Social Development

Third edition

Ross D. Parke
Glenn I. Roisman
Amanda J. Rose
EDITORIAL DIRECTOR Veronica Visentin
ASSISTANT EDITOR Ethan Lipson
SENIOR EDITORIAL MANAGER Leah Michael
EDITORIAL MANAGER Judy Howarth
CONTENT MANAGEMENT DIRECTOR Lisa Wojcik
CONTENT MANAGER Nichole Urban
SENIOR CONTENT SPECIALIST Nicole Repasky
PRODUCTION EDITOR Bharathy Surya Prakash
PHOTO RESEARCHER Simon Eckley
COVER PHOTO CREDIT © George Rudy/Shutterstock
This book was set in 10/12 NewBaskervilleStd-Roman by SPi Global and printed and bound by Quad Graphics.
Founded in 1807, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. has been a valued source of knowledge and understanding for more than 200 years, helping
people around the world meet their needs and fulfill their aspirations. Our company is built on a foundation of principles that include
responsibility to the communities we serve and where we live and work.
In 2008, we launched a Corporate Citizenship Initiative, a global effort to address the environmental, social, economic, and ethical chal-
lenges we face in our business. Among the issues we are addressing are carbon impact, paper specifications and procurement, ethical con-
duct within our business and among our vendors, and community and charitable support. For more information, please visit our website:
www.wiley.com/go/citizenship.
Copyright © 2019, 2014, 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a
retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning or otherwise,
except as permitted under Sections 107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act, without either the prior written permission of
the Publisher, or authorization through payment of the appropriate per-copy fee to the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc., 222 Rosewood
Drive, Danvers, MA 01923 (Web site: www.copyright.com). Requests to the Publisher for permission should be addressed to the Permis-
sions Department, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030-5774, (201) 748-6011, fax (201) 748-6008, or online at:
www.wiley.com/go/permissions.
Evaluation copies are provided to qualified academics and professionals for review purposes only, for use in their courses during the next
academic year. These copies are licensed and may not be sold or transferred to a third party. Upon completion of the review period, please
return the evaluation copy to Wiley. Return instructions and a free of charge return shipping label are available at: www.wiley.com/go/
returnlabel. If you have chosen to adopt this textbook for use in your course, please accept this book as your complimentary desk copy.
Outside of the United States, please contact your local sales representative.
ISBN: 978-1-119-49805-6 (PBK)
ISBN: 978-1-119-49802-5 (EVALC)
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Names: Parke, Ross D., author. | Roisman, Glenn I., author. | Rose, Amanda J.
(Amanda Janel), 1971- author.
Title: Social development / Ross D. Parke, Glenn I. Roisman, Amanda J. Rose.
Description: Third edition. | Hoboken, NJ : John Wiley & Sons, Inc., [2019] |
Includes bibliographical references and index. |
Identifiers: LCCN 2018054062 (print) | LCCN 2018057396 (ebook) | ISBN
9781119498001 (Adobe PDF) | ISBN 9781119497462 (ePub) | ISBN 9781119498056
(pbk.)
Subjects: LCSH: Child psychology. | Child development. | Developmental
psychology.
Classification: LCC BF721 (ebook) | LCC BF721 .P285 2019 (print) | DDC
305.231—dc23
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2018054062
The inside back cover will contain printing identification and country of origin if omitted from this page. In addition, if the ISBN on the
back cover differs from the ISBN on this page, the one on the back cover is correct.
To my partner Bonnie, my children Gillian,Timothy, Megan, Sarah, Jennifer and
Zachary and my grandchildren Benjamin, Liah, Sydney, Tess, Nathan and Noah.
Ross D. Parke

For Chryle Elieff and Nathan Roisman always, but this time especially for
Jay Martin
Glenn I. Roisman

To my husband, Chris Robert, our children Emma and Zack, and my parents
Bernard and Jolene Rose
Amanda J. Rose
 BRI EF CON TE N TS

Preface xix

Part I Theories, Themes, and Tools for Discovery

1 Introduction: Theories of Social Development 1
2 Research Methods: Tools for Discovery 43

Part II Early Tasks of Social Development

3 Biological Foundations: Roots in Neurons and Genes 85
4 Attachment: Forming Close Relationships 127
5 Emotions: Thoughts about Feelings 165
6 Self and Other: Getting to Know Me, Getting to Know You 206

Part III Contexts of Social Development

7 Family: Early and Enduring Influences 248
8 Peers: A World of Their Own 297
9 Schools, Mentors, and Media: Connections with Society 345

Part IV Processes and Products of Social Development

10 Sex and Gender: Vive La Différence? 388
11 Morality: Knowing Right, Doing Good 432
12 Aggression: Insult and Injury 476

Part V Policy and Prospects

13 Policy: Improving Children’s Lives 519
14 Overarching Themes: Integrating Social Development 560

Glossary 575
Author Index 587
Subject Index 609

v
 CON TE N TS

Prefacexix

1 Introduction: Theories of Social Development 1

■■ Bet You Didn’t Know That . . . Newborns Can Recognize
Their Mothers by Smell, 2
Social Development: A Brief History, 2
Critical Questions about Social Development, 3
How Do Biological and Environmental Influences Affect Social
Development?, 3
What Role Do Children Play In Their Own Development?, 4
What Is The Appropriate Unit for Studying Social Development?, 4
■■ Insights from Extremes: Genie, a “Wild Child”, 5

Is Development Continuous or Discontinuous?, 5

Is Social Behavior the Result of the Situation or the Child?, 7
Is Social Development Universal Across Cultures?, 7
■■ Cultural Context: Parenting Advice Around the Globe, 8

How Does Social Development Vary Across Historical Eras?, 9

Is Social Development Related to Other Developmental
Domains?, 10
How Important Are Mothers for Children’s Social
Development?, 10
■■ Research Up Close: Children of the Great Depression, 11

Is There a Single Pathway of Social Development?, 12

What Influences How We Judge Children’s Social Behavior?, 13
Do Developmental Psychologists “Own” Social Development?, 13
Is Social Development Focused on Only Basic Research or on
Applied and Policy Relevant Concerns as Well?, 14
Theoretical Perspectives on Social Development, 14
Psychodynamic Perspective, 15
■■ Into Adulthood: Fatherhood and Generativity, 19

Traditional Learning Theory Perspective, 20

Cognitive Learning Perspective, 21
Information-Processing Perspective, 24
Cognitive Developmental Perspective, 26

vii
viii  Contents

Systems-Theory Perspective, 29
Biological Perspective, 31
Life Span Perspective, 35
A Variety of Theoretical Perspectives, 36
■■ Learning from Living Leaders, 36

Chapter Summary, 38
Key Terms, 41
■■ At the Movies, 41

2 Research Methods: Tools for Discovery 43

Getting Started: Formulating Hypotheses, Asking Questions, 44
Research Methods: Establishing Patterns and Causes, 44
The Correlational Method, 45
Laboratory Experiments, 46
Field Experiments, Interventions, and Natural Experiments, 48
■■ Insights from Extremes: Lost and Found Children, 49

Combining Different Methods, 50

■■ Real-World Application: Treating an Aggressive Child, 51

The Case Study Approach, 52

Studying Change Over Time, 52
Cross-Sectional Design, 52
The Longitudinal Design, 52
■■ Into Adulthood: Behavior in Childhood Predicts Adult
Outcomes, 55
The Cross-Sequential Design, 55
Selecting a Sample, 57
Representativeness of the Sample, 57
The National Survey Approach, 58
Meta-Analysis: Combining Results Across Studies, 59
Studying Development Cross-Culturally, 59
■■ Cultural Context: Challenges for Researchers, 60

Gathering Data, 61
Children’s Self-Reports, 61
■■ Research Up Close: The Puppet Interview Method, 62

Reports by Family Members, Teachers, and Peers, 64

Focus Groups, 65
Direct Observation, 66
■■ Bet You Thought That . . .: Parents Can Accurately
Report Retrospectively About Their Children’s Early
Years, 67
Ways of Recording and Coding Observations, 70
Analyzing Data, 74
 Contents  ix

Ethics of Research with Children, 76

■■ Learning from Living Leaders, 78

Chapter Summary, 81
Key Terms, 83
■■ At the Movies, 83

3 Biological Foundations: Roots in Neurons and Genes, 85

Biological Preparedness for Social Interaction, 86
How Are Babies Prepared?, 86
Why Are Babies Prepared?, 90
The Neurological Basis of Social Development, 90
The Brain, 91
Brain Growth and Development, 91
Hemispheric Specialization, 93
Neurons and Synapses, 94
Brain Development and Experience, 95
Mirror Neurons and the Social Brain, 95
Genetics and Social Development, 99
■■ Bet You Thought That . . .: Genes Determine Your Potential, 99

Methods of Studying Genetic Contributions to Development, 100

Models of Genetic Influence, 103
Genetic Anomalies, 108
■■ Research Up Close: A Genetic Risk for Drug Use, 109
■■ Insights from Extremes: Autism, 110
■■ Real-World Application: Genetic Counseling,
Genetic Selection, 112
Temperament: Causes and ­Consequences, 113
Defining and Measuring Temperament, 113
■■ Cultural Context: Are Temperaments the Same
Around the World?, 115
The Biological Basis of Temperament, 115
Early Evidence of Temperament, 117
Consequences and Correlates of Temperament, 117
■■ Into Adulthood: Shy Children Thirty Years Later, 120
■■ Learning from Living Leaders, 121

Chapter Summary, 123

Key Terms, 125
■■ At the Movies, 126

4 Attachment: Forming Close Relationships 127

Theories of Attachment, 128
Psychoanalytic Theory, 128
x  Contents

Learning Theories, 129

Cognitive Developmental Theory, 129
Ethological Theory, 130
■■ Insights from Extremes: Maternal Bonding, 131

How Attachment Develops, 132

Formation and Early Development of Attachment, 133
What It Means to Be Attached, 133
Attachment to Whom?, 134
The Nature and Quality of Attachment, 135
■■ Bet You Thought That . . .: Babies Become Attached
to Their Teddy Bears and Blankets, 135
Different Types of Attachment Relationships, 136
■■ Cultural Context: Assessing Attachment in
Different Cultures, 140
Parents’ Role in Infants’ Attachment Development, 141
■■ Research Up Close: Early Experience, Hormones,
and Attachment, 145
■■ Real-World Application: Attachment When Mother
(or Father) Goes to Prison, 149
Effects of Infant Characteristics on Attachment, 150
Stability and Consequences of Attachment, 151
Stability and Change in Attachment Over Time, 151
Attachments in Older Children, 153
Consequences of Attachment, 153
■■ Into Adulthood: From Early Attachment to Later Romantic
Relationships, 158
■■ Learning from Living Leaders, 159

Chapter Summary, 161

Key Terms, 163
■■ At the Movies, 163

5 Emotions: Thoughts about Feelings 165

What Are Emotions?, 166
Why Are Emotions Important?, 166
Perspectives on Emotional Development, 166
Biological Perspective, 167
Learning Perspective, 167
Functional Perspective, 168
Development of Emotions, 168
Primary Emotions, 169
■■ Bet You Thought That. . .: A Smile Is a Smile Is a Smile, 172

Secondary Emotions, 178

Individual Differences in Emotional Expressiveness, 181
 Contents  xi

Development of Emotional Understanding, 182

Recognizing Emotions in Others, 182
■■ Cultural Context: Expressing and Understanding Emotions
in Different Cultures, 184
Beyond Recognition: Knowledge of and Understanding About
Emotions, 185
Emotion Regulation, 188
Socialization of Emotion, 189
■■ Into Adulthood: Controlling Negative Emotions
in Adulthood, 190
Socialization by Parents, 191
Socialization by Other Children, 194
■■ Research Up Close: Emotional Development in a High School
Theater Program, 194
Socialization by Teachers, 195
■■ Real-World Application: Teachers as Promoters of Emotional
Competence, 196
When Emotional Development Goes Wrong, 197
■■ Insights from Extremes: When Children Commit Suicide, 199

Causes of Childhood Depression, 200

Treating Childhood Depression, 201
■■ Learning from Living Leaders, 202

Chapter Summary, 203

Key Terms, 204
■■ At the Movies, 204

6 Self and Other: Getting to Know Me, Getting to Know You 206
The Sense of Self, 207
Developmental Origins of Self-Concept, 208
■■ Cultural Context: How Culture Shapes Self-Representations, 210

Difficulty Developing a Sense of Self: Autistic Children, 211

Self-Perceptions, 212
Global Self-Esteem, 212
Domain-Specific Perceptions, 212
Learning Self-Appraisal, 213
Gender Variations in Global Self-Esteem, 214
Social Determinants of Self-Esteem, 215
Identity Formation, 216
■■ Into Adulthood: Identity Formation Continues, 219

Ethnic Identity, 220

Religious Identity, 225
■■ Real-World Application: Sexual Orientation and Identity, 226

Development of Knowledge about Others, 228

xii  Contents

Early Understanding of Intentions and Norms, 228

Later Understanding of Mental States: Theory of Mind, 228
■■ Research Up Close: The Brain Beneath Theory of Mind, 229
■■ Bet You Thought That . . .: Babies Are Not Mind Readers, 230

Understanding Psychological Trait Labels, 231

Perspective Taking, 232
Advancing Social Understanding, 233
Stereotyping and Prejudice, 235
■■ Insights from Extremes: The Most Extreme Prejudice:
Genocide, 238
Communication Between Me and You: The Role of Language, 239
Steps Toward Language Fluency, 239
Semantic Development: The Power of Words, 241
The Acquisition of Grammar: From Words to Sentences, 241
Learning the Social Uses of Language, 242
■■ Learning from Living Leaders, 244

Chapter Summary, 245

Key Terms, 247
■■ At the Movies, 247

7 Family: Early and Enduring Influences 248

The Family System, 249
The Couple System, 249
■■ Into Adulthood: Transition to Parenthood, 253

The Parent–Child System, 254

■■ Research Up Close: Transmission of Hostile Parenting
across Generations, 259
■■ Bet You Thought That . . .: Parenting Is a Brain Drain,
Not a Brain Booster, 262
The Coparenting System, 264
■■ Insights from Extremes: When Is a Family Too Large?, 265

The Sibling System, 265

The Family Unit: Stories, Rituals, and Routines, 270
■■ Real-World Application: “Let’s Have Dinner”, 271

Family Variation: Social Class and Culture, 272

Differences in Family Values and Practices Related
to Socioeconomic Status, 272
Cultural Patterns in Child Rearing, 273
■■ Cultural Context: How Effects of Parenting Vary
Across Cultures, 274
The Changing American Family, 276
Parents’ Employment and Child Development, 277
Parenting after Thirty, 280
 Contents  xiii

New Reproductive Technologies, 281

Adoption: Another Route to Parenthood, 281
Gay and Lesbian Parents, 282
Parenting Alone, 283
Divorce and Remarriage, 284
■■ Learning from Living Leaders, 291

Chapter Summary, 293

Key Terms, 295
■■ At the Movies, 295

8 Peers: A World of Their Own 297

Definitions and Distinctions, 298
Developmental Patterns of Peer Interaction, 298
First Encounters in Infancy, 298
Social Exchanges between Toddlers, 300
Peer Play in Early Childhood, 301
Peer Society in the School Years, 302
Peer Interactions in Adolescence, 304
Peers as Socializers, 304
Modeling Behavior, 305
Reinforcing and Punishing Behavior, 305
Contagion, 305
Social Comparison, 306
■■ Cultural Context: Peer Roles and Relationships in
Different Cultures, 306
Peer Status, 308
Studying Peer Status: Acceptance and Rejection, 308
Factors that Affect Peer Acceptance, 309
Consequences of Peer Rejection, 315
■■ Bet You Thought That . . .: Names Would Never Hurt You, 316
■■ Research Up Close: When “Love Thine Enemy” Fails, 317
■■ Insights from Extremes: From Rejection to Revenge?, 318

Promoters of Peer Acceptance, 320

Parents as Promoters of Peer Acceptance, 320
Researchers as Promoters of Peer Acceptance, 324
Peers Can Help Too, 326
When Peers Become Friends, 326
Age Changes in Friendship, 326
Interactions with Friends, 329
■■ Insights from Extremes: When Children Love and Protect
Each Other, 330
Friendship Patterns, 331
xiv  Contents

The Pros and Cons of Friendship, 332

Romantic Relationships, 332
Interaction in Groups, 334
Dominance Hierarchies, 335
Cliques, Crowds, and Gangs, 336
■■ Into Adulthood: What Happens When Jocks, Brains, and
Princesses Grow Up, 337
■■ Real-World Application: Youth Gangs, 339
■■ Learning from Living Leaders, 339

Chapter Summary, 341

Key Terms, 343
■■ At the Movies, 344

9 Schools, Mentors, and Media: Connections with Society 345

The Role of the School in Social Development, 346
Schools as Social Communities, 346
School Size and Organization, 347
Class Size and Organization, 350
■■ Bet You Thought That . . .: Homeschooled Children Were
Socially Disadvantaged, 352
The Teachers’ Impact, 353
School–Family Links, 355
■■ Cultural Context: Matching Classroom Organization
to Cultural Values and Practices, 356
School Integration, 359
After-School Programs, 360
Mentors Supporting Social Development, 361
Natural Mentors, 362
Mentor Programs, 363
Electronic Media and Children’s Social Lives, 364
Screen Media: Television and Digital Media, 364
Positive Effects of Screen Media, 364
Potential Negative Effects of Screen Media, 365
Do Children Understand What They See?, 369
■■ Real-World Application: Advertising Influences Children’s
Choices, 371
How Can Parents and Siblings Modify TV’s Negative Effects?, 372
■■ Into Adulthood: Still Playing Games?, 373

Playing Video Games, 374

Smartphones and Social Media, 375
Potential Positive Effects of Smartphones and Social Media, 375
Concerns Regarding Smartphones and Social Media, 377
■■ Research Up Close: Role-Playing Games and Social
Life, 380
 Contents  xv

■■ Insights from Extremes: The Risks of Sexting, 381

■■ Learning from Living Leaders, 381

Chapter Summary, 384

Key Terms, 386
■■ At the Movies, 386

10 Sex and Gender: Vive La Différence? 388

Getting Started: Defining Sex and Gender, 388
Gender Differences in Growth, Abilities, Activities, and Interests, 389
Changes in Adolescence and Adulthood, 392
Stability of Gender Typing, 393
■■ Into Adulthood: Occupations for Men and Women, 393

Sex Differences in Gender Typing, 395

Gender Stereotypes, 395
■■ Cultural Context: Cultural Differences in Gender
Stereotypes, 397
Biological Factors in Gender Differences, 398
■■ Bet You Thought That . . .: Gender Identity was Determined
by Biological Sex, 398
Evolutionary Theory and Gender Development, 400
■■ Insights from Extremes: The First American Transgendered
Person, 400
Hormones and Social Behavior, 401
Gender and the Brain, 402
Genetics of Gender, 404
Biology and Cultural Expectations, 404
Cognitive Factors in Gender Typing, 405
Cognitive Developmental Theory, 406
Gender-Schema Theory: An Information-Processing Approach, 407
Comparison of Cognitive Developmental and Gender-Schema
Theories, 408
Social Influences on Gender Typing, 408
Theories of Social Influence, 408
Parents’ Influence on Children’s Gender-Typed Choices, 409
Parents’ Behavior toward Girls and Boys, 410
Modeling Parents’ Characteristics, 413
When Father Is Absent, 413
■■ Research Up Close: Gender Roles in Counterculture
Families, 414
Siblings as Agents of Gender Socialization, 416
Role Models in Books, Games, and Television, 417
Peers, Gender Roles, and Gender Segregation, 418
■■ Real-World Application: Do Computers Widen the
Gender Gap?, 419
xvi  Contents

Schools and Teachers, 422

Nature and Nurture, 425
Androgyny, 425
■■ Learning from Living Leaders, 427

Chapter Summary, 428

Key Terms, 430
■■ At the Movies, 431

11 Morality: Knowing Right, Doing Good 432

Moral Judgment, 433
Piaget’s Cognitive Theory of Moral Judgment, 433
Kohlberg’s Cognitive Theory of Moral Judgment, 435
■■ Insights from Extremes: Moral Heroes, 437
■■ Cultural Context: Justice versus Interpersonal Obligations
in India and the United States, 441
Turiel’s Social Domain Theory, 443
How Children Learn the Rules and Distinguish between Social
Domains, 446
Moral Behavior, 449
■■ Bet You Thought That . . .: Moral Judgment Leads to
Moral Action, 450
Self-Regulation of Behavior, 451
Individual Differences in Moral Behavior, 451
Consistency of Moral Behavior across Situations and Time, 452
■■ Into Adulthood: The Love of Money Is the Root of All Evil, 453
■■ Research Up Close: Children Telling Lies, 454

Moral Emotions, 456

Development of Moral Emotions, 456
Do Moral Emotions Affect Moral Behavior?, 458
■■ Real-World Application: Adolescents’ Competence
to Stand Trial as Adults, 459
The Whole Moral Child, 460
Prosocial and Altruistic Behavior, 461
How Prosocial Behavior and Reasoning Develop, 461
Determinants of Prosocial Development, 464
■■ Learning from Living Leaders, 470

Chapter Summary, 473

Key Terms, 474
■■ At the Movies, 474

12 Aggression: Insult and Injury 476

Types of Aggression, 477
Patterns of Aggression, 479
 Contents  xvii

Developmental Changes in Aggression, 479

Gender Differences in Aggression, 481
Stability of Individual Differences in Aggression, 483
■■ Into Adulthood: From Childhood Aggression
to Road Rage, 485
Causes of Aggression, 486
Biological Origins of Aggressive Behavior, 486
Social Influences on the Development of Aggression, 489
■■ Insights from Extremes: Child Soldiers, 493

Combined Biological and Social Influences on Aggression, 497

■■ Research Up Close: Genes, Environmental Triggers, and
Aggressive Behavior, 499
Sociocognitive Factors in the Development of Aggression, 500
Bullies and Victims, 502
Behavior of Bullies and Victims, 503
Consequences of Bullying, 505
■■ Real-World Application: Cyberfighting and
Cyberbullying, 505
Conditions Leading to Bullying, 507
Control of Aggression, 508
■■ Bet You Thought That . . .: You Could Reduce Aggressive
Feelings by “Letting off Steam”, 508
Cognitive Modification Strategies, 509
Parents as Agents for Reducing Aggression, 509
Schools as Venues for Intervention, 510
Aggression Prevention: A Multipronged Effort, 510
Cultural Context: Preventing Youth Violence, 513
■■ Learning from Living Leaders, 514

Chapter Summary, 516

Key Terms, 517
■■ At the Movies, 518

13 Policy: Improving Children’s Lives 519

What Determines Public Policy for Children?, 520
Types of Public Policy, 521
Children in Poverty: A Social Policy Challenge, 523
Economic Hardship and Social Disadvantage, 523
Effects of Poverty on Children, 523
Programs to Reverse Effects of Poverty, 524
■■ Real-World Application: Early Intervention with Children
in Poverty, 527
Child Care: A Problem Lacking a Unified Policy, 528
Choosing Child Care: What’s a Parent to Do?, 528
Effects of Child Care on Children, 529
xviii  Contents

How Can Policy Help?, 531

■■ Research Up Close: The Florida Child Care Quality
Improvement Study, 534
Teenage Pregnancy: Children Having Children, 534
Factors Leading to Teen Pregnancy, 535
■■ Bet You Thought That . . .: More Teens Are Having Sex Than
Ever Before, 536
Outcomes of Teen Pregnancies, 536
■■ Into Adulthood: When Teen Mothers Grow Up, 538

Reducing Teen Pregnancy, 539

Support for Teenage Mothers, 542
Child Abuse within the Family, 543
Child Abuse: A Family Affair, 543
The Ecology of Child Abuse, 545
Consequences of Abuse, 546
Policies to Prevent Abuse, 547
■■ Cultural Context: Child Abuse and Children’s Rights, 547
■■ Insights from Extremes: Suggestive Interrogations
and Legal Policy, 551
■■ Learning from Living Leaders, 553

Chapter Summary, 556

Key Terms, 558
■■ At the Movies, 559

14 Overarching Themes: Integrating Social Development 560

What We Know: Some Take-Home Principles, 561
Views of the Social Child, 561
Organization and Explanation of Children’s Social Behavior, 562
Social Agents and Contexts for Social Development, 563
Progress and Pathways of Social Development, 564
Glimpsing the Future: Methodological, ­Theoretical,
and Policy Imperatives, 566
Methodological Imperatives, 566
Theoretical Imperatives, 567
Policy Imperatives, 568
Emerging Leaders in Social Development, 569
At the Wedding, 574

Glossary 575
Author Index 587
Subject Index 609

References (Available from your Instructor)

 PREFAC E

In this third edition of Social Development our goal remains to provide undergradu-
ates and their instructors with a comprehensive, scholarly, engaging, and up-to-date
treatment of theoretical insights and empirical findings in the field of social devel-
opment. In writing and updating the book we have tried to convey the excitement
of recent advances along with the accumulated knowledge that forms the basis of
the field. In this revision we have added many recent references to new research on
social development and have used lively examples and illustrations from children to
illustrate the research-based conclusions in an effort to make this edition even more
undergraduate-friendly and to arouse and maintain students’ interest. Because we
recognize that the way instructors organize the material covered in a course on
social development varies, we have written the book so that chapters can be read
out of order and separate sections can be assigned to meet different teaching goals.

Theoretical Orientation
Although we cover the traditional theories, our presentation reflects contemporary
thought emphasizing systems, ecological approaches, and the multifaceted, multi-
ply determined, and dynamically related nature of social phenomena. This focus
on multiple levels of explanation is the reason we have included cultural-­contextual
and biological foundations of development and have discussed their interplay
across levels.

