmillan.
 10990860, 0, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/chso.12705 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [27/02/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
20 BACON and O’RIORDAN

Wall, J. (2022). From childhood studies to childism: reconstructing the scholarly and social imaginations.
­Children's Geographies, 20(3), 257–270.
Wyness, M. G. (2019). Childhood and society. Bloomsbury.
Young-Bruehl, E. (2012). Childism: confronting prejudice against children. Yale University Press.

AUTHOR BIOGRAPHIES

Kate Bacon has worked in Higher Education for over twenty years, teaching and programme
leading a range of undergraduate social science and childhood degree courses. She has
researched and published on a range of topics including children's citizenship, twinship and
sibship.

Zoe O'Riordan is co-director for the Centre for Children and Young People's Participation
and the programme leader for the children's-rights focused MA Professional Practice with
Children and Young People. She has worked with children and young people in a range of
settings and researched transitions, identity, youth justice and marginalisaiton.

How to cite this article: Bacon, K., & O'Riordan, Z. (2023). Who do you think you
are? Children's definitions of being a ‘child’. Children & Society, 00, 1–20. https://doi.
org/10.1111/chso.12705