Emphasis on Cultural Diversity

We have integrated information from cross-cultural research and studies that focus
on ethnic and racial diversity within cultures into our discussions of social develop-
ment. In each chapter, we illustrate these cultural variations both in the text and
in features that provide a more detailed examination of a particular culture or
cultural issue.

Emphasis on Biological Underpinnings

Reflecting increased recognition that we must probe the biological underpinnings
of social development, we have devoted a separate chapter to biological influences
on social development and introduced biological factors in our discussions of spe-
cific aspects of social development in other chapters. We highlight new advances in
molecular and behavior genetics and epigenetics, neurological assessments (e.g.,
functional magnetic resonance imaging [fMRI]), and the hormonal correlates of

xix
xx  Preface

social development and emphasize the interaction between environmental condi-

tions and the expression of biological predispositions to provide a forward-looking
view that we hope will intrigue students and instructors.

Concern with Social Policy

Each year governments spend millions of dollars on programs for children. We
review some of these policies and programs that have as their goal improving the
lives of children, underscoring the interchange between basic research and social
policy. We devote a separate chapter to this discussion—a unique feature of this
book—so that students can more fully understand the policy-making process as well
as specific policies aimed at children. Our goal is to make the work in this area rel-
evant to students as citizens, informed consumers of scientific literature, and begin-
ning professionals.

Age Scope of Coverage

This book covers social development in infancy, childhood, and adolescence. How-
ever, we recognize that social development does not stop then, so we have included
a special feature—Into Adulthood—in each chapter to illustrate how social behaviors
change in adulthood, how adult social behavior is influenced by earlier events in
childhood and adolescence, or how adolescents manage the transition to adult-
hood. In addition, in Chapter 7, “Family,” we discuss how children’s social develop-
ment is affected by adult development, specifically their parents’ development, and
how circumstances in parents’ lives alter their behavior and, in turn, modify their
children’s social outcomes.

Chapter Elements
Each chapter begins with examples of hypothetical children of different ages exhib-
iting the types of social behaviors we discuss in the chapter. At the end of the chapter,
bulleted summaries review the chapter’s key concepts and main ideas. Key terms,
which are highlighted in the text, are listed at the end of each chapter as a reminder
to students of their significance, and combined in a glossary at the end of the book.

Chapter Features
Each chapter contains the following features that address interesting issues in social
development. These are designed to underscore and amplify the main themes of
the chapter and are intended to be read along with the regular text material. Their
purpose is to increase students’ interest and understanding about topics that are
important for achieving each chapter’s overall goals.

Research Up Close
In these highlighted sections, we examine a single study or set of studies in more detail
to provide students with a fuller appreciation of the methodological complexities
 Preface  xxi

of research on social development. For example, one such section describes studies
of children who were raised in orphanages and who have problems forming close
relationships correlated with deficits in oxytocin, the “love” hormone. In another
chapter, this section describes studies of developmental changes in the frequency
and nature of children’s lies.

Real-World Application
These sections provide examples of ways that basic science is translated into real-
world applications, such as new ways to control violence, school programs to
improve children’s social skills, policies to lessen the effects of maternal incarcera-
tion, and consequences of cyberbullying. Our goal is to show how basic research can
be applied to understanding and addressing real-life problems.

Cultural Context
The focus of these sections is to demonstrate how culture shapes the behaviors
and beliefs of children and adults. They include descriptions of differences and
similarities in children’s temperaments, attachment relationships, and self-concepts
around the globe. They also include a discussion of how effects of physical punish-
ment depend on whether or not punishment is normative in the culture, and they
provide illustrations of the differences in parenting in collectivist and individualistic
cultures.

Bet You Thought That . . .

The goal of this feature is to challenge assumptions about how social development
works by providing illustrations that are counterintuitive; for example, not all infant
smiles are the same, genes alone do not determine social potential, babies can “read
minds,” and parenting is a brain booster rather than a brain drain.

Into Adulthood
In an era of increasing emphasis on life-span development, appreciating that devel-
opmental trajectories do not stop at age 18 or 21 is important. For this reason, each
chapter has a section that describes some aspect of development beyond adoles-
cence. Examples include a description of how children whose aggressive behavior
begins in early childhood are at risk for violent offenses in adulthood, a discussion
of how early attachment patterns foreshadow the quality of later romantic ties, and
a summary of how the lives of adults differ depending on whether they were shy or
bold as children.

Insights from Extremes

In these sections, we discuss extreme cases that have led to insights about social
development. These cases include children reared in institutions, a child who was
isolated from social contact until she was 13 years old, children who are forced to be
soldiers, children with autism, and transgender children.
xxii  Preface

Learning from Living Leaders

Who are the current leaders in social development? How did they become inter-
ested in this field? What questions have they tried to answer? What do they think are
the most pressing issues in their area? What message do they have for undergradu-
ates? A variety of experts answered these questions, and the Learning from Living
Leaders feature summarizes their responses. We hope that these profiles will put a
face on researchers in the field and introduce students to some of the paths that
lead to becoming a research leader, perhaps inspiring them to consider a career in
this field.

At the Movies
To connect text material with students’ interests, we have included a feature
describing some movies that illuminate important themes in each chapter. Exam-
ples include Juno, an atypical example of teen pregnancy; Mean Girls, an illustration
of relational aggression in high school; and Gone Baby Gone, a demonstration of dif-
ferent levels of moral reasoning.

Uniqueness of the Book

Several components of this text distinguish it from other books devoted
to this topic. One is the discussion of the biological underpinnings of social
development, both in a separate chapter and within the content of the other
­chapters. The discussion highlights the roles of hormones, such as cortisol and
­testosterone. It includes new techniques for probing brain activities and reviews
recent work on mirror neurons and the “social brain,” which suggest that there
are brain-specific correlates of social behaviors, such as empathy, moral decision
making, and reactions to televised violence. This component also includes new
work in behavior genetics, which emphasizes the role of environments in con-
trolling the expression of genetic predispositions. Second, the book considers
cultural variation both among societies around the world and within our own
society. Third, the book has a chapter specifically devoted to social policy that
examines in detail the policy process and highlights a number of recent gov-
ernment policy initiatives affecting children’s lives. Fourth, the book includes
unique features in each chapter, such as “Bet You Thought That . . .,” “Insights
from Extremes,” and “Into Adulthood.” Finally, the book presents discussion of
research on the cutting edge of the field to capture the excitement of recent
advances in this area. To write these discussions, we not only have relied on
published sources but also have sought out as-yet-unpublished information from
several sources including forthcoming articles from experts and hot topics on
the Internet. We believe this book offers students a fresh and unique perspective
on social development.

Highlights of the Third Edition

Several new features, including stylistic changes as well as content changes, have
been incorporated into this new edition.
 Preface  xxiii

Emerging Leaders
The Emerging Leaders feature, in Chapter 14, showcases 12 young scholars who
are helping to shape the direction of research and policy in social development.
This feature was introduced in the second edition and continues here with some
fresh faces who have become emerging leaders. Combined with the Learning from
Living leaders feature, it encourages students to appreciate the ways research is
conducted by real people and gives them some inspirational messages about the
research process.

Making Social Development More User Friendly

A second new feature is the addition of quotes from children and parents (real
and hypothetical) that are interspersed throughout the book. Our goal is to
illustrate key research findings by showing how they relate to children and
families. We hope that these additions enliven the book and increase students’
understanding.

Updating Social Development with New Research

Findings and Insights
We have revised Social Development to include the most recent developments in the-
ory, research, and policy. To achieve this goal, we have carefully reviewed recent
publications and added more than 900 new references to our review of the field of
social development.

Highlighting Ages of Children

In this revision we continue to offer descriptions of the ages of the research partici-
pants so students can more fully appreciate variations in children’s developmental
capabilities.

New Topics
New topics added in this revision include the following:
• New coverage of the biological foundations of social development includ-
ing genetic, neurological, and hormonal factors (Chapter 3 Biological Foun-
dations)
• More emphasis on the interplay between genes and environment in shaping
development including a new section on differential susceptibility (Chapter 3
Biological Foundations as well as other chapters)
• New section on the effects of loss and bereavement on children (Chapter 4
Attachment)
• New evidence of the precocity of infants for understanding their social world
(Chapter 6 Self and Other and Chapter 11 Morality: Knowing Right, Doing Good)
• More coverage of children in other societies around the globe (Chapter 7
Family: Early and Enduring Influences and Chapter 13 Policy: Improving Chil-
dren’s Lives)
xxiv  Preface

Specific New Additions to Individual Chapters

Updated topics in this revision include the following (among others):

Chapter 1: Introduction: Theories of Social Development

• additional links between the theories outlined in Chapter 1 and topics dis-
cussed in later chapters (added so students can appreciate the relevance of the
theories for guiding research)
• a focus on the mutually informative nature of basic and applied (translational)
research
• additional emphasis on how Vygotsky’s zone of proximal development concept
informs the study of parenting quality
• introduction of a key challenge for the interpretation of findings from sociali-
zation research in particular and nonexperimental research on social develop-
ment generally—that of potential genetic confounding

Chapter 2: Research Methods: Tools for Discovery

• additional detail on the nature and meaning of statistical inference in social
science
• a revised focus on maximizing the quality of causal inferences via research
designs and innovative statistical techniques in research areas where true
experiments are impossible or unethical
• additional emphasis on the distinction between prospective and longitudinal
approaches to the study of social development
• attention to the “replication crisis” in psychology and the value of large sample
studies in increasing the precision of estimates of the associations of interest in
social developmental studies
• updated discussion of the use of the Internet as a research tool
• updates on methods for collecting data from children during the course of
their days via ecological momentary assessments that leverage new technolo-
gies, including smartphones
• additional detail on the distinction between statistical mediation and mod-
eration
• new insights into research ethics

Chapter 3: Biological Foundations: Roots in Neurons and Genes

• additional detail on how newborns are biologically prepared to respond to
faces
• additional details regarding the logic of behavior-genetic approaches
• an introduction to a variety of behavior-genetic approaches to the study of
gene by environment interactions
• updates on our understanding of genetic influences—including epigenetics—
where genetic expression can be modulated by environmental factors
• additional details regarding the distinction between two popular gene by envi-
ronment interaction models—the dual-risk model and the differential suscep-
tibility model
• new studies of gene–environment interactions further illustrate this model of
genetic transmission
• updated statistics on the rate of autism in the United States

Chapter 4: Attachment: Forming Close Relationships

• additional details about measurement approaches that focus on attachment
dimensions that build on the classic attachment categories
 Preface  xxv

• new evidence of brain differences in adults with different patterns of attachment

• updates on the links between caregiving and attachment quality
• updated meta-analytic information about the transmission of attachment secu-
rity across generations
• new information on parental incarceration and its implications for attachments
• discussion of a recent meta-analysis on the links between insecure attachments
and temperament, along with discussion of studies focused on possibly genetic
contributions to individual differences in attachment quality
• updates on the stability of attachment over the first two decades of life
• a new subsection on the implications for children of the death of a parent and
relevant intervention strategies
• a summary of recent meta-analyses on the links between insecure and disor-
ganized attachments and later social competence, externalizing behaviors, and
internalizing problems

Chapter 5: Emotions: Thoughts about Feelings

• new computer automation techniques for tracking emotional intensity
over time
• recent meta-analysis of gender differences in emotional expressions
• updates on both Duchenne smiles and Duchenne distress expressions
• new cross-cultural work on shame and pride
• new findings on children’s distinguishing between true and pseudo-distress
• recent work on cultural differences in display rule use
• updates on emotion regulation in adulthood
• recent statistics on depression and suicide among children and youth

Chapter 6: Self and Other: Getting to Know Me, Getting to Know You
• updates on the links between physical appearance and self-concept in both
girls and boys
• new work on links between popularity and self-esteem
• new research on the development of growth mind sets across time
• new work on the processes underlying identity formation
• new work on early development of own race preferences
• updates on biracial and bicultural identities
• updated figures on sexual orientation among youth
• a new meta-analysis focused on the effectiveness of programs to improve per-
spective taking
• revised language section that focuses on the social aspects of language and
communication

Chapter 7: Family: Early and Enduring Influences

• new work on the transition to parenthood
• cross-national work on the effects of parental rejection
• new meta-analysis of the links between physical punishment and child
outcomes
• new work on the relation between motherhood and learning
• updates on the effects of sib–sib interaction on both children and young
adults
• new work on the effects of family routines on children
• updates on international efforts to prohibit physical punishment
• new findings on maternal employment, adoption, and same-gender parent
families
• effects of later onset of parenting on children
xxvi  Preface

Chapter 8: Peers: A World of Their Own

• new evidence of aggressive behavior as early as infancy
• new perspectives on cross-cultural differences in regards to pretend play
• new work on “contagion” effects in behavior and emotions between friends
• updated explanation of the different ways youth can be “popular” with peers
• new discussion of neural systems that may underlie tendencies to approach peers
• introduced construct called “antipathies,” a peer relationship characterized by
mutual dislike
• updated perspective regarding cultural/gender differences in the path to inti-
mate friendships
• up-to-date information about the prevalence and correlates of same-sex
romantic relationships

Chapter 9: Schools, Mentors, and Media: Connections with Society

• new studies regarding which students struggle the most with school transitions
• new research regarding cross-ethnic friendships in schools
• expanded discussion of the drawbacks and benefits of single-sex education
• expanded discussion of cooperative learning, including introducing the
“flipped” classroom
• new discussion regarding risks of school suspension and expulsion for at-risk
students
• new research regarding the positive effects of racially/ethnically integrated
schools
• up-to-date research on youths’ media involvement, including smartphones,
social media, and the risks of “lurking” on others’ social media sites
• expanded information regarding cyberbullying

Chapter 10: Sex and Gender: Vive la Différence?

• new discussion of historical shifts in sex-typed personality characteristics (e.g.,
expressivity among women)
• new research and discussion regarding transgendered youth
• new discussion of the difference between mean-level gender differences (i.e.,
boys are more aggressive than girls on average) and stereotypes (i.e., he is a boy
and so he must be aggressive)
• updated information about girls’ participation in sports
• updated information regarding the influence of prenatal hormone abnormalities
on girls’ likelihood of choosing boys as playmates and preferring male-typed toys

Chapter 11: Morality: Knowing Right, Doing Good

• new work on children and adolescent understanding of nurturance rights
(care/protection) and self-determination rights
• updates on the neurological correlates of moral reasoning
• new cross-cultural evidence of children’s ability to distinguish social-conventional
and moral rules
• recent work on adolescent reasoning about sexual minority youth
• youth understanding about income inequalities across society
• new work on positive and negative effects of parents on children’s moral
judgments
• recent work on the neurological correlates of self-regulation and prosocial
behavior
• advances in understanding the effects of moral emotions (shame and guilt) on
adolescent adjustment
 Preface  xxvii

• new work on infant’s and preschooler’s understanding of prosocial/nonproso-

cial behavior of others
• new research on ethnicity, acculturation, and prosocial behavior

Chapter 12: Aggression: Insult and Injury

• new information regarding teen ­dating violence
• new evidence regarding contexts (e.g., more dangerous versus safer neighbor-
hoods) under which genetics may have the greatest influence on aggression
• new presentation of the “differential susceptibility hypothesis”
• expanded discussion of the role of culture, including findings suggesting
­students are more aggressive at school in individualist cultures than in collec-
tivist cultures
• new discussion regarding cultural differences in the effectiveness of bullying
programs and the need for culturally sensitive interventions

Chapter 13: Policy: Improving Children’s Lives

• new work on the links between poverty and brain development
• updates on long-term effectiveness of Head start and other preschool programs
• new findings about the effects of TANF government programs for child well-being
• new work on effects of early child care on adolescent outcomes
• new statistics on the decline in teenage pregnancies
• new innovations in teen pregnancy prevention programs and their effectiveness
• new meta-analysis of gender differences in rates of child sexual abuse
• new programs for child abuse prevention
• updated statistics concerning rates of physical violence against children globally

Instructor Resources
Resources for instructors are available at www.wiley.com/go/parke/socialdevelop
ment3e. All resource material has been updated to reflect changes in the current
edition of the book.

Instructor’s Guide
The comprehensive instructor’s guide provides chapter outlines, chapter summa-
ries, key terms for each chapter (glossary items and additional important terms),
and chapter learning objectives. Ideas for lectures, class discussions, demonstra-
tions, student activities (e.g., small research projects that students can conduct in
settings outside of class), and topics suitable for class debates are given. A set of
handouts are provided that can serve as a review guide for students. The guide
offers topics and writing guidelines for students’ term papers, including suggestions
for conducting a literature search, recommendations about the best search engines,
suggestions about how to organize a review section by section, and an overview of
APA formatting and referencing style. It lists relevant short films generally available
from the university or college media resource center and popular movies and TV
programs that illustrate themes of each chapter. Films such as Juno document the
experience of adolescent pregnancy; Mean Girls illustrates the issues of relational
aggression among high school girls; Gone Baby Gone provides insights into different
levels of moral reasoning. Suggested background readings are also given for each
chapter.
xxviii  Preface

Test Bank
In the Test Bank, approximately 80 multiple-choice questions, 15 short-answer ques-
tions, 10 essay questions, and 20 true/false questions are provided for each chapter.
Some of these questions are available for students to use as a practice quiz. New
questions have been added to reflect revised text content. All questions are keyed to
specific pages of the textbook.

Image Gallery
The Image Gallery includes all of the illustrations in each chapter. These images can
be used as provided or to create instructional slides.

PowerPoint Slides
PowerPoint slides serve as a springboard for lectures covering the key points, fig-
ures, tables, and key terms in each chapter. These slides can be used as they are or
can be modified to suit the instructor’s specific requirements.

Annotated Web Links

A set of Web links connecting to relevant written and video materials for each chap-
ter can be used to supplement information in the textbook or as a starting point for
class assignments.

Acknowledgments
In writing the first two editions of this book, we received constructive s­ uggestions
from many experts in the field as well as instructors who teach social d ­ evelopment.
The book is better as a result of their feedback, and we are grateful for their
­assistance. The reviewers of the first edition of the book were the ­following: Joan
Grusec, University of Toronto; Scott Miller, University of Florida; John Bates, Indiana
University; Susanne Denham, George Mason University; D ­ eborah ­Laible, Lehigh
University; Melanie Killen, University of Maryland; Judith S ­ metana, ­University
of Rochester; Susan Harter, University of Denver; Jennifer L ­ansford, Duke
­University; Steven Asher, Duke University; Gary Ladd, Arizona State U ­ niversity;
Patricia ­Greenfield, University of California, Los Angeles; Rob C ­ rosnoe, ­University
of Texas; E ­ verett Waters, State University of New York at Stony Brook; Philip
­Rodkin, ­University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign; Craig Hart, Brigham Young
­University; Mark Cummings, University of Notre Dame; Lindsay ­Chase-Lansdale,
­Northwestern ­University; Campbell Leaper, University of ­California, Santa Cruz;
Barry ­Schneider, University of Ottawa; Kenneth Rubin, University of M ­ aryland;
­Samuel Putnam, Bowdoin C ­ ollege; Julie Dunsmore, V
­ irginia Tech University; Jamie
Ostrov, U
­ niversity of ­Buffalo; Herman Huber, College of Saint Elizabeth; Nancy
Furlong, Alfred University; Celina Echols, Southeastern L
­ ­ ouisiana U ­ niversity;
Robert M­ arcus, U ­ niversity of Maryland; Cynthia Hall, U ­ niversity of Alabama
 Preface  xxix

at ­Birmingham; Cheryl Goldman, Fitchburg State College; Ashton Trice, James

Madison University; Joyce Munsch, California State University, Northridge; J­ uliana
Raskauskas, ­California State U­ niversity, Sacramento; Eileen Achorn, University
of Texas at San Antonio; and Bonnie Kanner, Worcester State College. Reviewers
of the second edition included Eileen Achorn, University of Texas, San Antonio;
­Steven Asher, Duke University; Pamela Davis-Kean, University of Michigan; Joanna
Gentsch, University of Texas, Dallas; Martha Pott, Tufts University; Faith Sproul,
Temple University; and Alastair Younger, University of Ottawa. We acknowledge
with thanks the team of editors and staff at the Wiley Higher Education division
who have done a fine job in seeing this project through the production process and
into the hands of users.

earning from Living (and Past) Leaders

This third edition is coauthored world a better place. After receiving her PhD from
by Ross D. Parke, Glenn I. Yale University, she studied family interactions,
Roisman, and Amanda J. Rose, a child care quality, early childhood education
team that we hope will bring programs, divorce and custody effects, and
fresh perspectives and up-to- children’s eyewitness testimony—always with the
date coverage to this latest goal of discovering ways people could create
edition. It is important to note, however, that this more positive experiences for children and
edition builds upon the previous two editions enhance their social skills and relationships.
under the authorship of K. Alison Clarke-Stewart Before retirement, Clarke-Stewart was Professor in
and Ross Parke. Sadly Professor Clarke-Stewart the Department of Psychology and Social
died suddenly in 2014, but we want to recognize Behavior in the School of Social Ecology at the
that the wit, wisdom, and incisive sense of University of California, Irvine. Earlier she taught in
scholarship that she brought to the first two the Department of Education and the
editions has informed and guided this latest Committee on Human Development at the
edition. Below we provide a brief profile of Alison University of Chicago. She was a Fellow of the
Clarke-Stewart, and as current authors we hope American Psychological Association and the
that we have faithfully honored her legacy in this American Psychological Society and a Principal
new version of this book and trust that she would Investigator of the NICHD Study of Early Child
be pleased with this newest edition. Care and Youth Development. She was a Fellow
Our admired and beloved past author at the Center for Advanced Study in the
K. Alison Clarke-Stewart was a leading scholar Behavioral Sciences and a Visiting Scholar at
in social development. She grew up in Canada Oxford University. She wrote four textbooks on
and completed her BA and MS at the University child development and authored Day Care and
of British Columbia before moving to the United coauthored Children at Home and in Day Care,
States for graduate school. Just before she What We Know about Childcare; Divorce: Causes
began her PhD program, she had an epiphany. and Consequences, and Divorce Lessons: Real
The violence that erupted that summer culminat- Life Stories and What You Can Learn from Them.
ing in the assassinations of Robert Kennedy and She is missed by family and friends as well as
Martin Luther King Jr. led her to decide to study the field of social development where she
children’s social development in the hope that was recognized as an inspiring and ground-­
by doing so she might contribute to making the breaking leader.
xxx  Preface

Ross D. Parke Glenn I. Roisman

is a Distinguished is a Distinguished
Professor of Psy­ McKnight University
Courtesy of Ross D. Parke

chology, Emeritus Professor of Child

and past Director Psychology and
of the Center for the Director of
Family Studies Undergraduate Studies

Courtesy of Glenn I. Roisman

at the University at the Institute of
of California, Child Development
Riverside. He also at the University of
taught at the Minnesota. Prior
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign to moving back to
and at the University of Wisconsin. He is past Minnesota (where he
president of the Society for Research in Child earned his PhD) with
Development from which he received the his wife Chryle and son
Distinguished Scientific Contribution to Nathan, Dr. Roisman spent the first decade of his
Child Development Award, and of the career in the Department of Psychology at the
Developmental Psychology Division of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. During
American Psychological Association, who those years as an Assistant and then Associate
awarded him the G. Stanley Hall award for his Professor, he was honored with both the Society
contributions to develop­mental psychology. He for Research in Child Development Award for
has served as an editor of the Journal of Family Early Research Contributions and the Boyd R.
Psychology and Developmental Psychology McCandless Young Scientist Award from the
and was associate editor of Child Development. Developmental Psychology Division of the
He is the author of Fatherhood, coauthor of American Psycho­logical Association. Currently,
Throwaway Dads, and coeditor of Family-Peer Dr. Roisman serves as an associate editor of
Relationships: In Search of the Linkages; Children both Child Development and Psychological
in Time and Place; Exploring Family Relationships Bulletin and has thus far published over 100
with Other Social Contexts and Strengthening journal articles on the legacy of early interper-
Couple Relationships for Optimal Child sonal experiences—many of which are based
Development. His more recent books are Future on data from some of the landmark longi­
Families: Diverse Forms, Rich Possibilities pub- tudinal studies of human development
lished by Wiley-Blackwell in 2014 and a co-edited described in this book, including the Minnesota
volume (with Glen Elder) entitled Children in a Longitudinal Study of Risk and Adaptation and
Changing World: Socio-Cultural and Temporal the NICHD Study of Early Child Care and Youth
Perspectives published by Cambridge University Development. More recently, he became
Press in 2019. He obtained his PhD from the involved in assessments of the Minnesota
University of Waterloo, Ontario, Canada, and his Twin Registry cohort as one of its Principal
work has focused on early social relationships in Investigators. In addition, Dr. Roisman has
infancy and childhood, punishment, aggression, taught a college course to undergraduates on
child abuse, fathers’ roles in child development, social development entitled Development and
links between family and peer social systems, Interpersonal Relationships for more than
ethnic variations in families, and the effects of new 15 years and regularly co-teaches a course on
reproductive technologies on families. He taught a social and emotional development to first-year
college course on social development for more graduate students at Minnesota.
than 40 years and is highly regarded as a textbook
author with seven editions of Child Psychology:
A Contemporary Viewpoint to his credit.
 Preface  xxxi

Amanda J. Rose of the American Psychological Society. Dr. Rose

is a Professor of Psycho­ also was awarded an early scientific achieve-
logical Sciences at the ment award from the Society for Research in
University of Missouri. Child Development. Dr. Rose is a committed
She received her teacher and research mentor. In the classroom,
doctorate from the she has taught Social Development,
Courtesy of Amanda J. Rose

University of Illinois at Developmental Psychology, and Research

Urbana-Champaign Methods in Developmental Psychology. Many of
in 1999 and did her the undergraduate students that Dr. Rose has
undergraduate work mentored in research have pursued doctoral
at The Ohio State training at prestigious universities, and all of the
University. Dr. Rose doctoral students that she has mentored are
joined the faculty at currently faculty members in Departments of
the University of Psychology at colleges and universities around
Missouri in 1999 as a founding member of the the nation. Dr. Rose is a recipient of many teach-
Developmental Psychology Training Program ing awards, including a Kemper Fellowship for
within the Department of Psychological Sciences. Excellence in Teaching, one of the highest
She served as Director of the Developmental teaching honors awarded at the University of
Training Program from 2002 to 2010 and again Missouri. In addition, Dr. Rose is committed to
from 2013 to 2015. Dr. Rose’s research focuses on promoting women’s professional development,
gender, friendships, and emotional adjustment especially in academia. Dr. Rose has developed
in childhood and adolescence. Her work has undergraduate and graduate classes on wom-
been funded by NIH, and she is a fellow of the en’s professional development and regularly
American Psychological Association and a fellow gives presentations on the topic.
 CH AP TE R 1

Introduction
Theories of Social Development

Four-month-old Abby gazes into her mother’s

eyes. Her mother returns the gaze and smiles
broadly. Abby smiles back at her mother and
coos. This simple social exchange represents the
beginnings of social development. Five-year-old
Jason is a bully. He terrorizes the other children
in his classroom, takes their toys, hits them, and
verbally abuses them. His classmate Aiden is
quiet, cooperative, and compliant; he shares his
Alan Tobey/iStockphoto

toys and settles disputes peacefully. Not surpris-

ingly, classmates like Aiden better than Jason.
These patterns reflect individual differences in
social behavior during early childhood. Twelve-
year-old Emma loves to spend time with her best
friend Meg. They walk to school together, meet
at recess, sit next to each other at lunch, play on
the same soccer team, confer about homework,
What is the study of social development? It is many and text late into the night. Their close relation-
things. It is a description of children’s social behav- ship is typical of best friendships in middle
ior and how it changes as children get older. It is a childhood. These three hypothetical examples
description of children’s ideas about themselves illustrate some of the phenomena of social
and other people, their relationships with peers and development in childhood. In this chapter, we
adults, their emotional expressions and displays, and discuss the theories that explain these phenom-
their ability to function in social groups. It traces ena and the questions that are central to the
continuities and discontinuities in children’s social study of social development.
behavior, relationships, and ideas over time. It is also
an explanation of the processes that lead to changes
in social behavior and to individual differences among children. It includes exami-
nation of how other aspects of development—cognitive, perceptual, language, and
motor development—underlie children’s social behavior.
Researchers in the field of social development investigate the influences of
parents and peers, schools and the media, and culture and biology on children’s
social behavior and ideas. For some scholars, unraveling the mysteries of social

1
2  Chapter 1 Introduction

et You Didn’t Know That . . . Newborns Can Recognize

Their Mothers by Smell
• Even 2-years-olds experience jealousy.
• Aggressive behavior in an 8-year-old can

oneclearvision/iStockphoto
predict criminal behavior at age 30.
• Infants in orphanages have lower levels of
the “love” hormone, oxytocin.
• Child abuse can lead to changes in chil-
dren’s brain functioning.
• Having a close friend can make up for
being rejected by classmates.
• Adolescent girls who have grown up without
Each chapter in this book contains a highlighted a father have a much higher chance of
section describing something about social becoming a teen mother than those who
behavior or social development that may sur- grew up with a father.
prise you. Did you know that . . .
You will learn about these and other interesting
• Newborns can recognize their own moth- facts about social development as you read
ers by smell. this textbook.

development is a goal in itself. It allows them to satisfy their curiosity about why
some children become juvenile delinquents and others become model teens. It
offers insights into the principles and laws that govern social interaction.
Other scholars have more practical concerns. They gather information about
social development to help people make better decisions about children’s lives. They
give parents information that will help improve their child-rearing strategies. They
give teachers information about how to reorganize their classrooms to support chil-
dren’s social needs. They provide information to guide policymakers’ decisions about
child-care regulations, school policies, and family welfare. They offer information to
help health professionals identify and treat children who are showing signs of atypical
development. All of these are legitimate goals within the study of social development.

Social Development: A Brief History

The study of children’s development is a relatively recent enterprise. In the ­medieval
period, people viewed children as miniature adults and did not even recognize
childhood as a distinctive period deserving special attention (Aries, 1962). Children
were not valued in the same way or treated with the same care as they are today.
Many children died in infancy and early childhood and, if they survived, they were
forced to labor in mines and fields. Child labor laws to protect children’s health
and welfare were not introduced until the 1800s. As people began to recognize chil-
dren’s value and vulnerability, the need to understand their development through
scientific study became clear as well.
The scientific study of children’s development began with the pioneering work
of the evolutionary biologist Charles Darwin. In his work on the development of
emotions in his own and other people’s children, Darwin (1872) paved the way
 Critical Questions about Social Development  3

for the modern study of emotions—a key element of social development. Follow-
ing Darwin, psychologist G. Stanley Hall (1904) used questionnaires to document
children’s activities, feelings, and attitudes. A few years later, John B. Watson (1913)
argued that conditioning and learning were the processes by which social and emo-
tional behavior are acquired and modified. His early studies of how infants acquire
fear responses through conditioning demonstrated that emotional responses are
learnable and that social behavior can be studied scientifically. Around the same
time, Sigmund Freud (1905, 1910) offered a more biologically oriented view, claim-
ing that social development was the product of how adults handled children’s basic
drives, such as the infant’s drive to suck. An American psychologist and pediatrician,
Arnold Gesell (1928), offered a different view of social development. He argued
that social skills, like motor skills, simply unfold over the course of infancy and
childhood. Thus, the field began with competing views about social development
(Parke & Clarke-Stewart, 2012). In this chapter, we explore the views reflected in
both traditional and modern theories of social development (for a detailed review
of the recent history of the study of social development, see Collins, 2011).

Critical Questions about Social

Development
As scientists studied children’s social development, they confronted and debated
a number of critical questions. These questions, which we discuss in this section,
have framed the study of development and colored different theories of social
development.

How Do Biological and Environmental Influences

Affect Social Development?
In the early history of developmental psychology, scholars took opposing positions
on what was known as the “nature–nurture” issue. Some emphasized the role of
nature, that is, heredity and maturation; others emphasized the role of nurture,
that is, learning and experience. The former argued that biology is destiny and the
course of development is largely predetermined by genetic factors, which guide
the natural maturation or unfolding of increasingly complex social skills and abili-
ties. Gesell was an early advocate of this view. Opposing this view, scholars such as
Watson (1928) placed their emphasis firmly on the environment. They assumed
that genetic factors put few restrictions on the ways that environmental events shape
the course of children’s development and claimed that by properly organizing the
environment they could train any infant to become an athlete, an architect, or an
attorney.
Today no one supports either of these extreme positions. Modern scholars real-
ize that both biological and environmental factors influence social development—
although they may disagree about the relative importance of each. The chal-
lenge now is to explore how the two sets of factors interact to produce changes
and individual differences in children’s social abilities. In recent years, research-
ers have studied these factors in a number of ways. One group of researchers, for
example, showed that children’s aggressiveness is a function of both their testoster-
one level—biology—and their exposure to aggressive interactions—environment
(Moffitt et al., 2006). Another researcher showed that children’s sociability with
4  Chapter 1 Introduction

peers is rooted in both their early temperamental characteristics—biology—and

their early experiences in the family—environment (Rothbart 2011). Yet another
eminent developmental scientist, Jay Belsky, has advanced the “differential suscepti-
bility” hypothesis (discussed in more detail in Chapter 3, “Biological Foundations”)
that certain biologically based factors—including difficult temperament and a sub-
set of molecular-genetic markers—predispose some children to be more reactive to
and therefore affected by both negative and positive caregiving experiences (Belsky
& Pluess, 2009). Today, the question is not which factor, biology or environment,
determines development but rather how the expression of a particular inherited
biological characteristic is shaped, modified, and directed by a particular set of envi-
ronmental circumstances.

What Role Do Children Play In Their Own Development?

A second critical question about social development concerns the extent to which
children contribute to their own development. Early scholars tended to believe
that children were simply passive organisms who were shaped by external forces.
Today, most scholars have moved away from this simple view. Some still insist
that children are assertive or shy because of the way their parents rear them or
that adolescents become juvenile delinquents because of peer pressure. In gen-
eral, however, developmental scientists currently believe that children are active
agents who, to some extent, shape, control, and direct the course of their own
development (Kuczynski & Parkin, 2007; Kuczynski et al., 2015). Children, they
assert, are curious seekers of information who intentionally try to understand and
explore the world about them. They actively seek out particular kinds of informa-
tion and interactions. In addition, they actively modify the actions of the people
they encounter. Over the course of development, children participate in recipro-
cal interchanges with these other people, interchanges that are best described
as transactional (Sameroff, 2009, 2010). For example, children ask their parents
for help solving a social problem, their parents offer advice, and, as a result, chil-
dren’s interactions with their parents and peers are modified. Throughout devel-
opment, children’s social behavior is constantly undergoing change as a result of
this mutual influence process.

What Is The Appropriate Unit for Studying Social

Development?
Psychologists’ study of social development has typically focused on the individual
child as the unit of analysis. In recent decades, however, psychologists have increas-
ingly recognized that other units also warrant attention. As an outgrowth of the rec-
ognition that children have reciprocal interactions with other people, the focus has
shifted to the social dyad. Researchers now study the nature of social interactions
and exchanges between pairs of children or between children and their parents and
investigate social relationships between these individuals (Collins & Madsen, 2006).
Attention is also given to larger units including social triads, such as mother–father–
child or a trio of friends (Collins, 2011). In addition, researchers study the social
groups that children form or join outside the family. These groups have their own
rules and provide significant contexts for children’s social development. Contempo-
rary social development scholars view all of these units—individuals, dyads, triads,
and groups—as important for studying social development.
 Critical Questions about Social Development  5

nsights from Extremes: Genie, a “Wild Child”

not stand erect; she walked with a “bunny walk,”
with her hands up in front, like paws. She was
incontinent, unsocialized, malnourished, and
unable to chew normally. She was eerily silent.

Bettmann/Getty Images
She spoke only a few words and short phrases
such as “stop it” and “no more.” With therapy
and training, Genie eventually learned some
words. She also learned to smile. Her demea-
nor changed, and she became sociable with
familiar adults. She was fascinated with classi-
cal piano music, and researchers speculated
Few extreme cases have aroused as much that from her isolated bedroom she had been
public interest and professional scrutiny as the able to hear a neighbor child practicing piano.
discovery in November 1970 of a 13-year-old girl Genie also learned to express herself through
who had been living in isolation, locked inside sign language and developed remarkable
her bedroom, since infancy (Rymer, 1994). The nonverbal communication skills; she and her
house where “Genie,” as she became known, caretakers were often approached by strangers
lived was completely dark; all blinds were drawn who, without being asked, spontaneously gave
and there were no toys. Her bedroom, at the Genie gifts or possessions. Despite her therapy
back of the house, was furnished only with a wire and experience living with foster parents, Genie
cage and a potty chair. During the day, Genie was never able to master grammar and had
was strapped to the potty chair and at night she trouble controlling her angry outbursts. She
was locked in bed inside the wire cage. No one was never able to function independently and,
in the family was allowed to talk to her, and her today, in her early 60s, she is living in a sheltered
food was put out hurriedly without speaking. If home for adults with disabilities, speaking very
her father heard her vocalizing, he beat her and little but communicating reasonably well with
barked and growled like a dog to keep her quiet. sign language.
Genie was discovered by authorities when her This extreme case suggested that there are
mother, who was almost blind and also a victim critical or sensitive periods early in life, and devel-
of abuse by Genie’s father, ran away from her opment is irreparably impaired if children lack
husband and took Genie with her. sensory and social stimulation from their environ-
This was not only a human tragedy but ments during these periods. The case stimulated
also an opportunity to evaluate the impact of research and popular interest in the role of social
extreme environmental input on children’s devel- stimulation for brain functioning and develop-
opment. When she was rescued, Genie could ment of communicative and social skills.

Is Development Continuous or Discontinuous?

A fourth question that developmental psychologists have asked is how to charac-
terize the nature of developmental change. Some see development as a continu-
ous process with each change building on earlier experiences in an orderly way.
They see development as smooth and gradual, without any abrupt shifts along
the path (Figure 1.1a). Others view development as a series of discrete steps and
see the organization of behavior as qualitatively different at each new stage or
plateau (Figure 1.1b). The concerns of each phase of development and the skills
6  Chapter 1 Introduction

learned in that phase are different from those of every other phase. Jean Piaget and
Sigmund Freud both proposed such stage theories of development, suggesting that
as children get older, they move through different stages, that at each new stage,
they learn new strategies for understanding and acquiring knowledge and for man-
aging interpersonal relationships, and that these new strategies displace earlier ways
of dealing with the world. Scientists who endorse a continuous view of development
suggest that noticeable changes in behavior are simply part of an ongoing series of
smaller shifts.
Recently, some developmental psychologists have suggested that our judgment of
continuity or discontinuity depends on the power of the lens we use when we look at
changes across ages (Siegler, 2006). If we look from a distance or over a fairly long
period of time, marked differences are evident, suggesting that there are distinct
developmental stages in social behavior and social relationships. If we look more
closely, however, we find that such changes do not happen suddenly. In fact, we find
a great deal of variability in social behaviors even at the same point in time: A child
may sometimes use a sophisticated and socially appropriate strategy to interact with
a companion and, at other times, rely on a relatively primitive tactic. For example,
in the process of learning social skills, a toddler may take turns and ask to play with
a peer’s toy on one occasion but the next day may grab the toy without asking or
waiting. Only after many encounters with peers and toys does the toddler come to
use turn taking and requests consistently. When social interactions are examined
using a more powerful lens in this way, a very different picture of development
appears: one of gradual shifts and changes as children slowly learn new strategies
and gradually adopt the best and most advanced ones (Figure 1.1c). Thus, over
time, change proceeds in a less linear and a less step-like fashion than continuous
or stage theories suggest.
Today, most social development scholars recognize the value of both continuous
and discontinuous views; they see development as basically continuous but interspersed
with transitional periods in which changes are relatively abrupt or where growth is
accelerated relative to earlier periods. These transitional periods may be the result
of physical changes, such as learning to walk, which offers infants new opportuni-
ties for interaction (Karasik et al., 2011), or the onset of puberty, which changes

Level of development Period of development Level of use

Strategy Strategy 4
1 Strategy
Strategy 5
2

Strategy
3

Age Age Age

(a) (b) (c)
FIGURE 1.1 Continuity and discontinuity in development (a) The continuous view looks at development as
a gradual series of shifts in skills and behavior with no abrupt changes.(b) The discontinuous view suggests
that step-like changes make each stage qualitatively different from the one that preceded it.(c) The third view
suggests that different strategies ebb and flow with increasing age, and the most successful strategies gradually
predominate.
 Critical Questions about Social Development  7

the way children think about themselves (Caspi & Shiner, 2006; Ge et al., 2001).
Other transitions may be the result of cultural changes, such as entry into junior
high school, which brings children into larger social groups and a more complex
social organization. Some view these transitional periods of reorganization as oppor-
tunities for intervention or changes in developmental trajectories.

Is Social Behavior the Result of the Situation

or the Child?
Another critical question about social development is whether children’s behavior
is the same in different situations: at school, at home, on the playground, and in the
street. Do children behave differently in different settings, or do their individual
characteristics lead them to behave similarly across situations? Can we describe cer-
tain children as honest, dependable, and helpful and expect them to exhibit these
qualities at all times? How do these traits manifest themselves in different situations:
during a difficult test, in a confrontation with an angry parent, in a competitive
game, or with a friend in need? Developmental scientists differ in the importance
they assign to “person factors” versus “situational factors.” Many resolve the dilemma
by stressing the dual contributions of both personality and situational factors. They
point out that children seek out situations in which they can display their personali-
ties. Aggressive children, for example, are more likely to join a gang or enroll in a
karate class than to opt for the church choir or a stamp collectors’ club (Bullock
& Merrill, 1980), but in settings that don’t allow or promote aggressive behavior,
these same children may be friendly, reasonable, and cooperative. As we discuss in
Chapter 3, “Biological Foundations,” genetic predispositions lead children to niche-
pick situations that are compatible with their genetic makeup (Scarr & McCartney,
1983). At the same time, children’s selection of these experiences may strengthen
their predispositions—for example, their tendency to behave aggressively—as they
get older.

Is Social Development Universal Across Cultures?

Children who grow up on a farm in China, in a kibbutz in Israel, in a village in Peru,
or in a suburb in the United States have very different experiences. Even within the
United States, racial and ethnic groups present children with diverse experiences
(Buriel, 2011; Parke & Buriel, 2006). Another critical question about social devel-
opment is how much effect these different experiences have on children’s social
behavior. Psychologists themselves differ as to how much importance they ascribe
to culture. Some argue that culture-free laws of development apply to all children
in all cultures. For example, children in every culture acquire the basic foundations
of social life, such as learning to recognize other people’s emotional expressions
and to communicate their wishes and desires to others through language. Other
psychologists stress the fact that the cultural settings in which children grow up play
a major role in their development. In some cultures, for example, older siblings
care for children, whereas in other cultures professional caregivers care for them in
group settings. It is unlikely that children who grow up in nuclear family arrange-
ments would develop social attitudes and behaviors identical to those of children
with these very different child-rearing experiences. Yet other psychologists suggest
that some aspects of social development are universal and other aspects are culturally
specific. For example, although all children develop social understanding, the rates
8  Chapter 1 Introduction

ultural Context: Parenting Advice Around the Globe

In North America and Western value autonomy, assertiveness, ambition, and
Europe, millions of parenting even competitiveness in children. In our culture,
manuals are sold every year to parents have the major responsibility for produc-
mothers and fathers eager to ing children with these desirable characteristics.
learn how to become good par- Although all cultures aim to protect and keep
ents and raise their children properly. The nine their children safe, members of our culture have
editions of Dr. Benjamin Spock’s Baby and Child invented infant car seats, baby monitors, and
Care have sold tens of millions of copies since nanny cams to protect children. We believe
the book was first published in 1946; only the in the power of technology and innovation to
Bible had sold more copies in the 20th century. make things better, including our children and
But would Dr. Spock’s book travel well and serve ourselves. Our parenting advice manuals reflect
as a useful guide for parents in other cultures? these beliefs.
Probably not. Even though Westerners think that Other cultures do not share our assump-
their way of caring for infants is obvious, cor- tions about what child traits are desirable, who
rect, and natural—a simple matter of common should be responsible for child rearing, or even
sense—it turns out that what people accept the nature of the threats that children face. In
as common sense in one society may be many other cultures, our common sense makes
considered odd, exotic, or even barbaric in no sense! Instead of a focus on self-confidence
another (DeLoache & Gottlieb, 2000). Differ- and self-aggrandizement, many non-Western
ent cultures make different assumptions about cultures value interdependence, modesty, and
appropriate or desirable characteristics of chil- self-­effacement. Among the Fulani (see photo),
dren and appropriate or desirable behaviors one of the largest groups in West Africa, who
of parents. live at the edge of the Sahara desert, the most
valued traits include soemteende, “modesty and
reserve”; munyal, “patience and fortitude”; and
hakkilo, “care and forethought” (Johnson, 2000).
Children in Bali, one of the Indonesian islands,
are taught not to display positive emotions such
as joy when they receive a good grade at school
or negative emotions such as anger in public
(Diener, 2000).
Many non-Western societies also value shared
responsibility for child rearing, and members of
the wider community participate in child care. In
Alan Tobey/iStockphoto

Beng villages in the Ivory Coast (located in West

Africa), extended families live together, and all
family members as well as villagers from other
households share in child care. In fact, members
of other households are expected to visit a new-
born within hours of its birth (Gottlieb, 2000). An
Woman from a Fulani tribe with her child. extreme example of shared child-rearing respon-
sibility is practiced in Ifaluk, a Micronesian island
The characteristics that our culture values in the North Pacific Ocean. There, more than a
stress the uniqueness and independence of third of children are adopted by a second family.
individuals. Based on our belief in free will and These adopted children share the resources of
our capacity to shape our own destiny, we both their biological and their adoptive parents.
 Critical Questions about Social Development  9

They sleep in either family’s house and receive place a small knife on the pillow while a baby
shelter, protection, and security from both sets of sleeps to ward off the spirit (Johnson, 2000).
parents. In effect, adopted children have two fam- If Western child-rearing experts want to sell
ily networks (Le, 2000). their parenting books to mothers in other cul-
In some cultures, social ties are formed not tures, they will have to do some serious rewriting.
just with the living but also with the dead. Among The assumption that our way of raising children
the Baganda, an East African group, infants are is the right way or the only way is clearly wrong.
viewed as reincarnated ancestors, and one of Dr. Spock’s advice to parents about raising
the cultural goals is to maintain ties between the children would not be very adaptive for children
child and the ancestor’s spirit. Children’s names living among the Fulani, the Balinese, the Beng,
are selected according to which ancestor’s name or the Ifauk. Parents in these cultures need their
produces a smile from the baby (DeLoache & own parenting manuals written by someone
Gottlieb, 2000). Protection of children is cultur- who grew up in their culture and knows the skills
ally determined as well, often based on religious that children need to grow into productive and
beliefs that can include witches or evil spirits that well-adjusted members of their culture. Of course,
could harm children. Among the Fulani, mothers parents in these cultures don’t feel the need for
may ward off evil spirits by rolling their infants in parenting manuals the way Western parents do.
cow dung to make them less desirable and not They base their practices on tradition and obser-
worth capturing by the evil spirit, or they might vation, not on reading books.

at which social milestones are reached vary across cultures. Today most develop-
mental psychologists take this third position, recognizing universal aspects of devel-
opment as well as the importance of considering cultural contexts (Fung, 2011;
Rogoff, 2003; Sera, Maratsos, & Carlson, 2016).

How Does Social Development Vary Across

Historical Eras?
Cultures not only differ from one another but also differ over time. Another critical
question, therefore, is how these changes affect children’s social development. In
our own society, dramatic changes in the structure of families and the ways people
communicate have occurred over the past decades. Rates of divorce and remarriage
have increased, childbearing has been delayed, family sizes have decreased, the like-
lihood of mothers working outside the home has increased, children’s exposure to
peers in child care has increased, and computers and smart phones have increas-
ingly been used to communicate with people we know and people we have never
met. The question is whether children develop in the same ways regardless of such
shifts in the culture that surrounds them. Theorists now appreciate that histori-
cal changes such as these play a part in shaping children’s development (Elder &
Shanahan, 2006; Elder & George, 2015). The social lives of children and their fami-
lies are also affected by specific historic events: the Vietnam War in the 1960s, the
conflict between Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland in the late 1960s,
the farm crisis in the American Midwest in the 1980s, the fall of the Berlin Wall in
Germany in 1989, the terrorist tragedy on 9/11 in 2001, the tsunami in Indonesia
in 2004, Hurricane Katrina in 2005, and the global economic downturn in 2008.
Both distinct historical events and more gradual shifts in living arrangements and
10  Chapter 1 Introduction

Hagen, Ralph/CartoonStock
Even cartoonists appreciate the historical changes that affect childhood.

societal values leave their mark on children’s social and emotional development.
It is important to keep both types of changes in mind when comparing children’s
behavior across generations.

Is Social Development Related to Other

Developmental Domains?
Another question that is part of the study of social development concerns how
changes in children’s social behavior are related to changes in other domains of
development such as cognition, language, emotion, and motor development. More
than a century ago, Darwin (1872) suggested that emotions play a central role in
regulating children’s social interactions. Today psychologists often examine the role
of emotions in children’s social development (Denham et al., 2012). They also often
study the role of cognitive development. Children’s cognitive capacity to correctly
interpret another person’s intentions, for example, is a critical component of social
interaction, affecting the child’s reactions to the other person’s actions (Dodge,
Coie, et al., 2006). Development in the language domain plays a key role in social
development by providing an essential means of communication (Bloom & Tinker,
2001). Even motor development is important for social development; for example,
crawling and walking allow infants to initiate or maintain physical proximity with
other people; pointing and gesturing give them a way to engage in social exchanges
before they can speak (Saarni et al., 2006). As these examples illustrate, social
development is best understood by studying it in the context of other domains of
development because advances in other developmental areas facilitate changes in
social development. It is also important to recognize the reciprocal nature of this
cross-domain influence: Shifts in competence in the social domain affect children’s
progress in other domains as well as the reverse (Gauvain, 2001a, 2001b; Bell &
Calkins, 2012).

How Important Are Mothers for Children’s Social

Development?
It was once thought that mothers were the most important influence on children’s
social development, that they were necessary for children to develop normally,
and that no one else mattered much. Commentators and theorists from Sigmund
 Critical Questions about Social Development  11

esearch Up Close: Children of the Great Depression

Glen Elder (1974) made use move away from the family, becoming more peer
of the stock market crash in oriented. They also often became more ill tem-
1929 and the Great Depression pered and angry. In a family who had lost nearly
that followed to study how an two-thirds of their income and had just moved
­historical time period can affect into cramped quarters of a relative, the mother
children’s social development. He found that reported that her son was:
some participants in a longitudinal research pro-
ject in California were just entering school when “tense, quick to anger and ashamed to
the economy collapsed; others were teenagers. bring friends home even though the boy was
Some of their parents suffered or lost their jobs in well liked by his classmates and achieved
the Depression; others remained relatively well off. some prominence in student activities.”
These natural variations enabled the researcher
to compare families who were severely deprived Both boys and girls were moodier, more eas-
with those who were not and to investigate ily slighted, and less calm. Because younger
how family differences affected children at dif- children depended more on their parents and
ferent ages. thus were exposed to the altered situation at
In the economically deprived families, dra- home for longer periods of time, the effects of
matic changes occurred in family roles and rela- the Depression were greater for children who
tionships. The division of labor and power within were young when catastrophe struck. Many of
the family shifted. As fathers’ jobs disappeared the effects on children were long lasting. When
and income dropped, mothers entered the labor they became adults, their values, work patterns,
market or took in boarders. As a result, mothers’ and marriages bore the marks of their earlier
power increased and fathers’ power, prestige, experiences. Men who were forced to enter the
and emotional significance decreased. The job market as teenagers preferred secure but
rates of divorce, separation, and desertion rose, modest jobs rather than riskier higher-status
especially among couples whose relationship positions. They were also less satisfied with their
was shaky even before the onset of bad eco- work and income. Men and women who had
nomic times. Parent–child relationships changed experienced adjustment problems in response
in response to economic hardship, too; fathers to the Depression had less successful marriages.
especially became more punitive and less sup- Women who were prone to temper outbursts as
portive of their children. children in the Depression became ill-tempered
Roles also changed for children. Girls were mothers. Thus, the Great Depression affected
required to do more household work, and more social roles, emotions, and behavior across three
older boys took outside jobs. Boys tended to generations.

Freud forward championed mothers as the leading players in children’s social

worlds, and some went so far as to suggest that they were the only key players.
Although no one today would deny that mothers are important and often even the
most important people for children’s early social development, psychologists now
appreciate that other people are important too. Fathers, siblings, grandparents,
and other relatives are all recognized as influencing children’s social development
(Dunn, 2002, 2005, 2015; Lamb, 2010; Parke, 2013). Teachers, child-care providers,
coaches, and religious leaders may also contribute (Clarke-Stewart & Allhusen, 2005;
Lerner et al., 2011). We now know that children’s social development is embedded
12  Chapter 1 Introduction

in a social matrix in which many individuals guide and support children’s progress
toward healthy social relationships and social skills. As social historian Stephanie
Coontz (1992) noted,

“Children do best in societies where childrearing is considered too important to be left

entirely to parents.”

Is There a Single Pathway of Social Development?

Another critical question for social development is whether children all follow the
same general path. Early observers of social development, such as Gesell, tended to
focus on normative steps that all children take on the road to social maturity. Today
most theorists recognize that there are varied routes of development. No single
pathway to social success or failure exists. Children who start out at the same place
early in development may end up in totally different places later on. This diver-
gence of developmental paths, in which two individuals start out similarly and end
up at very different points, is called multifinality (Cicchetti & Rogosch, 1996) (see
photos below). It suggests that continuing patterns of transactions between chil-
dren and their families affect the children’s development. Consider this example
(Cummings et al., 2000, p. 39):

Robin and Staci both had secure relationships with their parents and were functioning
well as toddlers. But then Staci’s mother and father lost their jobs, and marital problems
developed. Her parents became less responsive to Staci’s needs and less attentive to
her increasingly disruptive behavior. Robin’s parents, in contrast, received promotions
at work and had a happy and rewarding marriage. They remained warm and respon-
sive and managed family matters constructively. When the children were assessed at
age 5, Robin was still secure with both her parents and above average in social compe-
tence. Staci was insecure and scored in the clinical range on a measure of adjustment
problems.
(Cummings, E. M., Davies, P. T., & Campbell, S. B. (2000). Developmental
psychopathology and family process. New York: Guilford Press)

Other children, by contrast, may begin at different places but end up with similar
developmental outcomes. This pattern where children follow very different paths
to reach the same developmental end point is referred to as equifinality. Here is an
example (Cummings et al., 2000, p. 40):

Ann and Amy grew up in very different family circumstances. Ann had an affluent fam-
ily. Her parents enjoyed an intact marriage and managed child rearing well. Amy lived
with her father, who had experienced an acrimonious divorce. At age 6, Ann was well-
adjusted; Amy was depressed and withdrawn. However, over the next few years, Amy was
able to take advantage of her social and athletic skills to develop good social relations
with classmates, and her divorced parents learned ways to interact more amicably. When
the children were 10 years old, Ann, whose family circumstances had continued to be
supportive and positive, was still a well-adjusted girl, but Amy was also well adjusted and
above average in social competence.
(Cummings, E. M., Davies, P. T., & Campbell, S. B. (2000). Developmental
psychopathology and family process. New York: Guilford Press)
 Critical Questions about Social Development  13

These two examples make it clear that children

Michel Bourquard/Tsuni/USA/Alamy Live News

do not follow a single path in developing their social
skills.

Splash News and Pictures/Newscom

Individual children also respond to their life cir-
cumstances in very different ways. Some who expe-
rience adverse circumstances suffer permanent
developmental disruptions or delays. Others show
sleeper effects: They seem to cope well initially but
exhibit problems later in development. Still oth-
ers exhibit resilience under the most difficult of
circumstances, and some not only are able to cope
with risk but actually seem to thrive on it. When
they confront new risks later in life, these children
Illustrating the concept of multifinality are sisters Alison and Mariah
are able to adapt to challenges better than children Carey. After their parents divorced, Alison went to live with her
who have experienced little or no risk; they have father and became a drug addict, twice arrested for prostitution.
been inoculated by their earlier experiences and Mariah lived with her mother, had little contact with her father, and
learned from them (Egeland et al., 1993; Luthar & was named best-selling female pop artist of the millennium at the
Barkin, 2012; Masten & Tellegen, 2012). 2000 World Music Awards.

What Influences How We Judge Children’s

Social Behavior?
Just as children’s social outcomes differ, the ways adults judge and label their social
behaviors differ. Behaviors such as aggression, affection, and altruism are difficult
to define. They are not like height and weight, measurable with a yardstick or on
a bathroom scale. So what influences people’s judgments of social behaviors? This
issue is of interest because how we judge or label someone’s behavior affects how we
respond to it. For example, labeling a behavior “aggressive” is more likely to lead to
a negative response than labeling it “assertive.”
Three sets of factors—characteristics of the child, the adult, and the context—
can subtly influence social judgments and the labeling of social behaviors. We are
more likely to judge or label a behavior negatively if it occurs in boys, in children
who have been temperamentally difficult as infants, in unattractive children, in
children with a history of other forms of deviance, and in children from lower-status
families (Cummings et al., 2000; Moeller, 2001; Putnam et al., 2002). We are also
more likely to judge a child’s behavior negatively if we ourselves are depressed or
abusive (Cicchetti & Toth, 2015; Gotlib & Colich, 2014). Finally, we are more likely
to judge a child’s behavior negatively if it occurs in a stricter and more demanding
context (e.g., in a classroom rather than a park). Negative labeling not only affects
our behavior, it can also lead children to detrimental self-labeling and expose them
to additional risks that push them toward more negative behavior.

Do Developmental Psychologists “Own” Social

Development?
Developmental psychologists are the scientists who most commonly study chil-
dren’s social development. But are developmental psychologists the only ones who
study social development? The simple answer is no. Scholars in other fields including
pediatrics, psychiatry, philosophy, demography, anthropology, economics, sociology,
14  Chapter 1 Introduction

law, history, and genetics have also contributed to our understanding of children’s
social development. Pediatricians have advanced our knowledge of the best ways
to evaluate, identify, and understand early social and cognitive capacities of young
infants and the implications of early experience for later development (Ellis &
Boyce, 2011; Shonkoff, 2012). Clinical psychologists and psychiatrists have focused
attention on abnormal social development, such as autism and conduct disorders
(Cicchetti & Toth, 2015; Rutter, 2011). Anthropologists have documented cross-­
cultural variations in children’s social lives (Weisner, 2008). Demographers have
documented changes in the ethnic and racial composition of families in our own
and other societies (Hernandez, 2012). Economists have addressed the effects of
poverty on children and families (Duncan, et al., 2017). Sociologists have provided
a better understanding of how social class and social mobility alter children’s social
outcomes (Lareau, 2011). Historians and philosophers have demonstrated that his-
torical eras shape children’s social attitudes, aspirations, and actions (­Matthews,
2010; Mintz, 2004). Legal scholars have informed the study of moral behavior and
provided guidelines for social policy (Wald, 2013). Geneticists have signaled the
importance of the interplay between genetics and environment and have identified
genes and clusters of genes that control children’s social behavior (Gregory et al.,
2011; Plomin et al., 2012)—and even more recently have ushered into develop-
mental psychology the science of epigenetics—the study of mechanisms by which
genetic expression is modified by experience (Lickliter, 2017). In the final analysis,
children and their social development are too important to be left in the hands
of a single discipline. By combining diverse disciplinary perspectives and encour-
aging scholars from different disciplines to work together on common problems,
we are most likely to figure out the complexities of children’s social development
(Sameroff, 2009, 2010).

Is Social Development Focused on Only Basic

Research or on Applied and Policy Relevant
Concerns as Well?
Clearly the search for the fundamental principles and processes that help us explain
social development is a central goal of a science of children’s social development.
However, applied research into important social problems such as delinquency, child
care, or adoption are of interest as well and, in turn, can inform our basic research
questions. The effects of the rise in childcare by caregivers outside the family on
infant and child attachment relationships with their parents and others can provide
an opportunity to explore issues about the attachment process such as the range
of agents of attachment to whom a child can develop a close relationship. Studies
of adoption can inform us about the relative importance of genetic ties and social
experience with a nonbiologically related caregiver on parent–infant relationships.
Finally, research—basic and applied—can inform social policies that alter children’s
lives such as child welfare programs or early education opportunities such as Head
Start. Clearly, basic, applied, and policy research mutually inform each other.

Theoretical Perspectives on Social

Development
Theories about how children grow and mature play a central part in the scien-
tific study of children’s social development. Theories serve two main functions.
 Theoretical Perspectives on Social Development  15

TABLE 1.1

Theoretical Perspectives’ Positions on Some Critical Questions

Question 1: Question 4: Question 5: Question 6:
Biology (B) Continuity (C) Situation (S) Universal
versus versus versus (U)
Theorist/ Environ- Discontinuity Individual versus
Theory ment (E) (D) (I) Cultural (C)
Freud B+E D I C+U
Erikson E D I C+U
Learning E C S U
Cognitive E C S+I U
social
learning
Social E C S+I U
information
processing
Piaget B×E D I U
Vygotsky E C S C
Ecological E C S C
Ethological B+E D S U
Evolutionary B+E S U
Behavior B+E I+S U
genetics B×E
Life span B+E C S+I C

+ Both are important. × Both interact in producing developmental outcomes.

First, they help organize and integrate existing information into coherent and inter-
esting accounts of children’s development. Second, they lead to testable and, impor-
tantly, falsifiable hypotheses and predictions about children’s behavior. Although
no theory (yet) accounts for all aspects of social development, some grand theories
from the past, such as Freud’s psychodynamic theory, Piaget’s cognitive structural
theory, and Watson’s theory of learning, were attempts to explain development in
a general way. In contrast, many current theories are focused on a single aspect or
domain of development. These theories do not assume that a common set of pro-
cesses applies across domains; different processes may operate in different areas.
Theories vary in their focus and their position on the critical questions we have
just discussed. It may be helpful as you read this section to refer to Table 1.1, which
provides an overview of how theories are related to some of these critical questions.

Psychodynamic Perspective
Sigmund Freud initiated a revolution in the way we think about development. His
views on the critical roles played by instinctual urges and by events in the early years
of childhood were radical in the early 1900s and had an enormous influence on psy-
chological and psychiatric thinking. In this section, we discuss both Freudian theory
and the developmental theory of Erik Erikson, who accepted many of Freud’s basic
ideas but expanded them to include the full life span from childhood to old age.
16  Chapter 1 Introduction

Freud’s theory According to Freud’s psychodynamic theory of development,

psychological growth is governed by unconscious biologically based drives and
instincts, such as sex, aggression, and hunger, and is shaped by encounters with the
environment, especially other family members. The developing personality consists
of three interrelated parts: the id, the ego, and the superego. The infant is largely
under the control of the instinctual id, which operates on the pleasure principle and
tries to maximize pleasure and satisfy needs immediately. As the infant develops, the
rational ego emerges and attempts to gratify needs through appropriate, socially
constructive behavior. The superego appears when the child internalizes—that is,
accepts and absorbs—parental or societal morals, values, and roles and develops a
conscience, or ability to apply moral values to his or her own acts.
To Freud, development was a discontinuous process, organized in five discrete
stages (see Table 1.2). In the oral stage, infants are preoccupied with activities such
as eating, sucking, and biting and with objects, such as food, that can be put in the
mouth. Freud assumed that infants derive great enjoyment and satisfaction from
these oral behaviors. In the second or sometimes third year, priorities change: In
this anal stage, children are forced to learn to postpone the pleasure of expelling
feces, as parents struggle with the task of toilet training. From the end of the anal
stage until the fifth or sixth year, children are in what Freud called the phallic stage:
Their sexual curiosity is aroused, and their preoccupation with their own sexual anat-
omy and the pleasures of genital stimulation alert them to the differences in sexual
anatomy of the sexes. During this period, boys become enmeshed in the Oedipus
complex, in which they are attracted to their mother and feel themselves to be jeal-
ous rivals of their father but also fear that the father will punish them by cutting off
their genitals. The Oedipus complex resolves when boys give up their sexual feelings
for their mother and identify with their father. In the Electra complex, a term coined
by Carl Jung, girls blame their mother for their own lack of a penis and focus their
sexual feelings on their father. When they finally realize that they cannot possess
their father as a mate, girls transfer their feelings to other males. They relinquish
their resentment of their mother and instead begin to identify with her.
These dramatic events are followed by the latency period, during which, Freud
believed, sexual drives are temporarily submerged. In this period, which lasts from
about 6 years of age to puberty, children avoid relationships with opposite-sex peers
and become intensely involved with peers of the same sex. This turning from the
family to the peer group is associated with the acquisition of the social skills neces-
sary to function effectively in the world. In the final stage of Freud’s theory, the
genital period, sexual desires reemerge, but this time they are more appropriately
directed toward peers. Once again, biological change—in this case, puberty—plays
a significant role in defining the focus of development.
According to Freud, the way children negotiate these stages has a profound effect
on their later behavior and personality. For example, failure to satisfy needs for oral
stimulation in infancy causes adults to be more likely to smoke, chew gum, talk,
and kiss a lot. Children who are toilet trained early and strictly are likely to become
“anal” adults who are more likely to demand neatness, cleanliness, and orderliness
in their rooms and their partners. Research has not provided support for most of
Freud’s specific theoretical propositions, but the general view that events in infancy
and childhood have a formative impact on later development remains a central
belief in developmental psychology.

Erikson’s theory Erik Erikson accepted many of Freud’s general principles, but
he gave more emphasis to the effects of the social environment on development.
 Theoretical Perspectives on Social Development  17

TABLE 1.2

Freud’s and Erikson’s Developmental Stages

Stage of Development
Age Period
(years) Freud Erikson
0–1 Oral: Focus on eating and taking things into Infancy: Task: To develop basic trust in
the mouth oneself and others
Risk: Mistrust of others and
lack of self-confidence
1–3 Anal: Emphasis on toilet training; first experi- Early Task: To learn self-control and
ence with discipline and authority childhood: establish autonomy
Risk: Shame and doubt about
one’s own capabilities
3–6 Phallic: Increase in sexual urges arouses curiosity Play age: Task: To develop initiative in
and alerts children to gender differ- mastering environment
ences; period critical to formation of Risk: Feelings of guilt over
gender identity aggressiveness and daring
6–12 Latency: Sexual urges repressed; emphasis on School age: Task: To develop industry
education and the beginnings of con- Risk: Feelings of inferiority over
cern for others real or imagined failure to
master tasks
12–20 Genital: With puberty, sexual desires reemerge Adolescence: Task: To achieve a sense of
and adolescents and adults express identity
these urges in romantic relationships Risk: Role confusion over who
with peers, possibly for reproduction. and what individual wants
to be
20–30 Young adult- Task: To achieve intimacy with
hood: others
Risk: Shaky identity may lead
to avoidance of others and
isolation
30–65 Adulthood: Task: To express oneself
through generativity
Risk: Inability to create chil-
dren, ideas, or products
may lead to stagnation
65+ Mature age: Task: To achieve a sense of
integrity
Risk: Doubts and unfulfilled
desires may lead to despair

His psychosocial theory, like Freud’s psychosexual theory, was based on the belief
that development is discontinuous and proceeds through a series of stages. How-
ever, Erikson extended his stages through adulthood (see Table 1.2). For every
stage, he specified the personal and social tasks that an individual must accomplish
as well as the risks he or she would confront by failing to accomplish the tasks of that
particular stage (Erikson, 1950, 1959, 1980).
In Erikson’s first stage, the main task is acquiring a sense of basic trust. By learn-
ing to trust their parents or caretakers, infants learn to trust their environments
and themselves. If they find others untrustworthy, they develop mistrust of both
18  Chapter 1 Introduction

themselves and the world. In the second stage, children in early childhood must
learn self-control and develop autonomy; they develop shame and self-doubt if they
remain worried about their continuing dependency and their inability to live up to
adult expectations. During the third stage, the play age, between about 3 and 6 years,
children struggle to develop initiative and to master their environment, but at the
same time they often feel guilty if they are too aggressive, too daring. Between about
6 and 12 years, during the school age, children try to develop a sense of industry,
largely by succeeding at school. This is also a period of constant social comparison
in which children evaluate their skills against those of their peers. Real or imagined
failure at either academic or social tasks may bring feelings of inferiority.
In the fifth stage, adolescents’ main focus is the search for a stable definition of
the self—that is, for a self-identity—and the danger is role confusion if they can-
not determine who or what they want to be. In the next stage, young adulthood,
the task is to achieve intimacy with others and, in particular, a stable intimate and
sexual relationship. Problems in earlier stages, such as a shaky sense of identity, may
lead to avoidance of relations with others and thus to isolation. The task that con-
fronts the adult in middle age is to create something—children, ideas, or products.
If not given expression, this quality of generativity can deteriorate into stagnation. In
Erikson’s last stage, ego integrity is the older adult’s goal. When reflection on one’s
past accomplishments and failures leads to doubt and regret, despair may be the result.

Psychodynamic perspective: An evaluation Freud’s and Erikson’s develop-

mental theories helped shape many of the concerns underlying the modern study
of social development, including the effect of early experience on later behavior,
the influence of the family on social behavior, and the impact of social interaction
on development. Freud and Erikson identified as important many current topics,
including aggression, morality, gender roles, attachment, and identity. In Chapter 4,
“Attachment,” you will see that Freud’s focus on the early mother–infant relationship
continues to be influential. He also suggested that gender roles are shaped in part
by biological factors as well as by the kinds of relationships we develop with our par-
ents, as we discuss in Chapter 10, “Sex and Gender.” Freud was an early proponent of
aggression as a basic biological drive, a view that continues in current discussions of
the foundations of aggression covered in Chapter 12, “Aggression.” Although Freud
was unable to measure unconscious thoughts and motives, scientists today have con-
firmed that these underlie prejudice and stereotyping as we discuss in Chapter 6, “Self
and Other.” Erikson’s influence on our contemporary theorizing is evident too. For
example, he is credited with alerting us to the importance of identity in development
as you will read in Chapter 6, “Self and Other.” Just as important was his recognition
that development is a lifelong process, which continues to resonate in the present era
in our discussions of the importance of timing of events in adult lives such as job loss,
divorce, and childbirth in Chapter 7, “Family” and Chapter 13, “Policy.”
Many problems plague this theoretical perspective, however. First, the central
claims of Freud’s theory are difficult to test empirically. Second, his theory was
based on information gathered via retrospective methods from adults undergoing
therapy rather than children behaving socially. Third, Freud’s methods of collect-
ing information, such as free association, recollections of childhood experiences,
and reports of adult dreams, were potentially biased: Freud selectively focused on
certain childhood experiences and the patients themselves may have forgotten
or distorted their earlier childhood experiences, a common problem with retro-
spective (versus prospective) data gathering methods (see Chapter 2 on “Research
Methods”). Finally, the focus on childhood sexuality was both too narrow and too
 Theoretical Perspectives on Social Development  19

nto Adulthood: Fatherhood and Generativity

Erikson argued that the main generative at midlife than the men who
psychosocial task of middle remained childless. The men who experienced
adulthood is to attain a favora- more parental generativity by being actively
ble balance between gen- involved in nurturing their children’s social-
erativity and self-absorption. By emotional development were more likely than
generativity, he meant any creative activity that less-involved fathers to engage in generative
contributes to the positive advancement and activities outside the family. These associations
encouragement of future generations. It includes between types of generativity were not due
efforts as diverse as producing new ideas, new to the men’s incomes, educations, or IQs.
works of art or literature, and new products, They were evidence of an underlying attitude.
nurturing the growth of other individuals, and As one son, describing his highly involved
shepherding the development of a broader father’s attitude toward the wider community,
community. Adults can express their generativity put it:
by becoming parents or mentors. John Snarey
(1993) identified three types of generativity “My father always takes on other people’s
in which men can participate: first, biological problems. He has a big heart.”
generativity, when they experience the birth
of their biological children; second, parental More generative men also experienced social
generativity, when they become involved in advantages. Parentally generative fathers had
rearing their children; third, societal generativity, better marriages and experienced more occu-
when they care for younger adults, serving as a pational mobility. Perhaps their social-emotional
mentor, providing leadership, and contributing development was promoted by learning to
to generational continuity. Examples of this last meet the demands of parenting; a father can-
type of generativity include serving as a master not be self-absorbed and preoccupied; he
for an apprentice, coaching an athletic team, must respond to the needs of his children. This
founding a neighborhood improvement commit- experience would pave the way for the man to
tee, serving on a board of a community agency, share his time and talents to help others in the
managing employees, and advising or supervis- wider community. In Erikson’s terms, the experi-
ing students. ence of parenting reduces a focus on the self
Snarey (1993) examined generativity in 240 and stimulates generative actions on behalf of
men followed from adolescence (age 14) others. These generative men followed Erikson’s
to midlife (age 47). He found that the men Golden Rule (Erikson, 1980, p. 36): “Do unto others
who became fathers and thus experienced what will advance the growth of others even as it
biological generativity were more societally advances your own.”

exaggerated to provide a solid base for a theory of development. Moreover, the

views were biased in that they implied the superiority of men (e.g., the view that girls
were upset because they did not have a penis); however, this perspective regarding
men and women did reflect common views at the time. Although Erikson did study
real children, his work suffered from many of the same methodological problems as
Freud’s. Erikson’s observations of children’s play, for example, are open to alterna-
tive interpretations, and his conclusions were not easily verified. His limited specifi-
cation of the mechanisms that account for development from one stage to another
is another weakness. In spite of these limitations, the psychodynamic perspective
casts a long and influential shadow over the field of social development.
20  Chapter 1 Introduction

Traditional Learning Theory Perspective

Learning theories offer a quite different perspective on development. In this sec-
tion, we explore several learning theories that have been used to explain social
development: classical conditioning, operant conditioning, and drive-reduction
theory.

Classical and operant conditioning The conditioning approach to develop-

ment is best exemplified by the work of John Watson, Ivan Pavlov, and B. F. Skinner.
According to these theorists, the same principles of learning shape development
throughout childhood and, indeed, across the entire life span; development is a
continuous process, not occurring in stages; and children play a relatively passive
role, directed by events in the environment.
A good example of classical conditioning is Pavlov’s famous experiment dem-
onstrating that a dog learns to salivate at the sound of a bell if that sound is always
associated with the presentation of food (Pavlov, 1927): After repeated pairing of
bell and food, the dog salivates at the sound of the bell alone. Watson used classical
conditioning to manipulate children’s behaviors and emotions. Most famously, he
conditioned an 11-month-old infant, Little Albert, to fear furry animals by repeat-
edly showing the baby, who was easily frightened by loud noises, a white rat and
simultaneously making a loud noise (Beck, Levinson, & Irons, 2009). Extrapolating
from his work, Watson boasted (1926, p. 10):

Give me a dozen healthy infants, well-formed, and my own specific world to bring them
up in and I’ll guarantee to take any one at random and train him to become any type
of specialist I might select—doctor, lawyer, artist, merchant-chief and, yes, even beggar-
man and thief, regardless of his talents, penchants, tendencies, abilities, vocations and
race of his ancestors.
(Watson, J. B. (1926). What the nursery has to say about instincts. In C. Murcheson
(Ed.), Psychologies of 1925 (pp. 1–35). Reprinted by permission of Taylor & Francis
Ltd., http://www.informaworld.com)

Operant conditioning occurs when a behavior is systematically followed by a

reward or punishment. Following a child’s behavior by positive reinforcement in
the form of a friendly smile, praise, or a special treat increases the likelihood that
the child will exhibit the behavior again. In contrast, punishment in the form of a
frown, criticism, or the withdrawal of a privilege such as watching television is likely
to decrease the chance that the child will engage in that behavior again. Skinner
(1953) explained a wide range of behaviors using operant-reinforcement princi-
ples, and his followers applied these principles to modify children’s social behaviors
in classrooms, institutions, and homes, as part of the behavior-modification move-
ment of the 1960s and 1970s (Bijou & Baer, 1961, 1978). Skinner also emphasized
the importance of reinforcement schedules and showed that if reinforcement is
provided on an intermittent schedule rather than continuously (every time the
behavior occurs), the reinforced behavior will be more persistent and resistant to
extinction.
In another version of learning theory, drive-reduction theory, Clark Hull (1943)
argued that the association of stimulus and response in classical and operant con-
ditioning results in learning only if it is accompanied by drive reduction. Primary
drives such as hunger and thirst act as motivators. They create tensions that are
reduced when the person eats or drinks, and, as a consequence, the actions of
 Theoretical Perspectives on Social Development  21

eating or drinking are reinforced and become increasingly strong habits. Through
classical conditioning, stimuli associated with the pleasurable feeling resulting
­
from satisfaction of basic drives become rewarding and valued. This theory of drive
reduction later became fused with Freud’s focus on the feeding situation as a critical
context for the development of social relationships. Researchers studying children’s
early social attachments suggested that nursing at the mother’s breast reduces
infants’ hunger and this is why infants learn to love their mothers. This position was
challenged by later theorists as we elaborate on in greater detail in Chapter 4 on
“Attachment.”

Learning theory approaches: An evaluation Learning theories continue to be

useful for explaining some aspects of children’s social development. Classical con-
ditioning seems to account for the development of strong emotions in response to
certain specific objects, and, more important, it can be used to reduce such strong
emotions through systematic desensitization (Gelfand & Drew, 2003; Szigethy et al.,
2012). Children can learn to overcome their fear of snakes, dogs, doctors, or the
dark by gradual exposure to the feared object or event. For example, a child who
is afraid of snakes is asked to imagine a snake, then is shown a snake in a cage at a
distance, then is asked to move closer to the snake, and eventually is encouraged to
handle the reptile; at each step, the child is taught to relax to counteract the muscle
tension associated with fear or anxiety.
Current researchers have also shown the value of operant conditioning for
understanding how children’s behaviors develop and how they can be modified.
Gerald Patterson (1993, 2002; Patterson & Forgatch, 2010) showed that children’s
aggressive behavior is often increased by the attention (positive reinforcement)
that parents pay to such acts as hitting and teasing. He also showed that punishing
these acts by a time-out—a brief period of isolation away from other people—
can help diminish aggressive behavior. Operant conditioning has been incorpo-
rated into many applied programs to help teachers and parents change children’s
behavior.
Although these approaches can modify children’s undesirable behaviors and
provide clues about the origins of such behaviors, they are not enough. For one
thing, they are not sensitive to developmental changes in children’s cognitive,
emotional, and social abilities. Their one-size-fits-all nature does not differentiate
among children at different ages. As children get older and advance in cognitive
and verbal abilities, conditioning techniques may be less effective or efficient for
modifying behavior. Alternative strategies, such as reasoning and problem solving,
which use children’s cognitive and verbal skills, become more effective (Gershoff,
2010, 2013). Conditioning theories also give scant attention to biological differ-
ences in children’s temperaments and predispositions, which could influence the
effectiveness of these approaches for different children (Kim & Kochanska, 2012;
Kochanska et al., 2015). Learning theories offer some general principles of social
development but do not provide a complete explanation or account for all indi-
vidual differences among children.

Cognitive Learning Perspective

Cognitive social-learning theory According to cognitive social-learning theory,
children learn social behaviors by observing and imitating other people. Albert
Bandura was one of the first to demonstrate that children who watched another
person behaving aggressively were likely to imitate that person’s aggressive actions.
22  Chapter 1 Introduction

They did not need to be rewarded, have a drive satisfied, or have their aggression
elicited by a punch. Bandura showed preschool children an adult hitting and kick-
ing a large Bobo doll (an inflatable clown doll that pops back up after each hit),
either live or on videotape (Bandura et al., 1963). When the children were later
given the chance to play with the doll, they were more likely to attack it and play
aggressively than were children who had not seen the aggressive model. Moreover,
the children reproduced many of the model’s behaviors accurately and precisely.
Neither the adult model nor the children had received any apparent reinforce-
ment, yet quite clearly the children had learned some specific social behaviors. In
Bandura’s words (1977, p. 38):

“After the capacity for observational learning has fully developed, one cannot keep
people from learning what they have seen.”

As the name cognitive social-learning theory implies, observational learning goes

beyond simple imitation. Children do not imitate automatically; cognition is part
of the process. Bandura (1997) suggested that four sets of factors determine how
well children learn by observing another person’s behavior. First, there are factors
that affect whether children pay attention to the model’s behavior. Children inter-
pret and process the social behaviors they observe on the basis of their past expe-
rience, their relationship with the model, the situation in which the observation
takes place, and their own personality. They are more likely to pay attention to the
model’s behavior if they have been rewarded for imitating models in the past, if
they have a positive relationship with the model and see him or her as an authority
figure, if they are uncertain about how to behave in the situation, and if they have a
personality characterized by a high level of attentional focusing. Second, there are
factors that affect children’s retention of the observed behavior. To be able to imitate
a behavior, children must be able to remember it, and children who use rehearsal,
organization, and other strategies to recall the observed behavior are more effective
learners. Third, there are factors that affect children’s reproduction of the observed
behavior. Young children who see an older child or an adult perform a complicated
social ritual are not likely to be able to reproduce it, no matter how much attention
they paid to the behavior or how often they try to copy it. Finally, in addition to
these three sets of cognitive factors, children’s motivation to reproduce the model’s
actions affects their learning. They are more likely to imitate the model if they are
motivated to do so by extrinsic or intrinsic incentives.

Beyond modeling: reciprocal determination and self-efficacy In the real

world, unlike the psychology laboratory, children not only learn from models’
behavior, they also influence the model in a process Bandura called reciprocal deter-
mination. Children’s actions produce responses by other people, leading to changes
in the social environment and changes in the child, in a kind of social ping-pong
game that developmental psychologists call a transactional process (see Figure 1.2).
For example, 3-year-old Alex acts by sharing a toy with a peer; the peer responds
positively with a smile. Alex, having received reinforcement for his behavior, repeats
the action and shares another toy; the peer continues the positive interaction with
more shared play. Ultimately Alex develops a positive social attitude, and the two
children form a relationship. In this example, Alex has created a positive play envi-
ronment for himself through his positive actions. Another child who is suspicious
and hostile toward other children is more likely to elicit negative reactions from
peers and through continued hostility to create an unfriendly and perhaps lonely
 Theoretical Perspectives on Social Development  23

Child’s behavior Social environment

FIGURE 1.2 Possible route to
Child shares a toy with a the development of sharing:
peer Reciprocal determination
in action.

Peer smiles

Child shares a second

toy with peer because
the reaction was positive

Peer invites child to play

and share the toys

Child develops a
prosocial attitude as a
consequence of these
experiences

Peer seeks out the child

as a playmate in the
future

environment. Thus, according to cognitive social-learning theory, social interac-

tions occur on a two-way street, and children actively contribute to their own social
development.
One of the strengths of this theory is its focus on cognition as a guide to social
action. As Bandura (1986, p. 15) argued,

“A theory that denies that thoughts can regulate actions does not lend itself readily to
the explanation of complex human behavior.”

To illustrate the role of cognition in theoretical accounts of social development,

Bandura suggested that children develop a sense of self-efficacy whereby they con-
tribute to their own social development by their perception of how competent they
are. According to Bandura (2006), children who perceive themselves to be compe-
tent are high in self-efficacy; they believe that they can solve social problems and are
willing to try. Like The Little Engine that Could (Piper, 1930), they say to themselves,
“I think I can. I think I can. I think I can.” Other children who have low self-efficacy
are pessimistic about their ability to deal with a social situation and either avoid
trying or put forth only a modest effort when entering a social setting or confront-
ing a social problem. Self-efficacy is especially important for determining whether
children—or adults—persist in the face of failure or rejection. Only a person with
high self-efficacy would persist when he lost eight elections, including two for the
U.S. Senate, one for the U.S. House of Representatives, and one for the Vice Presi-
dency (as Abraham Lincoln did) or when his singing group failed to get a recording
contract because “We don’t like their sound” (as happened to the Beatles).
24  Chapter 1 Introduction

Children develop self-efficacy from a number of sources, according to Bandura.

First, self-efficacy comes from direct experience when children have success in pre-
vious similar attempts. Second, self-efficacy comes from vicarious experience when
children observe other people who are somehow like them succeeding at similar
tasks. Third, parents or peers can be sources of self-efficacy; for example, when
an adolescent is rejected by his dream date for the high school dance, his peers
might convince him that he should try again, raising his sense of social self-efficacy.
Fourth, self-efficacy comes from biological and affective reactions to social situa-
tions. If a girl is in a state of fear and anxiety every time she contemplates approach-
ing strangers, her self-efficacy about successful social engagement of new people is
likely to be low; if she feels calm, her self-efficacy will be high. Finally, self-efficacy
can come from a group such as a peer group, a family, a school, or even a neighbor-
hood. The group’s shared belief in its ability as a unit to achieve some goal is termed
collective efficacy (Bandura, 2006).

Cognitive social-learning theory: An evaluation The value of the cognitive

social-learning approach is indisputable (Grusec, 2011; Miller, 2011), and in this
textbook you will see many examples of insights about social development that have
been inspired by this theory. Cognitive social-learning theory, particularly with its
focus on observational learning, has advanced our understanding of the effects of
exposure to television on children’s aggression and prosocial behavior, discussed
in Chapter 9, “School, Mentors, Media,” Chapter 11, “Morality,” and Chapter 12,
“Aggression.” The theory has contributed to our understanding of gender roles
(in Chapter 10, “Sex and Gender”) and moral behavior (in Chapter 11, “Moral-
ity”) as well. The theory has also been influential in clinical child psychology and
has guided the development of therapeutic approaches for helping children over-
come fear and phobias through exposure to models who gradually overcome their
own fears. It has been given rigorous experimental testing. Bandura’s self-efficacy
concept has been useful in explaining children’s ways of dealing with social failure
(discussed in Chapter 8, “Peers”), and his concept of collective efficacy has been
used to explain why some schools and communities function well and empower
their constituents whereas others do not (discussed in Chapter 9, “School, Men-
tors, Media”).
In spite of these strengths, however, the theory has limitations. First, even
though it has influenced the study of social development, cognitive social-learning
theory is not very developmental. Bandura paid little attention to the ways obser-
vational learning or self-efficacy change with age. Second, although individual
differences are recognized in the theory, there is little elaboration of the role of
genetic, hormonal, or other biological influences. Third, even though the envi-
ronment plays an important part in the theory, most of the evidence is based on
experimental studies conducted in the laboratory. The degree to which these find-
ings generalize to real-world contexts outside the laboratory is unclear. Finally,
the sensitivity of the principles to cultural variations has received relatively little
attention.

Information-Processing Perspective
Information-processing theories use computer processing as a metaphor for the
way people think (Klahr & MacWhinney, 1998; Siegler, 2016; Siegler & Alibali,
2005). A person attends to input information, changes it into a mental represen-
tation, stores it in memory, compares it to other memories, generates response
 Theoretical Perspectives on Social Development  25

possibilities, makes a decision about the most appropriate response, and, finally,
takes some action. These operations are analogous to computer processing in which
information in the form of symbols is entered into the system, undergoes a series of
transformations, and finally provides an answer or output. Information-processing
theorists who study development see it as continuous, with the quality of thinking at
any age depending on the information the person is able to represent, the ways the
person can operate on the information, and the amount of information the person
can keep in mind at one time (Siegler, 2000, 2016).

Social information processing Social information-processing theory is a version

of information-processing theory that provides a powerful analytic tool for under-
standing social behaviors such as social problem solving and aggression (Arsenio &
Lemerise, 2010; Dodge, 2011). According to this theory, in social situations, chil-
dren proceed through a series of cognitive-processing decisions or steps, such as
assessing another child’s intention, deciding on possible responses, evaluating the
likely outcomes of various courses of action, and finally selecting and acting on
their decision (Figure 1.3; for more details see Chapter 8, “Peers” and Chapter 12,
“Aggression”).

Social information processing: An evaluation Social information-processing

theory has generated many insights about the mental steps children engage in when
they deal with a social situation. It underscores the links between cognitive under-
standing and social behavior and has led to numerous demonstrations of how cog-
nitive processes influence children’s social decisions and behavior (Crick & Dodge,
1994; Gifford-Smith & Rabiner, 2004). In Chapter 8, “Peers,” we show the relevance
of this theory for understanding children’s peer interactions, and in Chapter 12,

5. Decide on an action
Review possible outcomes
Evaluate likely response
4. Review Evaluate self-efficacy
possible actions Select action

FIGURE 1.3 An information-processing model

of children’s social behavior. Children perceive
and interpret a social situation, decide what
Database they want to achieve, review possible responses,
Memory store choose a behavior they think will accomplish
3. Clarify goals Acquired rules 6. Act on decision
their goal, and act on their decision. The
Social schemas
child’s database consists of memories of other
Social knowledge
situations and knowledge of social rules and
experiences. As the double arrows indicate,
the child’s thinking and action both draw on
the database and contribute to it.
2. Interpret cues 1. Encode cues Source: Copyright © 1994 by the American Psycho-
Attribute causes (one´s own thoughts as well logical Association. Reproduced with permission. The
Attribute intent as others´ behaviors) official citation that should be used in referencing
this material is “Crick, N. R., & Dodge, K. A. (1994).
Evaluate goal
A review and reformulation of social information-
Evaluate past performance
processing mechanisms in children’s social adjustment.
Evaluate self and others Psychological Bulletin, 115(1), 74–101.” The use of APA
information does not imply endorsement by APA.
26  Chapter 1 Introduction

“Aggression,” the theory helps us understand how children’s evaluation of social

encounters can lead sometimes to aggression and sometimes to peaceful resolu-
tion. However, this theory provides little insight into how social-cognitive process-
ing changes with age. The theory has also been criticized for its lack of attention to
emotional factors and how they modify cognitive decision making in social encoun-
ters (Arsenio & Lemerise, 2010; Lemerise & Arsenio, 2000). It presents a profile
of a thoughtful, reflective child who goes through a series of deliberate cognitive-­
processing steps before taking action. It does not account for the fact that
much social interaction is routine and automatic and does not require delibera-
tion. It does not account for the impulsive, reactive, even unconscious nature of
social responding in familiar situations with familiar people. The value of the social
information-processing approach is perhaps most evident in explaining social
behavior in novel or unfamiliar social situations or as a description of how modes
of social action are initially acquired.

Cognitive Developmental Perspective

To understand children’s social development, it is important to understand
their cognitive development as well. Two major theorists—Jean Piaget and Lev
Vygotsky—have shaped our understanding of cognition in childhood.

Piaget’s cognitive developmental theory According to Swiss psychologist

Piaget (1928), two processes play a major role in increasing children’s cognitive
understanding. First, children use their current knowledge as a framework for
absorption or assimilation of new experiences. Second, children modify their exist-
ing knowledge through the process of accommodation of their mental structures. As
they develop, children increase their understanding through the interplay between
these two complementary processes.
According to this viewpoint, children actively interpret and make sense of the
information and events they encounter. They are not merely passive receivers of
experience who are shaped by the reinforcements and models to which they are
exposed; they actively seek experience to increase their knowledge. Because of their
continual interpretation and reorganization of experience, children construct their
own reality, which may differ from the objective reality perceived by adults. The way
children perceive and organize new information depends on their level of cognitive
development. Piaget proposed that all children go through a number of stages of
cognitive development, each characterized by qualitatively different ways of think-
ing, organizing knowledge, and solving problems (Figure1.1b; Table 1.3).
Young children are more bound to sensory and motor information than are ado-
lescents and adults, and they are also less flexible and less able to think symbolically
and abstractly. Not until adolescence does the ability to use logic and to engage in
deductive reasoning appear. Young children are also more egocentric—that is, they
are more centered on their own perspective than are older children and are less able
to take the viewpoint or understand the feelings and perceptions of others. Accord-
ing to Piaget, we may think of cognitive development as a de-centering process in
which the child shifts from a focus on self, immediate sensory experience, and single-
component problems to a more complex, multifaceted, and abstract view of the world.

Piaget’s theory: An evaluation It would be a mistake to underestimate the

importance of Piaget’s ideas for social development, even though Piaget himself
 Theoretical Perspectives on Social Development  27

TABLE 1.3

Piaget’s Stages of Cognitive Development

Stage Age Range (Years) Characteristics and Achievements
Sensorimotor 0–2 Differentiates self from objects and other people, seeks interesting
sights, develops object permanence and basic understanding of
causality, begins to imitate and engage in imaginative play
Preoperational 2–7 Begins to use symbols and language; problem solving is intuitive
and thinking is egocentric, irreversible, centered
Concrete operations 7–12 Can reason logically about present objects, grasps concept of
conservation, can take the perspective of another person, can
organize objects into classes and series
Formal operations >12 Thinking is flexible and complex; can think about abstract ideas
and hypotheses

might not have fully appreciated their implications. He was busy investigating chil-
dren’s transactions with inanimate objects and largely ignored the fact that these
objects were often in the hands of other people and that children learned about
them in the context of social interactions. Piaget’s theory was helpful for illuminat-
ing how children’s cognitive development modifies their social reactions. For exam-
ple, his concept of object permanence—the realization that objects and people do
not cease to exist when they are no longer visible—has been used in explaining
how children develop emotional attachments to their caregivers, as we discuss in
Chapter 4, “Attachment.” His notion of egocentrism has also been used: When chil-
dren get older and less egocentric, they are able to switch to different perspectives,
and this ability allows them to understand other people’s viewpoints, as we discuss
in Chapter 6, “Self and Other.” One of Piaget’s best-known contributions to social
development is his descriptions of the shifts in children’s judgments about the right-
ness or wrongness of moral decisions, as we discuss in Chapter 11, “Morality.”
However, Piaget’s theory has been criticized for its assertion that development
proceeds through a series of universal, invariant, and irreversible stages (Bjorklund,
2011; Miller, 2011) and its neglect of social, emotional, and cultural influences on
development (Gauvain, 2001b). Piaget’s methods, especially those involving his
interviews of children, have also been criticized for their lack of scientific rigor
(Baillargeon, 2002; Dunn, 1988). In spite of these criticisms, Piaget’s influence on
research about social development has been widespread, as you will see in later dis-
cussions of social cognition, theory of mind, and moral development.

Social cognitive domain theory Although Piaget did not invest a lot of energy
in trying to explain children’s social development, he influenced modern theorists
and researchers who did. For example, Lawrence Kohlberg (1969, 1985) and Elliot
Turiel (1983, 2015) used notions from Piaget’s theory to explain how children
make social judgments about their world and come to understand social and moral
rules. Brian Bigelow (1977) demonstrated how children’s conceptions of friendship
progress through three stages from relatively concrete expectations that friends
help and share to more abstract notions that involve expectations of genuineness,
intimacy, and self-disclosure. Perhaps the major advance that the developmental
28  Chapter 1 Introduction

cognitive perspective provided was that it led to the recognition that children cat-
egorize social issues into specific domains and make different judgments depend-
ing on the domain (Smetana, 2017). This notion of domain specificity challenged
Piaget’s theory, which suggested that all domains of knowledge are governed by the
same cognitive processes and principles. Social cognitive-domain theory focuses on
children’s understanding of social issues and is less concerned with links between
understanding and social behavior or with the processes that underlie children’s
abilities to make domain-specific judgments (Grusec & Davidov, 2010).

Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory The developmental theory proposed by Soviet

psychologist Lev Vygotsky is unique in its emphasis on the importance of the child’s
social world (Daniels et al., 2007). Although Vygotsky was a contemporary of Piaget,
his sociocultural theory of development contrasted markedly. He put forward three
principles of cultural influence. First, cultures vary in the settings and practices
they provide. Second, these settings and practices facilitate children’s development.
Third, children learn about their culture from experienced members of the cul-
ture. Whereas Piaget generally focused on development achieved by the individual
child with little attention to the social context, Vygotsky proposed that development
is best understood as a product of social interaction. He suggested that develop-
ment occurs as children and their more mature social partners—parents, teachers,
and older children—work together to solve problems. Thus, his theory focused on
dyadic interaction rather than individual behavior. He was also less concerned with
children’s abilities at a particular point in time than with their potential for growth.
To assess this potential and to understand how development occurs, he focused
on the zone of proximal development, which is the difference between children’s
level of performance working alone and their level of performance working with
an experienced partner. According to Vygotsky, the assistance provided by other
people enables children to reach their full developmental potential and gradually
to learn to function on their own. Each child has a set of innate abilities, but input
from the child’s society in the form of interactions with adults and peers who are
more skilled molds these basic abilities into higher-order functions.

Vygotsky’s theory: An evaluation Vygotsky offered a fresh perspective from

which to view children’s development, a new way of measuring children’s potential
abilities by assessing their zone of proximal development, and new ways of teaching
children (Gauvain, 2001a; Rogoff, 1998, 2003). He increased appreciation of the
importance of cultural variations and historically based changes. Throughout this
book we have included in each chapter a feature titled “Cultural Context,” which
illustrates the effects of some cultural variation on children’s social development.
For example, in Chapter 4, “Attachment,” we describe the ways that cultural prac-
tices shape how infants react to separations from their parents. In Chapter 5, “Emo-
tions,” we discuss how parents in different cultures differ in their socialization of
children’s emotions; some emphasize reticence and frown on overt emotional dis-
plays, whereas others encourage full-blown display of emotional expression. And in
Chapter 7, “Family,” we describe how family roles have changed over historical time.
Many view Vygotsky’s theory as a corrective to Piaget’s neglect of social contex-
tual factors. On the negative side, Vygotsky was not very developmental and pro-
vided little description of how social interaction between partners at different levels
of competence shifts over the course of development. He did not indicate how
changes in physical, cognitive, or socioemotional development determine the types
of contexts that society, through parents and others, makes available to the child.
 Theoretical Perspectives on Social Development  29

Finally, measurement of the zone of proximal development is difficult because we

have no simple metric to measure the distance between the child’s level of func-
tioning alone and with a partner (Cross & Paris, 1988). In spite of these problems,
this theory has stimulated a great deal of research in social and cultural aspects of
development (Gauvain, 2001b; Rogoff, 2003). In addition, the idea of the zone of
proximal development has been a means of helping define effective parenting—that
is, whether caregivers provide adequate scaffolding to support their children in ways
that make it possible for them to succeed at tasks just outside of their ability to do
so on their own.

Systems-Theory Perspective
For a long time, developmental psychologists have realized that children are affected
by a number of different systems including the family, the school, the community,
and the culture. Taking a systems-theory approach means describing how children’s
development is affected by the interacting components that form one of these sys-
tems as well as by single factors within the system (Molenaar et al., 2014). For exam-
ple, to describe how a child learns to cooperate with others at home, a researcher
taking a family systems approach would analyze the interactions the child experi-
ences with individual family members and how these individuals function as a family
group to promote the behavior. The description would include the child’s interac-
tions with siblings and parents, interactions of the mother–father–child triad, and
interactions of the family as a social unit. The aim of systems theory is to discover the
levels of organization in social interactions and relationships and how these levels
or contexts of social experience are related to one another and, in turn, promote
children’s social development.

Bronfenbrenner’s ecological theory Urie Bronfenbrenner’s ecological theory

is an important application of systems theory (Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 2006).
It focuses on the multiple systems in which children are embedded and how these
systems are linked, and it stresses the importance of both the relations between the
child and these systems and the relations among the systems themselves. In Bron-
fenbrenner’s view, the child’s world is organized as a set of nested systems or con-
texts, like a set of Russian (Matryoshka) dolls, ranging from the most immediate or
proximal (the family or peer group) to the most remote or distal (society’s values
and laws) (Figure 1.4). The microsystem is the system in which a child interacts
directly with people and institutions. Over time, the relative importance of these
people changes. Parents are most important in infancy and early childhood; peers
and teachers become more important in middle childhood and adolescence. The
mesosystem consists of the interrelations among the components of the microsys-
tem, that is, the relations between parents and teachers, between parents and peers,
between family members and a religious institution, and so forth. The exosystem
is composed of settings that impinge on a child’s development but with which
the child has largely indirect contact. For example, a parent’s work can affect the
child’s life if it requires the parent to travel a great deal or work late into the night.
The macrosystem represents the ideological and institutional patterns of a par-
ticular culture or subculture. Finally, these four systems change over time in what
Bronfenbrenner termed the chronosystem, as changes occur within the child
or in one of the systems. In Bronfenbrenner’s theory, development involves the
interactions of a changing child and changing ecological systems in all their
complexity.
30  Chapter 1 Introduction

CHRONOSYSTEM

OSYSTEM
MACR
d ideologies of the
es an cult
ure
ttitud
A
EXOSYSTEM

Extended family

Y
MESOS STEM
Playground

Ne
ia

igh
ed
CROSYSTEM

bo
sm
MI

ily

rs
m
Mas

He ervice
Fa
Child

alth s
s

care
R e li g i o u s
i ns ti t u t i o
s
n
Leg

ol
al s

ho

ily of
Sc

famnds
erv

Pee
rs
ic

ie
Fr
es

S o ci s
al welfare service

FIGURE 1.4 Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model of development. This model emphasizes the impor-
tance of children’s interactions with the people and institutions closest to them within the microsystem
and mesosystem, as well as the effects of a widening array of social and cultural institutions, attitudes,
and beliefs within the exosystem and the macrosystem. The fact that all of these systems change over
time is represented by the chronosystem.

Ecological systems theory: An evaluation The valuable contribution of the

ecological perspective has been to alert us to the broad range of social contexts—
such as the family, the peer group, the school, the neighborhood, and religious
institutions—that affect children’s social development. This perspective is evident
in nearly all chapters of the book. The theory also illustrates the value of the per-
spectives offered by other disciplines. The inclusion of the neighborhood context,
for example, incorporates the work of sociologists and criminologists, who have
shown links between neighborhood poverty and delinquent activity (Elliott et al.,
2006; Leventhal et al., 2015; Sampson & Laub, 1994), as we discuss in Chapter 12,
“Aggression.” As we detail in Chapter 7, “Family,” the inclusion of the parental work
context incorporates the work of economists and organizational scientists (Duncan,
2005; Fobre, 2008); the inclusion of the cultural context incorporates the work of
anthropologists (Weisner, 2011).
This theoretical approach also has limitations. Although it provides a useful
descriptive guide to the various contexts or systems that need to be examined, the
 Theoretical Perspectives on Social Development  31

processes by which each one affects children’s development are largely drawn from
other theoretical perspectives, such as social-learning theory or sociocultural the-
ory. The developmental aspects of the perspective were not articulated in detail,
and information about how children’s changing capacities alter the effect of expo-
sure to different contexts remains to be collected.

Biological Perspective
A theoretical approach emphasizing the important role of biological factors is
increasingly being applied to the study of social development. Three examples of
theoretical approaches based on biology are ethological theory, evolutionary the-
ory, and behavior genetics.

Ethological theory The ethological theory developed by European zoologists

Konrad Lorenz (1952) and Niko Tinbergen (1951) is based on the belief that to
understand behavior, scientists must view it as occurring in a particular setting and
as having adaptive or survival value and must study it in relation to the organism’s
biology and the ecosystem in which the organism functions. To learn about chil-
dren’s social behavior, therefore, researchers must consider the children’s needs
and the nature of the setting in which their behavior takes place, such as a class-
room, a playground, or a library.
Ethological researchers have observed human infants and children to find out
which behaviors are “species specific” (unique to the human species) and play a
functional role in ensuring survival. They have identified behaviors that are com-
mon to all children regardless of the culture into which they are born. For example,
emotional expressions of joy, sadness, disgust, and anger are similar across a wide
range of modern cultures including those of Brazil, Japan, and the United States, as
well as nonindustrialized cultures such as the Fore and Dori tribes of New Guinea
(Ekman, 1994; Ekman et al., 1987; LaFreniere, 2010). These behaviors appear
to have a biological basis and help ensure that caregivers meet children’s needs.
Although ethologists view the behaviors as biologically based, they also assume that
they are modified by experience. For example, with input from parents and peers,
children learn to mask their emotions by smiling even when they are unhappy
(McDowell & Parke, 2009; Saarni, 2011; Saarni et al., 2006). Thus, modern etholo-
gists view children as open to input from the environment, not as captives of their
biological roots. One important concept in ethology is the critical period, a specific
time in an organism’s development during which external factors have a unique
and irreversible impact.

Ethological theory: An evaluation Ethologists have made a number of signifi-

cant contributions to our understanding of social development. One contribu-
tion was the discovery that nonverbal social behaviors—gestures, postures, facial
expressions—regulate social exchanges. For example, monkeys often use threat ges-
tures, such as a stare and bared teeth, to ward off attackers, and they make appease-
ment signs, such as baring the neck or making themselves look smaller, to call a halt
to a struggle. Children also make themselves look smaller—kneeling, bowing, lying
down—to express appeasement (Ginsburg et al., 1977). A particularly important
contribution of ethology to our understanding of social development was its sug-
gestion that infants’ signaling behaviors, such as crying and smiling, promote close-
ness with caregivers. This suggestion became a central component in John Bowlby’s
32  Chapter 1 Introduction

theory of the development of attachment (discussed in Chapter 4, “Attachment”).

Another contribution from ethology was a better understanding of how children’s
groups are organized. It turns out that children, like monkeys and chickens, develop
specific organizational structures and dominance hierarchies or “pecking orders”
(Hawley, 2010), as we spell out in Chapter 8, “Peers.” Another contribution was the
method of study used in ethology. Ethologists observe children and animals in their
natural surroundings and develop detailed descriptions and classifications of behav-
ior that they then try to organize into meaningful patterns. For example, ethologists
compute rates of hitting, poking, kicking, and yelling, which are then used to define
aggression; ethologists observe a slight lift of the eyebrows, a suggestive smile, and
a tilt of the head to define flirtatious behavior. As a result of ethological research,
observational approaches to studying children have increased in popularity and
detail, as we emphasize in Chapter 2, “Research Methods.”
However, there are limits to what is learned from ethology. First, the theory is
largely descriptive. Although this is a useful first step, more explanatory principles
are needed. Second, the application of the concept of critical periods to human
development was criticized because it failed to acknowledge that later environ-
mental experiences can sometimes overcome the effects of early experiences. The
concept of a narrowly defined “critical” period has now been replaced with the
notion of a “sensitive” period that has more porous boundaries (Bornstein, 1989;
Wiedenmayer, 2010). The utility of the critical period concept also has been found
to vary across domains of development. Some behaviors have a narrow critical or
sensitive period, some have a broad window. For example, the window for develop-
ing an attachment to a caregiver appears to be the first year of life; the period for
learning a second language extends from birth to adolescence.

Evolutionary developmental theory Although ethologists and evolutionary psy-

chologists share many basic assumptions, evolutionary psychology focuses on behav-
iors that ensured survival of the species in the past. Evolutionary psychologists assume
that our ancestors developed complex skills to ensure survival by successfully find-
ing a mate for reproduction, rearing children to the age of reproduction, hunting
and securing food, and communicating and cooperating with members of the social
group. These processes are seen as instrumental to human functioning more broadly
and to social development specifically (Bjorklund & Ellis, 2014; Bugental & Grusec,
2006). After all, one hallmark of evolution is the fact that human beings use their
capacities to reason and solve problems in all types of situations—including figuring
out how to recognize a familiar group member or escape from a dangerous or threat-
ening enemy. The main questions for developmental evolutionary psychologists are
how and when in the course of childhood these adaptive capabilities emerge.
One of the central principles of evolutionary developmental theory is that we are
programmed to reproduce and pass our genes to the next generation. This concept
is useful for explaining parents’ investment in their children. It also helps explain
the higher rates of abuse and homicide in stepfamilies compared with biological
families (Daly & Wilson, 1996). According to evolutionary theory, stepparents are
less protective and invest fewer resources in stepchildren than biological children
because they have no genetic investment in them.
Evolutionary developmental psychologists are also interested in the capabilities
children develop that enable them to learn from interactions with other people, for
example, the ability to understand other people’s intentions. They suggest that this
ability appeared relatively late in human evolution and is a feature that distinguishes
humans from other primates (Tomasello, 2008, 2014). They are also interested in
the adaptive value of immaturity. Childhood play, for example, is a seemingly pur-
poseless activity that may, in fact, be important for children’s sense of self-efficacy,
 Theoretical Perspectives on Social Development  33

for learning and practicing social signaling, and for encourag-

ing curiosity and creativity, regardless of its long-term conse-
quences for adult functioning (Bjorklund, 2008).
A recent application of evolutionary developmental theory
is life history theory, which suggests that the schedule of key
events over the life course is influenced by natural selection
to produce the largest possible number of surviving offspring
and thus maximize the successful passing on of the organism’s
genes. These key events include the age of sexual maturity
and first reproduction, the number of offspring produced,
and the level of parents’ investment in children. According to
life history theory, stressful and unpredictable environments,
characterized by poverty, harsh parenting, frequent residence

© Photoplay/Media Bakery
changes, paternal transitions, and parents’ job changes, can
cause children to reach sexual maturity more quickly, begin
reproduction earlier, and have more sexual partners than
children in less harsh and unstable environments. Children
in such challenging environments are less certain about their
future longevity, so earlier reproduction has an evolutionary
advantage in maximizing their success in transmitting their
According to evolutionary theory, parents give their
genes in this way. This theory is supported by data revealing children attention and resources to ensure the pas-
that children in families with a high level of child–parent con- sage of their genes through the next generation.
flict reach puberty earlier (Ellis, 2004), and that girls in fami-
lies with absent fathers become pregnant at younger ages (Ellis, 2011). Likewise,
children in poor, unstable families are more likely to be sexually active at age 15
(Belsky et al., 2012), though such links appear to be weakened when children share
secure attachments with their primary caregivers in infancy (Sung et al., 2016).

Evolutionary developmental theory: An evaluation Evolutionary theory

illuminates some basic social processes including the capacities that permit social
understanding and regulate social behavior. For example, the remarkable ways
infants are prepared from birth to socially engage their caregivers, which we discuss
in Chapter 3, “Biological Foundations,” is probably a set of evolutionary-based skills
that have persisted because of their adaptive social function. Our understanding of
aggression, discussed in Chapter 12, “Aggression,” is enhanced by a focus on the
adaptive function of aggressive behavior in regulating social behavior. Evolutionary
theory brings attention to the adaptive functions of some uniquely childish behav-
iors and has provided insights into the role of biological kin ties. However, critics
argue that this approach has limited relevance for addressing issues associated with
rapid changes, such as new technological advances or sudden social shifts. Another
problem with evolutionary theory is that many of its explanations are post hoc, or
after the fact, and rely on the general argument that a particular behavior had adap-
tive value that ensured the survival of the species. Determining the function of a
particular behavior is not so easy. As one skeptic has observed (Miller, 2011, p. 365):

“The evolution of anatomical structures can be gleaned from fossils, but we have no
fossils of human behavior.”

Therefore, knowing what function a behavior served many generations ago is dif-
ficult. Moreover, behaviors that were adaptive in ancient times may not be adaptive
in current society. For example, although understanding others’ intentions con-
tinues to be a useful skill, some forms of physical aggression and a liking of fatty
34  Chapter 1 Introduction

foods appear to be less adaptive. It has also been suggested that evolutionary theory
should be integrated with advances in neuroscience because some of the theory’s
assumptions can be directly evaluated by investigating brain functioning (Panksepp &
Panksepp, 2000; Panksepp et al., 2017).

Human behavior genetics The field of human behavior genetics came into
prominence in the 1960s when scientists focused their attention on the relative
contributions of heredity and environment to individual differences in human
behavior (Plomin et al., 2001). These researchers wondered why some children are
outgoing and sociable while others are introverted and shy; why some children—
and adults—are chronically aggressive whereas others seek to cooperate and avoid
confrontation. Unlike biologists who study heredity, these behavior geneticists origi-
nally conducted their research without directly measuring chromosomes, genes, or
DNA. Their primary strategy was to use statistical techniques to estimate the contri-
bution that heredity makes to particular abilities or types of behavior. More recently,
advances in genetic science have allowed behavior geneticists to assess genes as well
(Gregory et al., 2011; Plomin, 2013).
Since the 1960s, behavior geneticists have studied a number of differences in
children’s social behavior, such as those in sociability, fear, and irritability. These
differences appear in the earliest days of life and to some extent persist throughout
childhood (Rothbart, 2011; Sanson et al., 2011; Thomas & Chess, 1986), suggesting
that genes influence these behaviors. However, the fact that these behaviors do not
always lead to identical outcomes in different children indicates that they are also
susceptible to environmental influences (Grigorenko, 2002; Knopik et al., 2014).
Behavior geneticists have shown that both heredity and environment contribute
to individual differences in emotionality, activity level, and sociability (Kochanska
et al., 2011; Plomin et al., 2016; Rutter, 2006). This information is of great value
in our effort to understand and predict social development. Behavior-genetics
researchers have also importantly brought into high relief a significant limitation of
much research on socialization—that many such studies, which often examine cor-
relations between parental behaviors and child outcomes, are unable to differenti-
ate effects of shared genes versus shared environments because parents and their
biological children share on average 50 percent of their species-specific genetic vari-
ation (Roisman & Fraley, 2006; Turkheimer, 2000).

Human behavior genetics: An evaluation The behavior genetics perspec-

tive has provided an important corrective to psychologists’ long-held emphasis on
environmental causes of behavior, along with an important corrective to the kinds
of research designs used in the field of socialization research, which now include
much more genetically informed designs (e.g., twin and adoption studies) and
other means (e.g., intervention and prevention research that rely on experimental
randomization) that are arguably better positioned to demonstrate any true effects
of the environment and experience. Of course, many social behaviors are clearly
influenced by genetic factors. This is illustrated by individual differences in aggres-
sion and helpfulness, although the particular genes or gene clusters accounting
for the biological predispositions to act aggressively or altruistically are still not
totally known, as we discuss in Chapter 12, “Aggression,” and Chapter 11, “Moral-
ity.” In their early days, behavior geneticists were criticized for being reductionist
and assuming that genetic factors were more important than environmental factors;
however, modern behavior geneticists acknowledge that inputs from many sources,
from genetics to culture, are important in explaining social development. Despite
this acknowledgment, measurement of the environment in many behavior genetics
 Theoretical Perspectives on Social Development  35

studies is still quite general and nonspecific. Therefore, the ways in which genetic
expression is modified by particular environments remain to be described.

Life Span Perspective

The life span theory of development, as the name implies, extends the frame of
development beyond childhood and through adulthood, because people are open
to change across their entire lives (Baltes et al., 2006; Elder & Conger, 2000; Elder
& George, 2015). According to this perspective, change over time can be traced to
three sets of causes. First, there are normative events, which most people encounter
at roughly the same age. Some of these events, such as the onset of menstruation
in adolescent girls, are biological or maturational. Other normative events are pro-
grammed by society, for example, entering school at age 5 or 6, beginning college at
age 17 or 18, and marrying in the 20s or early 30s and pregnancy in the 20s or 30s.
The quote from this 22-year old woman who was pregnant illustrates the societal
expectations for these normative events (Elder & Shanahan, 2006, p. 697):

“I was ready, my husband was ready, my mother was ready, my father was ready, my
grandmother couldn’t wait.”

A second set of causes of change involves unexpected events that push develop-
ment in new directions. Life span theorists term these nonnormative events because
they do not happen to everyone in the normal course of development and they do
not follow any preset schedule. Instead, they happen to any child or family at any
time and often without warning or anticipation. Divorce, job loss, residence change,
and teen pregnancy are nonnormative events that affect development. Here, for
example, is the reaction of a 30-year-old woman who had just found out that her
teenage daughter was pregnant (Elder & Shanahan, 2006, p. 697):

“I can’t be a young momma and a grand momma at the same time. Something seems
funny about that, don’t you think?”

Historical events constitute the third set of factors that influence development.
People who were born in the same year or age period make up age cohorts who
share the same historical experiences. For example, people born in 1950 were ado-
lescents during the late 1960s, an era of considerable upheaval and social unrest;
people born in 1970 were adolescents in 1989 when the Communist monopoly in
Europe collapsed and the Cold War ended; people born in 1980 were adolescents
in the 1990s when Internet use exploded and changed the way we communicate.

Life span perspective: An evaluation The life span perspective reminds us

that development is a life-long process and that both normative and nonnormative
events affect developmental trajectories and outcomes. For example, as we high-
light in Chapter 7, “Family,” children growing up in the 1950s had very different
social experiences from those growing up today, and as we describe in Chapter 13,
“Policy,” becoming a parent as a teenager is a very different experience from becom-
ing a parent at a later age. The life span perspective focus on age cohorts under-
scores the fact that historical eras modify development. Another contribution of
this perspective is that it highlights changes in adults’ lives, which may, in turn,
affect children’s development. For example, parents who experience nonnorma-
tive stressful events, such as losing a job or getting a divorce, provide less-optimal
rearing for their children, and this affects children differently, depending on their
36  Chapter 1 Introduction

age, as we discuss in Chapter 7, “Family.” In short, the developmental trajectories of

parents and children are linked, and both need to be considered in order to under-
stand children’s development. One of the reasons this perspective has not had more
impact on the study of children’s social development is that much of the theorizing
has involved older adults. As a result, social development researchers have used the
perspective mainly as a descriptive aid; few of the processes generated by the theory
for older age groups have filtered down to explain children’s social development.

A Variety of Theoretical Perspectives

Today no single overarching theory adequately addresses all aspects of social devel-
opment. Instead, development can be approached from a variety of perspectives.
The grand theories of Freud and Piaget, which attempted to explain wide swaths of
development, have, for the most part, been replaced by modern theories that are
more modest in scope. These current theories offer detailed accounts of particular
domains or developmental phenomena, and as a result some offer better and more
complete accounts of certain aspects of development than others. Ethological theory
is especially helpful in describing the development of emotional expressions and
communication and how children’s social groups are organized. Cognitive social-
learning theory and social information-processing theory offer useful perspectives
for explaining aggression. Systems theories offer a framework for studying the influ-
ence of the family and social institutions on social development. All of these theoreti-
cal perspectives have a place in the broad study of social development, and it is often
helpful to draw on several to investigate a particular research question.

earning from Living Leaders: Joan E. Grusec

imitation. Later she studied children’s prosocial
behavior and parents’ discipline processes. She
was interested in what makes parents effective
in achieving their socialization goals and what
Courtesy of Joan E. Grusec

makes some parents more effective than others.

She found that parents’ effectiveness depended
on the child’s age, the parent’s emotional state,
and the cultural context. Grusec is a Fellow of
the Canadian Psychological Association and
the American Psychological Association and
has been Associate Editor of the journal Devel-
opmental Psychology. She believes that develop-
mental psychology is the most exciting area of
Joan Grusec is Professor of Psychology Emerita at
psychology because it is the only one that brings
the University of Toronto, where she first learned of
together under one umbrella a concern with
social learning theory as an undergraduate. She
how biology and culture interact over the course
found it exciting enough to trek off to Stanford
of time to make us what we are.
University for graduate work with Albert Bandura,
abandoning her plans to be a social worker or
Further Reading
a historian. Since then, she has been an advo-
Grusec, J. E. (2011). Socialization processes in the family:
cate, chronicler, and modifier of social learning Social and emotional development. Annual Review
theory. Her early work with Bandura focused on of Psychology, 62, 243–269.
 Theoretical Perspectives on Social Development  37

Barbara Rogoff on the Science of Learning for the U.S. National

Academy of Sciences and several years ago

Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences

she received the 2013 Award for Distinguished

photo by John Sheretz, provided courtesy of the

Lifetime Contributions to Cultural and Contextual
Factors in Child Development, from the Society
for Research in Child Development. She sends
this message to students: “You are the genera-
tion that can make a real difference in how we
understand and foster children’s development
in the varying communities of the United States
and the world. I hope you continue to think
about these issues long after you finish reading
this book.”

Further Reading
Rogoff, B. (2011). Developing destinies: A Mayan midwife
and town. New York: Oxford University Press.
Barbara Rogoff, UCSC Foundation Distinguished
Professor of Psychology at the University of
California, Santa Cruz, has been a major force in David Bjorklund
bringing attention to the role of culture in chil-
dren’s development. Like many others in the field,
she did not plan to be a psychologist. She started

Courtesy of David Bjorklund

out to be a cartoonist and majored in art. Her cul-
tural journey began when as a graduate student
at Harvard she became involved in research in a
Mayan town in Guatemala. After discovering that
how these people thought and acted was closely
related to their social experiences, she began a
career examining how people learn, how other
people help them learn, and how this varies in dif-
ferent cultural communities. David Bjorklund is Professor of Psychology at
Through her work in different cultures and in Florida Atlantic University. He has taught there for
a wide array of settings from classrooms to Girl more than 30 years, since completing his Ph.D.
Scouts to school drama groups, she showed how work at the University of North Carolina. As an
cultural rules govern social development. In her undergraduate, Bjorklund wanted to be a
book, Apprenticeship in Thinking, she demon- clinical child psychologist “saving the world by
strated the value of Vygotsky’s theory as a way to curing one neurotic child at a time.” However,
understand how learning takes place in routine the reality of working with delinquent youth
everyday social interactions with parents, siblings, during college made him realize that he was
and peers. For Rogoff, the pressing issue for the not cut out for a clinical career but was more
field of social development is how to foster chil- suited to research. After a lengthy period doing
dren’s development in ways that respect the differ- research on children’s cognitive development,
ences in the values and practices of their cultural Bjorklund became an eloquent spokesman for
communities. the evolutionary theoretical perspective. His
Rogoff has received many honors for her work. views are described in his book The Origins of
She is a Fellow of the American Psychological Human Nature: Evolutionary Developmental
Society, the American Psychological Association, Psychology, which was the first extended
and the American Anthropological Associa- treatment of an evolutionary approach to
tion. She has served as a committee member development.
38  Chapter 1 Introduction

Bjorklund believes that our unique intelligence social behavior. He has been widely recognized
is not technological ability but an ability to negoti- for his work, receiving the Alexander von Humboldt
ate the social environment, to cooperate with oth- Research Award and invitations to be a visiting
ers, and to understand their intentions and desires. professor in Germany, Spain, and New Zealand.
The central question that concerns him is how He is editor of the Journal of Experimental Child
human social intelligence evolved. He suggests Psychology and served as a contributing editor
that many social development issues can be bet- to Parents Magazine. He advises undergradu-
ter understood through an evolutionary lens. For ates to do what works for him, “Write to see what
example, although child abuse and young males’ you think.”
aggression are no longer adaptive in modern
environments, they may have been adaptive in
our evolutionary past. Bjorklund hopes that in the Further Reading
future the field will embrace more biological ideas Bjorklund, D. F., Hernández Blasi, C., & Ellis, B. J. (2016). Evo-
lutionary developmental psychology. In D. M.Buss (Ed.),
including not only evolution but also the effects Evolutionary psychology handbook, 2nd Ed. (Vol. 2)
of hormones and the central nervous system on (pp. 904–925). New York: Wiley.

Chapter Summary
Social Development
• The field of social development includes descriptions of social behavior, indi-
vidual differences in social behavior, and changes in social behavior with age as
well as explanations for these changes and differences.
Social Development: A Brief History
• The scientific study of social development began with Darwin’s work in the 1800s.
Subsequently, competing views were expressed in Watson’s behaviorally oriented
theory, Freud’s biologically inspired theory, and Gesell’s maturational theory.
Critical Questions about Social Development
• How do biological and environmental influences affect social development?
Modern developmental psychologists recognize the importance of both bio-
logical and environmental influences and are concerned with discovering the
ways these factors interact to produce developmental differences.
• What role do children play in their own development? Most developmental psy-
chologists believe that children actively shape, control, and direct the course of
their own development.
• What is the appropriate unit for studying social development? Although
researchers have typically focused on individual children, they have increas-
ingly recognized that other units such as dyads, triads, and social groups are
also important.
• Is development continuous or discontinuous? Some theorists view social devel-
opment as a continuous process whereby change takes place smoothly and
gradually. Others see development as a series of qualitatively different stages or
steps. The more closely we examine development, the more we see ebbs and
flows in the acquisition of social skills.
• Is social behavior the result of the situation or the child? Most developmental
psychologists stress the complementary roles of situational factors and child
differences.
 Chapter Summary  39

• Is social development universal across cultures? Most developmental psycholo-

gists agree that cultural contexts should be considered but believe that univer-
sal aspects of development such as emotions, language, and communication
coexist with cultural variations.
• How does social development vary across historical eras? Both abrupt and grad-
ual changes in society influence social development.
• Is social development related to other developmental domains? Social develop-
ment influences and is influenced by emotional, cognitive, language, percep-
tual, and motor development.
• How important are mothers for children’s social development? Although
mothers are clearly important in children’s social development, other people
including fathers, siblings, grandparents, peers, teachers, and religious leaders
also are important influences.
• Is there a single pathway for social development? Children can start out at a
similar place but end up at very different points (multifinality), or they can fol-
low different paths but end up at the same point (equifinality).
• What influences how we label children’s social behavior? Three sets of
factors—characteristics of the child, the adult, and the context—influence
social judgments and, in turn, how social behaviors are labeled.
• Do developmental psychologists own social development? Scholars in a variety
of fields including pediatrics, psychiatry, anthropology, economics, law, soci-
ology, history, and genetics have made valuable contributions to the field of
social development.
• Is social development focused only on basic research or on applied and policy-
relevant questions as well? In fact, both are key emphases in the area of social
development and are often mutually informative endeavors.

Theoretical Perspectives on Social Development

• Theories help organize and integrate knowledge into a coherent account of
how children develop and foster research by providing testable predictions
about behavior. Historically, grand theories reflected attempts to account for
all aspects of development. Modern theories tend to be more narrowly focused
attempts to explain specific aspects of social development.

Psychodynamic Perspective
• In Freud’s psychodynamic theory, basic biological drives motivate the child.
Early experiences are essential for determining later behavior.
• Erikson expanded Freud’s theory to include social and cultural influences on
development. His psychosocial theory is organized around a series of funda-
mental personal and social tasks that individuals must accomplish at each stage.
• Psychodynamic theories helped shape many concerns of modern social devel-
opment, including the effects of early experience in the family and the psy-
chological roots and importance of aggression, morality, gender roles, and
attachment. However, the central claims of the theories are difficult to test
empirically.
Traditional Learning Perspective
• Traditional learning theories emphasize how new behaviors are acquired
through a gradual and continuous process of learning. The theories had
important applications and have been used in homes, schools, and clinics to
reduce children’s behavior problems. Their lack of attention to developmental
changes is a limitation.
40  Chapter 1 Introduction

Cognitive Social-Learning Theory

• Bandura focused attention on observational learning. The notions of recipro-
cal determinism and self-efficacy were important additions to this theoretical
position. The lack of attention to developmental issues, the limited ecological
validity of the findings, and the limited recognition of the roles of biology and
culture are shortcomings of the theory.
Social Information-Processing Theory
• The social information-processing approach focuses on how children take in,
use, and remember information to make decisions about social actions. The
lack of developmental focus, the limited role allocated to emotion, and the
heavy emphasis on deliberate decision making rather than automatic or habit-
ual responding are limitations of this perspective.
Cognitive Developmental Perspective
• In Piaget’s theory of development, children actively seek new experiences and
from them construct mental structures. They assimilate new information into
existing structures and accommodate structures when the information doesn’t
fit. Piaget’s focus on stages has been questioned, and his lack of emphasis on
emotions, culture, and social behavior make his theory of limited use in the
field of social development.

Social Cognitive Domain Theory

• The social cognitive domain perspective focuses on how children learn to
make social judgments about their world. According to this approach, chil-
dren’s social judgments are domain specific.

Vygotsky’s Sociocultural Theory

• Vygotsky’s theory focuses on the contributions of social and cultural factors to
children’s development. Children grow and change as a function of their own
efforts and the guidance of skilled others. The theory does not describe how
interactions change over the course of development.

Systems Perspective
• According to systems theories, other elements or members of the system influ-
ence an individual’s behavior.
• Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory stresses the importance of rela-
tions between the child and environmental systems, such as the family, school,
community, and culture. Development involves the interplay between the child
and the microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem, macrosystem, and chronosystem.
Lack of developmental focus as well as limited information about the processes
that govern cross-level linkages are limitations of this theory.

Biological Perspective
• Ethologists observe behavior in natural settings and study patterns of behavior
across human and infrahuman species and across human societies and cul-
tures. The theory is largely descriptive.
• Evolutionary psychology asserts that social behaviors reflect survival needs and
processes of human evolution. It focuses attention on parental investment as a
way to ensure intergenerational continuity of genes and on the adaptive value
of immaturity. A recent application of evolutionary developmental theory is
“life history theory,” which suggests that the schedule of key events over the
 Key Terms  41

life course is influenced by natural selection to produce the largest possible

number of surviving offspring and thus maximize the successful passing on of
the organism’s genes. These key events include the age of sexual maturity and
first reproduction, the number of offspring produced, and the level of paren-
tal investment in children. The evolutionary approach has limited relevance
for addressing issues associated with rapid changes. Some are concerned that
explanations are post hoc.
• Behavior genetics addresses the relative contributions of heredity and environ-
ment to social development and the interdependence between environmen-
tal conditions and whether and when genes are expressed in behavior. The
particular genes or clusters of genes that account for social outcomes are still
poorly understood, and the way the environment is measured is often very
general.
Life Span Theory
• The life span theory emphasizes development over the entire life course.
Changes can be traced to normative age-graded events including entry into
school, nonnormative events such as divorce, and historical or cohort-related
events such as the Great Depression or the Vietnam War.
• The impact of this perspective is limited by the fact that much of the theorizing
has involved older adults.
Variety of Theoretical Perspectives
• Social development can be approached from a variety of perspectives and it is
often helpful to draw on several theories to explain children’s development.

Key Terms
accommodation drive-reduction theory life history theory psychosocial theory
age cohorts ecological theory macrosystem social dyad
assimilation ego maturation social information-
chronosystem egocentric mesosystem processing theory
classical conditioning Electra complex microsystem sociocultural theory
cognitive social- equifinality multifinality superego
learning theory ethological theory object permanence systems
critical period exosystem Oedipus complex transactional
desensitization generativity operant conditioning zone of proximal
domain specificity id psychodynamic theory development

At t h e M ov i es

A number of movies and videos illustrate the ideas and the- that field. Instead, he became a doctor specializing in ner-
ories discussed in this chapter. Biography—Sigmund Freud: vous diseases. You can view home movies of Freud with his
Analysis of a Mind (2004) uses photographs, interviews with friends and family made in the 1930s at these sites: http://
psychoanalysts and Freud’s grandchildren, and even a brief www.freud-museum.at/freud/media/video-e.htm; http://
recording that Freud himself made to provide a glimpse www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQOcf9Y-Uc8
into the life of this complex man. Freud didn’t intend to Lost in Translation (2003) is useful for illustrating
get into psychiatry. His dream was to be a research scientist, Erikson’s psychosocial stages of development. The movie
but because of Jewish quotas, he wasn’t permitted to enter explores the relationship between a young woman and a
42  Chapter 1 Introduction

middle-aged man stuck in Tokyo. Both characters are scientist, a naturalist, and a man born and raised in the
experiencing developmental crises. They help each wild. The scientist trains the wild man in the ways of the
other articulate their dilemmas and begin to take world, starting with table manners; the naturalist fights to
steps forward. preserve the man’s simian past. On a more serious note,
A commercial movie portraying classical condi- Where Do the Children Play? (2002) shows how children’s
tioning is Stanley Kubrick’s science fiction drama, A Clock- experiences depend on where and when they are born
work Orange (1971). A violent youth convicted of murder and provides an answer to the question of how social
and rape is given an experimental program of “aversion development varies across historical eras. The film opens
therapy” in which he is conditioned to detest violence. by examining differences between growing up today and
Television programs discussing the work of Piaget childhood as it was lived 50 years ago and examines how
include LÉpistémologie génétique de Jean Piaget (1977). The restrictive patterns of sprawl, congestion, and suburban
documentary film The Genius of Charles Darwin (2008) development affect children’s development.
includes segments on Darwin’s life and discoveries and The question of whether social development
an attempt to convince a group of school children that is universal across cultures is addressed implicitly in
evolution explains the world better than religion. The numerous films showing children’s experiences in dif-
movie Creation (2009) focuses on Darwin’s personal life ferent cultures. A few of these films are Families of the
during the time he was writing On the Origin of Species World (1997–2000), a documentary series illustrating
and reveals the struggles he went through balancing cultural differences and similarities among children
his religious faith with his science. Finally, ethological from Mexico, Japan, India, Egypt, China, Russia, France,
theory is illustrated in the short documentary Konrad the United States, and several other nations. Each film
Lorenz: Science of Animal Behavior (1975). Lorenz’s work records two children performing their daily activities.
is also the basis for the movie Fly Away Home (1996) in Other movies portraying children’s experiences in cul-
which a young girl becomes the “mother” to a flock of tures other than our own include Xiang ri kui (2005), a
geese and has to teach them how to migrate south for dramatic tale about the life of a boy in an urban Chinese
the winter. family, his conflicts with his father, and how both are
In addition to these films focused on psychological affected by society; La Quinceañera (2007), a portrait of a
theories and theorists are movies that highlight the “crit- Mexican family’s love and devotion to each other; Perse-
ical questions” these theories address. The question of polis (2007), a portrayal of events through the eyes of a
the extent to which social development is influenced by girl experiencing the Iranian Revolution of 1979 and the
environmental factors is front and center in NOVA: Secret new Iran ruled by Islamic fundamentalists; and Slumdog
of the Wild Child (1997), a documentary about Genie, the Millionaire (2008), which offers a glimpse of life in the
13-year-old girl who was rescued from her home by social slums of Mumbai, India. Babies (2010) is a visually stun-
workers after a decade with virtually no human contact. ning film that chronicles the lives of four infants—in
For a humorous take on this question, watch Human Mongolia, Namibia, San Francisco, and Tokyo—from
Nature (2001), which follows the ups and downs of a first breath to first steps.
 CH AP TE R 2

Research Methods
Tools for Discovery

Researcher Angela Gonzales wants to know

whether boys and girls differ in their use of the
Internet for social interactions. She conducts
a national survey of U.S. 10-year-olds to find
out. Toni Smithson wonders what makes some
children more liked than others. To investigate
this question, she asks second-grade children
to rate their classmates’ likability, and then
Blend Images/Getty Images

she examines behavioral differences between

the most- and least-liked children. Another
researcher, James Burks, is interested in whether
watching a character on TV behave prosocially
encourages children to be more helpful. He car-
ries out a laboratory experiment in which some
children are shown an episode of Sesame Street
in which Big Bird is helpful and cooperative and
other children are shown an equally engaging
video of dolphins at Sea World. He then assesses
A theory can provide insights, hunches, and ideas;
whether the two groups of children differ in their
but to be useful, it must produce falsifiable predic-
willingness to help the experimenter pick up
tions that can be tested with empirical research. In
some dropped papers. These three hypothetical
this chapter, we describe some of the research meth-
examples illustrate the range of strategies that
ods that developmental psychologists have used
can be used to study children’s social behavior.
to study children’s social behaviors and how those
They differ in their research questions, samples,
behaviors change with age. Like all scientists, devel-
methods, and data-gathering techniques. In
opmental psychologists follow the scientific method.
this chapter, we explore the various methods
They formulate a hypothesis on the basis of theory
used to study children’s social behavior and
and use reliable techniques to collect, study, and
development.
analyze data in an effort to test the theory’s useful-
ness. Or they pose a research question and use sci-
entific techniques to gather data from an (ideally)
representative sample so they can answer their query. The decisions that must be
made by researchers taking a scientific approach to studying social development
include choosing a research method, picking a research design, finding a research

43
44  Chapter 2 Research Methods

sample, and devising a data-collection strategy so that hypotheses can be tested and
questions can be answered in an informative and ethical way.

Getting Started: Formulating Hypotheses,

Asking Questions
Doing research is about pursuing ideas that will help chart the course of social
development and identify the causes of developmental advances. Thus, research
starts with ideas. These ideas can be derived from theory, from previous research,
from observations of behavior, or even from common intuitions, but they should be
sensible, innovative, and important. As one expert on research methods in this field
wisely observed (Miller, 2012, p. 3):

“It is important to remember that all the technical skill in the world will not save a study
if the ideas behind it are not any good.”

One example of a good idea, which we discuss in this chapter, was the idea that chil-
dren’s social behavior might be affected by their exposure to violence on television.
Between having a good idea and conducting a good study are a number of criti-
cal steps. One step is to translate the general idea into clear research hypotheses
or questions. If the researcher’s goal is to test specific theoretical premises, this
step involves proposing testable hypotheses; for example, if children watch violent
television, their own aggression will increase because they will imitate the TV mod-
els’ behavior. If the researcher’s goal is descriptive, the challenge will be to find
a question or questions that can be answered with empirical data; for example,
how often do children watch violent television programs? Before empirical data
can be collected, finding out about past work on the topic is important for the
researcher. Brilliant ideas will not contribute to scientific knowledge if the answers
to the researcher’s questions are already known! Reviewing past literature is a key
step to make sure the study is not merely plowing old ground. Search engines such
as PsycINFO are helpful (perhaps essential) to find out about previous studies in
the area. Another step in the research process is the operationalization of the idea
or construct to be studied by translating it into an empirically assessable form; for
example, operationalizing “violent television” as television programs showing at
least three instances of an adult hitting, kicking, or shooting another person. The
researcher must be familiar with the tasks and procedures that other investigators
have used in pursuit of the same topic, in this case, how previous researchers have
assessed children’s aggression. After researchers have formulated their hypotheses
or questions and operationalized their research constructs, they make decisions
about research designs, methods, samples, and analyses.

Research Methods: Establishing Patterns

and Causes
The most common research methods for studying social development are the cor-
relational method, the experimental method, and the case study. Each of these
methods can be used to test hypotheses or answer questions about the effects of
viewing violent television programs on children’s social behavior.
 Research Methods: Establishing Patterns and Causes  45

The Correlational Method

The correlational research method involves looking for statistical associations
between two variables; that is, determining whether two things are related to each
other in a regular and systematic way and finding out how strongly they are related.
An illustration of the correlational method applied to the question of whether view-
ing television is related to aggression in preschool children is found in a study by
Jerome Singer and Dorothy Singer (1981). They asked 141 parents about the TV
viewing habits of their sons and daughters, including how much time they spent in
front of the television set and the types of programs they watched. Then observers
(who didn’t know what the parents had said) rated how aggressive the children
were with classmates in preschool. Their ratings showed that children who were
more aggressive at preschool watched more action and adventure shows at home
according to their parents. These shows contain a relatively high level of violence.
This correlation between aggressive behavior and television viewing did not prove
that watching violent programs was the reason children displayed more aggression.
A correlation between two variables does not mean that one variable necessarily
causes the increase or decrease in the other; it simply tells us that the two variables
are related to each other and indicates the strength or magnitude of this associa-
tion. Any number of factors other than watching violent television could have con-
tributed to the children’s aggressiveness. For example, children who watch violent
action and adventure programs might already be aggressive and simply choose to
watch these programs. A correlational study does not resolve this issue.
The correlation coefficient is a statistic that provides a numerical estimate of how
closely two variables are related to each other and indicates the direction in which
they are related. Correlation coefficients range along a continuum from –1.0, the
lowest possible negative correlation, to +1.0, the highest possible positive correla-
tion. If two variables are correlated –1.0, this means that for every increase in one
variable there is a systematic decrease in the other; if they are correlated +1.0, for
every increase in one variable, there is a comparable increase in the other. (In other
words, if you know a child’s score on one variable you know their exact score on the
other variable. Only variables like children’s height in inches and their height in
centimeters would be correlated 1.0 (because if you know a child’s height in inches,
you know their exact height in centimeters.) The coefficient of 0.0 means that the
variables are completely unrelated to each other. In studies of social development,
researchers generally find correlation coefficients that range from ±0.2 to ±0.3. For
example, a researcher might find that the correlation between how much parents
read to their children during the preschool years and the children’s reading skills
in kindergarten is .25. These coefficients may be statistically significant; that is, large
enough that the observed correlation in a given sample would rarely occur assum-
ing that the true association in the population from which that sample was drawn
was exactly zero—but they are considered modest to moderate in size. This suggests
that factors other than those included in the research are also associated with chil-
dren’s social behavior.
If correlational research doesn’t, on its own, allow us to determine whether a fac-
tor is actually causing children’s social behavior, why do we use it? One reason is that
we cannot always design a suitable experiment to study our research question. The
effect of television viewing—if there is one—is likely to be spread out over a long
period of time, beginning when children are very young. It is not uncommon for chil-
dren to be exposed to television even when they are infants (Wartella et al., 2005).
Conducting an experiment that provides or manipulates such long-term exposure
46  Chapter 2 Research Methods

would be difficult. Likewise, implementing experiments to study the effects of resi-

dential mobility, divorce, or child abuse is virtually impossible because these events
do not lend themselves to experimental manipulation. Ethical concerns would pro-
hibit using experiments to study these factors, and even without ethical restrictions,
parents would likely decline to participate if they were to be randomly assigned to
move to a new neighborhood or get divorced. In this context, it is important to keep
in mind that the goal in many areas of social science where manipulation of vari-
ables using true experiments is impossible or unethical is to maximize the quality of
our causal inferences (Foster, 2010). Indeed, there are many techniques now available
for improving causal inferences with correlational data that all involve attempting
to rule out alternative explanations for why two variables might be correlated (i.e.,
other than a true causal effect). Some examples of these techniques involve the use
of behavior-genetic designs (e.g., adoption and twin) that help rule out genetic con-
founds (Jaffee, Strait, & Odgers, 2012) and various techniques borrowed from the
epidemiological and econometrics literatures, including propensity score matching
(Boutwell, Beaver, & Barnes, 2012), which attempts to estimate causal effects of a
given experience by first accounting for the range of possible confounds that pre-
dict why some children have and some children do not have the experience being
studied. For example, Boutwell and his colleagues (2012) found that the experi-
ence of early breastfeeding remained a significant predictor of higher cognitive
abilities in children even after adjusting for a range of potential confounds using
propensity score matching. Do such results definitively prove a causal effect exists?
No, but they do provide stronger evidence.

Laboratory Experiments
All other things being equal, the most compelling way that researchers can dem-
onstrate causal connections between environmental events and children’s social
behavior is by using experiments. In an experiment carried out in a laboratory,
researchers hold constant, or equate, every possible factor except the one they have
hypothesized will influence the behavior they want to study. They then assign each
participant to a group. Participants in the experimental group are exposed to the pro-
posed causal factor; participants in the control group do not receive this experience.
Researchers put people in these groups by using random assignment, which rules
out the possibility that the people in the groups differ from one another in some sys-
tematic way that could distort the results of the experiment (but only if the experi-
ments are conducted using sufficiently large samples that are capable of balancing
the full range of potential confounds across experimental conditions).
In a laboratory experiment on the effects of watching violent television, Robert
Liebert and Robert Baron (1972) randomly assigned 136 boys and girls ranging
in age from 5 to 9 years to experimental and control groups. The children in the
experimental group saw 3 minutes of a crime show containing a chase, two fistfights,
two shootings, and a knifing. The children in the control group watched a highly
active but nonviolent sports sequence of the same length. Whether the children
saw the violent television clip or not was the independent variable. The researchers
hypothesized that children in the experimental group would behave more aggres-
sively than children in the control group. If they found support for this hypothesis,
they could then reasonably conclude that exposure to TV violence was the cause of
the increased aggression.
In the second phase of this study, the experimenters told the children that they
were to play a game with another child in an adjoining room. The researchers then
seated children before a panel that had two buttons labeled “Hurt” and “Help” and
 Research Methods: Establishing Patterns and Causes  47

New York: Cambridge University Press, Figure 10.1. Reproduced with Permission of
Maria Legerstee, Infants’ Sense of People: Precursors to a Theory of Mind (2005).

Cambridge University Press

In this laboratory experiment, an infant was video recorded reacting to the mother as she behaved in ways
specified by the researcher. The independent variable was whether the mother was smiling or not; the
dependent variable was whether the baby smiled in response.

told them that the buttons were connected to a panel that the child in the other
room was looking at. The experimenter explained that the other child was playing a
game that required turning a handle and if children wanted to make it easier for the
other child to turn the handle, they could press the Help button, but if they wanted
to hinder the other child, pressing the Hurt button would make the handle burning
hot. This entire scenario was a deception—the other child was purely imaginary and
nothing a child did hurt anyone. (This issue of deception raises ethical questions,
which we discuss later in this chapter.) The amount of aggressive behavior the chil-
dren displayed, operationalized as how long and how often they depressed the Hurt
button, was the dependent variable. Results of the study indicated that children who
had seen the violent TV segment were significantly more likely to “hurt” the other
child than were children who had watched the fast-paced but nonviolent sports
program. This finding supported the researchers’ hypothesis that exposure to TV
violence would increase aggression.
Although this study was carefully designed, like many laboratory experiments it
had limitations that reduced generalization from its results to the real world. For
example, Liebert and Baron had edited their violent TV program to include more
acts of violence in 3 minutes than would normally occur on television, even in a
violent show. One way to overcome some of the problems of artificiality in the labo-
ratory and increase the real-life applicability or ecological validity of a study is to
conduct a laboratory analogue experiment. In this kind of experiment, researchers
try to duplicate in the laboratory features or events that occur naturally in everyday
life. For example, they might show children real TV shows over the course of several
weeks in a room that resembled a living room and then assess the children’s aggres-
sion toward real peers in a room that resembled a playroom.
48  Chapter 2 Research Methods

The exact duplication of natural circumstances is not the aim of all experiments,
however. Researchers can gain important insights about people’s socioemotional
tendencies and capacities using laboratory experiments because they can precisely
control the critical features of social stimuli and events. For some questions, the
laboratory is an ideal place for study. Clearly, research strategies must be matched
to the questions researchers are asking.

Field Experiments, Interventions, and Natural

Experiments
When researchers want to avoid artificiality and other problems associated with lab-
oratory or even laboratory analogue experiments, they sometimes conduct experi-
ments in people’s natural environments. In field experiments and interventions,
they deliberately introduce changes in the normal environment; in natural experi-
ments, they take advantage of naturally occurring changes in the everyday world.

Field experiments In a field experiment, investigators deliberately introduce

changes into a person’s natural environment. In one field experiment, research-
ers studied the effect of viewing television violence on children’s aggressive behav-
ior (Friedrich & Stein, 1973). Preschoolers enrolled in a summer program were
the participants. During the first three weeks of the study, the researchers simply
observed the children during their usual play sessions to achieve a baseline measure
of the aggressive behavior each child displayed under normal circumstances. Then,
for the next four weeks, they showed the children, who were randomly assigned to
one of three groups, a 30-minute TV program each day. Some children always saw
programs depicting aggression, such as Batman and Superman cartoons; others saw
programs with a message of caring and kindness, such as Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood;
and children in the third group watched neutral shows, such as nature programs or
circus movies. The researchers took care to minimize observer bias by having the
researchers who assessed the children’s behavior after the television viewings be
unaware of the types of programs the children had seen.
Results of the study showed that children who had been high in aggressive behav-
ior before the experiment behaved even more aggressively after repeated expo-
sure to aggressive cartoons but not after exposure to the other two kinds of shows.
Children who were rated as less aggressive during the initial assessment period and
children who watched neutral shows did not increase in aggression. The researchers
concluded that exposure to TV violence can increase children’s aggressiveness but
only if the children were already headed in that direction.
One advantage of field experiments over laboratory experiments is that the
results can be more easily generalized to real life. In the study just described, the
researchers had not edited the TV programs; they were programs that many of
the children watched at home. Moreover, the children’s aggressive behavior was
measured in an everyday setting, the preschool. Thus, the field experiment offers
researchers control over the independent variable (in this case, television viewing),
random assignment of participants to groups, and some degree of ecological valid-
ity. These researchers could be reasonably confident that they had demonstrated a
causal connection between exposure to television violence and increased aggres-
siveness in aggressive children.

Interventions Sometimes the field experiment is broader in its focus as when an

entire program, or intervention, is introduced rather than just a few sessions of tele-
vision viewing. In an effort to minimize the harmful effects of violent TV, a year-long
 Research Methods: Establishing Patterns and Causes  49

intervention, consisting of 31 brief classroom lessons, was undertaken with 130 chil-
dren in grades 1 through 3; the control group consisted of 47 children in classes
that did not receive the lessons (Rosenkoetter et al., 2004). Lessons using music,
rap, puppets, role-play, stories, and film clips emphasized the many ways television
distorts violence. The intervention resulted in a reduction in girls’ viewing of vio-
lent TV and girls’ identification with violent TV characters. Boys who were initially
high viewers of violent TV were judged by their classmates to have reduced their
aggression following the intervention. Unlike children in the intervention group,
children in the control group did not become less aggressive, watch less violent TV,
or identify less with violent characters. Thus, this intervention study suggested that
children can be taught to reduce their consumption of violent TV and their aggres-
sive behavior.

Natural experiments For ethical or practical reasons, researchers may not be

able to introduce changes into the natural environment. In these instances, they
may be able to take advantage of a so-called natural experiment in which they
measure the effects of events or changes that occur without their intervention.

nsights from Extremes: Lost and Found Children

These orphanages provided a natural
Patrick Zachmann/Magnum

experiment whereby researchers could

evaluate the impact of sensory, perceptual,
and social deprivation on children’s develop-
ment. They also provided an opportunity to
carry out interventions by providing these “lost
Photos, Inc.

and found” children with new environments. In

the Bucharest Early Intervention Project,
researchers removed 66 children, ages 6
months to 2½ years, from a Romanian orphan-
In 1966, communist dictator Nicolai Ceausescu age and placed them in high-quality foster
banned birth control and abortion and created care. For many years, they tracked the progress
financial incentives for women to have more of these children and compared it with the
children to increase Romania’s population and development of children who remained in the
workforce. The birth rate soared. So did child orphanage and children who grew up in their
abandonment. When Ceausescu fell from power own families. Children who were placed in foster
in 1989, more than 170,000 children were found care when they were under 1 year of age
languishing in orphanages like this one under increased an average of 10 IQ points and had
appalling conditions. The children’s physical less depression and anxiety than the children
needs were attended to, but they had few who stayed in orphanages (Nelson et al., 2007).
interactions in which adults held them, talked to Their social skills in childhood were normal
them, sang to them, or played with them. Many (Almas et al., 2012). These findings illustrate the
of the children were cross-eyed, perhaps from a insights researchers have gained from examin-
lack of visual stimulation as they lay in their cribs. ing children in extreme circumstances and
They were small for their age, and their develop- show the value of both natural experiments
ment was severely delayed. Their IQs were almost and interventions as alternatives to laboratory
40 points lower than normal, they had profound methods of research (Nelson et al., 2011; Rutter,
communication problems, and they suffered from Pickles, et al., 2001; Stamoulis, Vanderwert,
emotional disorders. Zeanah, Fox, & Nelson, 2015).
50  Chapter 2 Research Methods

This approach is often called a quasi-experiment because it is not a true experi-

ment in that the research participants are not randomly assigned to experimental
conditions. Instead, researchers select children who are naturally exposed to one
set of conditions and compare them with children who are not exposed to these
conditions. A natural experiment on children’s television viewing was conducted
by monitoring what happened before and after television was introduced into a
small town in Canada (MacBeth, 1996; Williams, 1986). The investigators were
able to show that aggressive behavior in children’s play increased after TV came
to town. Because the researchers did not arrange for the introduction of televi-
sion to the town, their findings might have more ecological validity than those of
laboratory studies or even field experiments. However, the independent variable,
TV viewing, was very broadly defined; children watched all kinds of programs,
and the researchers did not attempt to examine or control the shows they chose.
As a result, we cannot say precisely what aspect of television caused the increase
in aggressive play. Moreover, the researchers did not divide participants into ran-
domly assigned experimental and control groups, so they could not rule out the
possibility that personal characteristics might have influenced who bought and
watched TV.

Combining Different Methods

No research strategy is without its strengths and limitations; each can play a role
in helping investigators understand human behavior. Often researchers start in an
unexplored area by using the correlational method simply to establish some possi-
ble relations. The correlational approach is a relatively simple research method that
avoids some of the pitfalls of experimental methods such as the ethics of manipu-
lating people and events, but it exerts minimal control over variables and is always
open to criticism about the degree to which results are due to the specific causal
processes that researchers assume might be operative. In some cases, the research-
ers may then use experimental approaches to help determine whether the associa-
tions they observed with the correlational method are causal.
Among laboratory, field, and natural experiments, there is often a trade-off
between control of variables and the generalizability of findings: Variables can be
controlled more in the lab, but generalizability is better if data are collected in
the field. One way to deal with this trade-off is to combine field and laboratory
approaches in a single study. As Figure 2.1 shows, there are two ways to do this:
The independent variable can be introduced in the laboratory and the depend-
ent variable measured in the field (cell C), or the independent variable can be
introduced in the field and the effect measured in the lab (cell B). (Cell A in the
figure represents the traditional lab experiment; cell D represents the usual field
experiment.) An example of the first type of combined lab-and-field experiment
is to bring youngsters into the lab and show them violent films and then measure

Manipulation of independent variable

Lab Field
FIGURE 2.1 Manipulation and assess- Lab A B
Assessment of
ment of variables in field, lab, and
dependent variable
combined field-and-lab designs. Field C D
 Research Methods: Establishing Patterns and Causes  51

changes in their social behavior with peers in the classroom. An example of the
second kind of combined lab-and-field experiment is to control children’s TV
viewing in their own homes by having some parents allow their children to watch
violent programs and other parents to allow their children to watch only nonvio-
lent programs and then to conduct an assessment of changes in the children’s
aggressiveness in the laboratory. The first approach offers more precise control
over the independent variable and allows the dependent variable to be measured
in a natural way; the second approach allows greater ecological validity in the
independent variable and exerts tighter control over measurement of the depend-
ent variable. Both approaches help researchers increase the generalizability of
their findings.

eal-World Application: Treating an Aggressive Child

whether Adrian’s behavior was changing in
response to the new strategy, the psychologist
papa42/iStockphoto
asked the teachers to resume paying attention to
Adrian when he hit other children. Sure enough,
Adrian’s rate of hitting increased, suggesting that
his need for attention was indeed controlling his
aggressive behavior. The teachers were then
instructed once again to ignore Adrian’s hitting,
and once more his rate of hitting dropped.
This is an example of an ABAB experiment. A is
Sometimes researchers use a case study experi- the normal condition that existed before the
ment to try to bring about a change in a particu- experiment began; B is the experimental condi-
lar behavior in one child. For example, a new tion. Thus Adrian’s initial hitting behavior is repre-
treatment for child conduct problems could be sented by the first A, and the experimental
used with a particular child to see exactly how treatment—ignoring his behavior and walking
the treatment works before using it with away from him—by the first B. The second A
other children. reflects the psychologist’s instruction that every-
Consider the case of 4-year-old Adrian. During one return to the original state of affairs, and the
every play period at school, Adrian hit other second B reflects the reinstatement of the experi-
children. At first, every time he hit another child, mental treatment. If the reinstatement of the
his teachers rushed over to stop him, often experimental treatment again diminishes the
lingering to explain why he should not hit other undesirable behavior—as it did—we can be
people. But Adrian kept right on hitting. The reasonably sure that the treatment works. As this
school psychologist, who thought that Adrian hit case study illustrates, we can learn about promis-
other children in part to gain the teachers’ ing approaches to helping children overcome
attention, told the teachers to ignore Adrian their problems by carefully analyzing the efficacy
whenever he was aggressive and to tell the other of a treatment of a single child. Adrian’s treatment
children just to walk away. At first, Adrian reacted might or might not work with other children;
to this change in teachers’ and children’s nothing in the study of a single individual guaran-
behavior with an increase in aggressive attacks. tees future success. But it’s a first step in the long
However, after a few days of the silent treatment, process of developing scientifically based treat-
his rate of hitting began to drop. To determine ments to curb children’s aggression.
52  Chapter 2 Research Methods

The Case Study Approach

The focus of a case study is a single individual or a small group of individuals. Case
studies allow investigators to explore phenomena that they do not often encounter,
such as an unusual talent, a rare developmental disorder, or a model classroom. Case
studies facilitate more intensive investigation because the researchers’ efforts are not
spread across a large number of participants. They provide rich details about pro-
cesses under study. They may be useful as precursors or follow-ups to studies using
other methods. The chief limitation of the single case approach is the substantial
challenges of generalizing from one individual to other children in other settings.

Studying Change Over Time

An essential decision for researchers in the field of social development is to deter-
mine how they will study changes in social behavior as children get older. Three
main designs are available for investigating changes over time: cross-sectional, lon-
gitudinal, and cross-sequential.

Cross-Sectional Design
The most common way to investigate age-related differences is to use a cross-­
sectional design, comparing individuals of different ages. By comparing the social
behaviors of groups of children at different ages, researchers hope to determine
how changes occur over the course of development. In one cross-sectional study,
Harriet Rheingold and Carol Eckerman (1970) investigated the development of
independence in young children. They recruited six different children at each
6-month age interval between 12 and 60 months. They then placed each child in
a naturalistic setting, on a large lawn, and recorded how far the child moved away
from his or her mother’s side. They found that the older children traveled farther.
Rheingold and Eckerman concluded that children’s independence increases with
age. But perhaps there were other reasons for their finding. The cross-sectional
design yields no information about the causes behind age-related changes because
we do not know what children in the study were like at younger ages. A longitudinal
design, which follows the same children over time, is better suited to addressing the
issue of individual change over development. In addition, perhaps the older chil-
dren traveled farther because their mothers had taken them to the park more often
than the younger children’s mothers who were working full time as a result of a shift
in maternal employment patterns. The cross-sectional approach does not establish
that differences between groups are strictly related to participants’ ages rather than
other confounding factors.

The Longitudinal Design

In a study using a longitudinal design, researchers follow a single group of children
as they grow. Longitudinal studies vary in the ages at which they begin and the
length of time they continue. For example, a study might start when the children
are infants and follow them to toddlerhood; it might start at birth and continue
 Studying Change Over Time  53

to adulthood. No matter how long they last, longitudinal designs have a number
of advantages. First, they allow researchers to follow children’s development over
time and to determine, for example, whether the distance children travel from
their mother or the amount of time they spend watching television increases as
they get older. Second, longitudinal designs allow researchers to study whether
children’s behavior patterns are stable; that is, whether toddlers who travel a long
distance from their mother’s side are more independent of mother later on or
whether children who throw more temper tantrums at age 2 are more likely to
hit other children at age 4 and get into fights with their peers at age 14. Third,
longitudinal designs allow researchers to explore possible causes of changes in
behavior over time (see Figure 2.2). They can analyze links between early events
(such as watching TV) and later behaviors (such as hitting classmates) while statis-
tically controlling for earlier behaviors (such as hitting siblings). Controlling for
earlier aggressive behavior in this example case helps to rule out the possibility
that watching violent TV only appears to be related to later aggressive behavior
because watching violent TV in early childhood is related to aggressive behavior
at that time and it is actually the early aggressive behavior that is predicting the
later aggressive behavior.
In short, examining changes in children’s aggressive behavior between one age
and another as a function of TV viewing, they are on somewhat firmer ground in
inferring that TV violence causes aggression. Importantly, however, many of these
advantages of longitudinal studies are only realized when measurement in those stud-
ies is prospective in nature. Though all longitudinal studies follow children over time,
such studies are only prospective investigations if researchers measure those chil-
dren’s experiences as they are unfolding. In contrast, retrospective studies (even if they

14

12

10
Height age (years)

6
*

4 * * FIGURE 2.2 Growth curves of five children in a longitudinal

* * study showing that when the children were removed from an
2 abusive home environment (*), they immediately gained in
height. This study provides clear evidence that abuse inhib-
its growth.
0 Source: Sirotnak, 2008. Image reprinted with permission from
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
eMedicine.com, 2010. Available at: http://emedicine.medscape.com/
Chronological age (years) article/913843-overview.
54  Chapter 2 Research Methods

have a longitudinal component) attempt to measure experiences that occurred in the

past, often by asking participants to recall earlier events, and are subject to many well
established biases of recall detailed later in this chapter (Reuben et al., 2016; Roisman
et al., 2002; Yarrow et al., 1970).
The longitudinal design also has disadvantages. It can take years to collect lon-
gitudinal data, and researchers often want information more quickly. In addition,
there is the problem of losing participants (i.e., attrition, which refers to the issue
of original participants not being available or being unwilling to continue their
involvement in the longitudinal study at later time points). As time passes, people
move, become ill, or simply lose interest, and results may be skewed by a shrinking
sample. As one teenager who had been measured, weighed, and tested every year
since he was a toddler put it:

“I just got tired of being the guinea pig, so when I was old enough to make my own
decisions, I told my parents and the folks who were conducting the study that I had had
enough and simply stopped coming to the study center. In my teen years, I was too busy
having fun to continue with this testing stuff.”

Another teen felt very differently:

“I really like it that the people at the center take such a keen interest in me by asking
how I am doing each year. And as I get older I understand that helping them out in this
way is really cool. I feel like I am contributing to science in a small way that may help
other kids someday.”

These two teens who either dropped out or continued were very different from
each other. This may have caused a problem with the findings, because the sam-
ple could have ended up including more helpful and generous subjects when the
more difficult kids dropped out. Moreover, even the sample of individuals who ini-
tially agreed to participate in a longitudinal project might not be representative of
the general population. Not everyone wants to have their children or themselves
observed, measured, and questioned for many years.
Another problem with a longitudinal design is that it is not very flexible. It is dif-
ficult for researchers to incorporate new insights and methods into a study that is
already under way. If a new test or technique is designed 10 years after the study has
begun, what can investigators do? They can start over with a new sample and the
new test, or they can begin to give the new test to their ­participants who are already
10 years old. But then they lose the possibility of comparing the children’s earlier
performance with later performance because the test instruments are not compara-
ble. The best solution usually is to give children already in the study both the old test
and the new test; however, this imposes a greater burden on participants and might
require additional funds for the study.
Yet another problem with a longitudinal design is practice effects; that is, the
effects of repeatedly testing participants over many years. A way to avoid some of
these problems is to conduct a short-term longitudinal study lasting only a few
months or a few years. This has the advantages of reducing participant attrition and
providing findings that can be used to design subsequent investigations incorporat-
ing newer research methods. A final drawback to lengthy longitudinal studies is
that findings may be descriptive of only a particular age cohort and lose relevance
as times change. For example, children who lived through difficult economic times
such as the great recession of 2008 when their family income dropped and the chil-
dren suffered from the financial loss might be different than those who were either
born much earlier or much later.
 Studying Change Over Time  55

nto Adulthood: Behavior in Childhood Predicts

Adult Outcomes
The longest-running example of a conscientiousness, cheerfulness, and optimism.
longitudinal study linking child- Then, when they were 30 years old, the partici-
hood and adulthood began in pants completed self-reports assessing these
1921 when Stanford psychologist characteristics. The characteristic that was most
Lewis Terman selected 1,528 predictive of longevity was conscientiousness,
California 11-year-olds of high intelligence, gave which was expressed in traits such as organiza-
them extensive personality tests, and gathered tion, thoroughness, reliability, and dutifulness
details about their lives. His original goal was to (Friedman, 2008). On average, Termites in the top
track these children and assess whether they quartile for conscientiousness lived 2 to 4 years
turned out to be psychologically normal or neu- longer than those in the bottom quartile. They
rotic, introverted, or sickly eggheads. (It turned out lived longer because they were less likely to
they were neither sickly nor neurotic.) The “Termites,” smoke and drink to excess, maintained more
as they are fondly nicknamed because of their optimal weight, and lived more stable and less
participation in the Terman study, have been stressful lives (Friedman, 2008; Hampson et al.,
tracked for decades now, through nearly all the 2006). Other childhood traits were not so helpful.
milestones of life; more than 200 were still alive as of Cheerfulness predicted a shorter life (L. R. Martin
2003. They have provided a unique database from et al., 2002) in part because cheerful individuals
which researchers can determine whether person- used more alcohol and cigarettes and engaged
ality types and early experience predict later health in more partying and riskier hobbies, such as
and well-being and with which they can investigate aviation and hunting (Friedman, 2008). This study
links between childhood characteristics, lifestyle clearly illustrates how longitudinal investigations
choices, and adult success, health, and longevity. can help us understand the long-term conse-
The database provides a rich demonstration of the quences of childhood characteristics. It also
value of a longitudinal design for understanding showed that fate is not sealed in childhood.
social development across the course of life. People who entered good jobs or good mar-
At the onset of the study, parents rated their riages sometimes became more conscientious
children’s personality characteristics, including as a result (Friedman & Martin, 2011).

The Cross-Sequential Design

A creative way around the problem of separating age-related changes from changes
caused by the unique experiences of a particular age cohort is to use the cross-
sequential design, which combines features of both cross-sectional and longitudinal
studies. In this design, researchers begin as they would in a cross-sectional study by
selecting children of different ages, but then they follow the children longitudinally.
For example, they might begin by recruiting and testing a sample of 2-year-olds,
4-year-olds, and 6-year-olds, and then every 2 years, they would test these children
and add a new sample of 2-year-olds to the study. The study would stop when the old-
est children in the initial cohort were 12. Figure 2.3 displays the design of this study.
The cross-sequential method offers several advantages. First, researchers can
examine age-related changes in children’s behavior and look at the stability of
individual differences because they test the same children repeatedly. Second,
researchers can examine practice effects because although some children are
assessed four times, other children are assessed less often. Third, in following differ-
ent age cohorts, researchers can explore cohort effects, or effects of the particular
time period in which children were born. For example, they can assess the effect
of changes if the school curriculum is modified to emphasize reducing children’s
56  Chapter 2 Research Methods

Year of assessment
2012 2014 2016 2018

2006 6 8 10 12

2008 4 6 8 10

2010 2 4 6 8

Year of birth
2012 2 4 6
FIGURE 2.3 Design for a
cross-sequential study. This
combination of cross-sectional
and longitudinal designs 2014 2 4
allows researchers to examine
age-related changes and com-
pare age cohorts at different Cross-sectional comparisons
points in time. The numbers 2016 2
Longitudinal comparisons
within the arrows are the ages
of the groups of children to Cohort comparisons
be studied.

aggression. Finally, the cross-sequential design saves time; six years after the start of
this study, researchers have data spanning a period of 10 years—a four-year saving
over a traditional longitudinal study.
See Table 2.1 for a summary of some of the advantages and disadvantages of
the three research designs. Researchers can avoid the problems of each method by
combining their components in creative ways.

TABLE 2.1

Comparison of Methods of Studying Developmental Change over Time

Advantages and Disadvantages Cross-Sectional Longitudinal Cross-Sequential
Time required for study is relatively Short Long Moderate
Cost of study is likely to be Low High Moderate
Participant attrition during study is Low High Moderate
Risk of staff turnover is Low High Moderate
Possibility of using new measures is High Low Moderate
Likelihood of practice effect is None High Low or moderate
Ability to assess links between early None High High for short-term
events and later behavior is
Ability to assess stability vs. instability None High High for short-term
of behavior patterns is
Ability to assess developmental paths of individuals is None High High for short-term
Threat of a cohort effect tends to be Unknown High Moderate
 Selecting a Sample  57

Selecting a Sample
If researchers wanted to study the typical social behaviors of preschool children, how
would they go about it? How many preschool children would they have to study?
They could not possibly study all of them; they would have to select a group of man-
ageable size made up of children who are representative of the entire population of
preschoolers. One of the important decisions in studying social development is how
to select the study sample. Also important is the task of recruiting participants. Nov-
ice researchers are often surprised to find that recruiting participants is more time
consuming (and frustrating) than running them through the research procedure. It
is relatively easy if the researcher can use rats or college students; but otherwise, it’s
not a matter of simply putting up a sign-up sheet on the office door and hoping that a
sample of 9-month-old infants or 14-year-olds will walk through the laboratory doors.
Considerable effort must be spent negotiating with hospitals, doctors, child-care
centers, school systems, churches, or community centers to convince them of the
value of the research and gain access to their patients or attendees.

Representativeness of the Sample

If research conclusions are to be generalizable, it is critical that they be based on
study of a representative sample; that is, a group of participants who possess the
same characteristics as the larger population of interest to the researcher. Suppose
a team of researchers who want to study the development of aggressive behavior in
children selects a sample of children who have been referred to a psychology clinic
because of behavior problems at home. The sample has 30 boys and 5 girls, and they
all come from a poor neighborhood in a large urban area. The researchers evaluate
various aspects of the children’s behavior by watching them play with other children
and asking them how they would resolve a dispute with a peer. They also assess how
each child’s parents get along and how much television the children watch. Ulti-
mately, the researchers conclude that boys are more aggressive than girls and that
aggression in children is related to watching television.
Are they entitled to draw these conclusions? They are not. Children who are
brought to a clinic because they have behavior problems at home are different from
children whose families do not or cannot seek this kind of help. For this reason, the
sample is biased toward children with more affluent or more conscientious parents.
The sample is also skewed toward boys. Although it is possible that boys are more
aggressive than girls, the sample of girls in this study is disproportionately small. In
fact, it is too small to use as the basis for a gender comparison. Given the lack of
representativeness in this sample, no basis exists for connecting television viewing
with aggressiveness. To draw such a conclusion, the researchers would be better off
testing relatively equal numbers of girls and boys who come from similar socioeco-
nomic backgrounds and include both children who are and children who are not
attending a clinic for behavior problems. Great care must be taken in generalizing
from a restricted sample, for example, a sample that includes only one race, gender,
social class, or geographical region.
Increasingly, investigators are finding the selection of several samples helpful
when each is made up of individuals who vary in race and social class and include
both genders. By selecting multiple samples, researchers can be more certain
that their conclusions do, in fact, apply to a broad range of people. This strategy
can be used by investigators in different regions studying the same issues as well.
If researchers in Vancouver, Helsinki, Berkeley, and Athens all produce similar
58  Chapter 2 Research Methods

findings, a particular place or sample clearly is not responsible for the results. When
researchers use multiple samples and several researchers draw similar conclusions,
they can have more confidence in their findings. In addition, even a sample that is
not representative of all youth (e.g., a sample of boys who are aggressive and have
other externalizing problems) can be informative if the goal is to generalize the
findings only to a similar group of children (e.g., other aggressive boys with exter-
nalizing problems).

The National Survey Approach

In a national survey, researchers select a large, nationally representative group of par-
ticipants. A stratified sampling strategy is often used to ensure that boys and girls or
participants from different socioeconomic groups are represented in the same pro-
portions as they exist in the general population. The National Longitudinal Survey of
Youth (NLSY) is one example of a national survey. The study began in 1979 with a sam-
ple of nearly 12,000 participants ranging in age from 14 to 24 years and drawn from
235 geographic areas across the United States. Other nations also have national sur-
veys. For example, the National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth (NLSCY)
in Canada includes more than 30,000 children whose social and emotional develop-
ment is being followed from birth to early adulthood. Sampling in these surveys must
ensure representativeness of age, gender, socioeconomic status, marital status, ethnic-
ity, and race—but some of these groups are more difficult to locate and recruit. Unless
researchers make a special effort to include minority groups such as single mothers,
Latino Americans, Asian Americans, African Americans, French Canadians, or aborigi-
nals, they will not learn about development in these groups. Therefore, they use a strat-
egy of oversampling to recruit participants from these groups at higher rates than their
proportions in the population (Miller, 2012). When data from large national samples
are available, researchers can use them for secondary data analysis. This has been a
common approach used by sociologists and economists for some time; however, it is
only recently that social developmental psychologists have begun to use other people’s
data to answer their research questions (Davis-Kean & Yager, 2017; Friedman, 2007).
Although national surveys allow researchers to draw conclusions that apply to
entire populations and subpopulations, a major disadvantage is their cost in terms of
time and labor. Moreover, often the questions asked are not relevant for addressing
the topics of interest to developmental psychologists (Trzesniewski et al., 2011). A
further disadvantage is that these surveys are not well suited to answering questions
about the psychological processes underlying social development—emotional regula-
tion, parent–child relationships, and so on. To study psychological processes in 20,000
children takes more time and money than most investigators have at their disposal.
Nonetheless, investment in studies that not only use high-quality, often expen-
sive measurement strategies (e.g., observational methods) but manage to do so in
the context of large samples is critical for at least two reasons. First, larger sample
studies often provide more opportunities to conduct more representative sampling.
Second, in research that studies individual differences in particular, sample size
(quantity) is actually itself a component of quality. More specifically, the larger the
sample size, the more precisely a researcher can estimate the magnitude of an asso-
ciation between two variables or the difference between two or more groups on an
outcome of interest. And large samples make it more likely that the results will be
reliable and likely to be found by others in the future (Card, 2017).
 Selecting a Sample  59

Recently, some scientists have argued that many of findings of social science are
not replicable and some have even labeled this situation a “replication crisis” (Card,
2017; Lindsay, 2015). One simple (albeit partial) solution to the “replication crisis”
is to conduct studies that use samples large enough to produce good estimates of
the associations of interest. It is therefore heartening to see longitudinal studies of
social and emotional development, including the Early Childhood Longitudinal
Study-Birth Cohort (Roisman & Fraley, 2012) and the NICHD Study of Early Child
Care and Youth Development (Early Child Care Research Network, 2005) that have
acquired multiple direct observations (e.g., of parent–child interactions) in studies
that exceed a thousand or more participants. Not surprisingly, this kind of work
requires a large amount of financial resources and a great deal of collaboration
among developmental scientists.

Meta-Analysis: Combining Results Across Studies

Meta-analysis is a statistical technique that, in contrast to narrative reviews of the lit-
erature, allows researchers to quantitatively synthesize the results of many studies on
a particular topic (Cooper, 2009)—for example, the effects of television violence on
children’s aggressiveness. The technique yields an overall estimate of the magnitude
of the difference between experimental and control groups or the strength of asso-
ciations between factors in correlational studies. This estimate is called the effect size
(Rosenthal & DiMatteo, 2001). Conducting a meta-analysis permits researchers to draw
conclusions about the size and reliability of observed differences rather than simply
listing the results of different studies and looking to see whether they are consistent.
In one meta-analysis of 217 studies investigating the links between exposure to televi-
sion violence and children’s and adolescents’ antisocial behavior, researchers found
a clear association between TV violence and antisocial behavior (Paik & Comstock,
1994). The effect size was 0.30. A more recent meta-analysis produced a similar finding
(Bushman & Anderson, 2001). This effect size indicates that the association between
watching violent TV programs and behaving aggressively is moderately strong.
Meta-analysis is an invaluable tool. However, a word of caution is needed.
Although meta-analysis can provide an estimate of the reliability and strength of dif-
ferences or associations across studies, the accuracy of that estimate is limited by the
samples in the individual studies. If all of the studies in the meta-analysis included
only white children from middle-class families, the conclusions would not neces-
sarily apply to children of other classes, races, or ethnicities. Thus, meta-analysis
provides an opportunity to take stock of the available evidence and identify oppor-
tunities for improving the quality of evidence in a given area of research.

Studying Development Cross-Culturally

In recent years, researchers have realized that selecting samples from different cul-
tures can be a valuable research strategy. Finding that a behavior pattern is similar
across cultures suggests that it is universal, whereas finding that behavior patterns
differ markedly across cultures suggests that specific environmental variables play a
significant role. Although cross-cultural research can be very informative, it is often
difficult and expensive to conduct. Language differences and lack of familiarity with
the underlying meanings of different customs and practices can lead researchers to
60  Chapter 2 Research Methods

erroneous conclusions. Successful cross-cultural studies benefit from the participa-

tion of cultural informants (Fung, 2011; Greenfield, Suzuki, et al., 2006; Rogoff,
2003). These are usually local people who serve as translators and interpreters and
help researchers gain the trust of officials and other people with whom they need to
collaborate. They also often assist in interpreting research findings. As awareness of
cultural contributions to development increases, cross-cultural research is becom-
ing more common.

ultural Context: Challenges for Researchers

Studying different cultural groups Establish cultural equivalence of research
is full of challenges. Here are instruments. Some researchers simply
some suggestions that can help reuse an experimental paradigm or set of
researchers conduct useful questionnaires developed in their home
cross-cultural investigations. culture when they go into the field to do
cross-cultural research. Unfortunately, this
Treat culture as a set of variables. Originally,
can lead to things getting lost in translation.
cross-cultural researchers simply compared
This is literally true when researchers simply
children from different cultures as if cul-
translate an interview or questionnaire into
ture were a single independent variable.
another language. Although it is common
However, cultures are more complex than
to use a two-step process whereby a bilin-
this. They consist of many factors, such as
gual person translates the interview into the
beliefs and customs, religious orientations,
other language and then another person
and political systems. It is important for
translates it back (“back translation”), prob-
researchers to identify and disentangle
lems can still exist. The exact equivalent of
these factors.
a verbal expression might not exist in the
Choose representative cultural samples.
second language or it might carry a slightly
Because variation within cultures can be as
different meaning.
great as between cultures, it is important for
Interpret findings in a culturally informed
researchers to obtain samples that reflect
manner. Researchers are likely to benefit
the diversity of the culture and to look at dif-
from inquiring as to whether their interpre-
ferences within as well as between cultures.
tations of the actions and statements they
Study cultures that differ in meaningful ways.
observe in another culture are consistent
The era of cataloging differences between
with the interpretations that native mem-
cultures just to satisfy one’s curiosity is over.
bers of the culture would make. Investi-
Purely descriptive inquiries are best left to
gators should talk to informants from the
National Geographic and the Discovery
culture before they collect data, include
Channel. The goal of current cross-cultural
members of the culture in their data col-
research is to take advantage of naturally
lection teams, and discuss the interpreta-
occurring variations to test meaningful
tion of the findings with informants after
theoretical hypotheses.
the data are collected and analyzed.
Avoid ethnocentrism. All researchers belong
to a culture, and they use that culture as a Cross-cultural research can yield valuable
frame of reference for viewing the customs insights, but these challenges, combined with the
and beliefs of other cultures. This can lead logistical problems of making contacts with
to characterizations of other cultures as people in other countries, establishing coopera-
inferior or deficient. The goal for researchers tion with them, and gaining their trust, make this
is to shed their own cultural clothing so they a method for the persistent, patient, and
can focus on understanding the practices committed.
in other cultures.
 Gathering Data  61

Gathering Data
After researchers have decided what group or groups of individuals they want to
study, they must decide exactly how they will study them. Essentially, they can use
three methods of gathering data: asking children about themselves, asking other
people who are close to the children about them, and observing children directly.
Each approach has its advantages and limitations, and researchers’ choices depend
on the types of questions they are trying to answer.

Children’s Self-Reports
A self-report is information a person provides about himself or herself, typically
by answering a set of questions the researcher has compiled. Soliciting such infor-
mation from children presents special problems. Compared with adults, children
are less attentive, are slower to respond, and have more trouble understanding the
questions that researchers ask. Despite these limitations, some types of informa-
tion are difficult to obtain any other way. As one researcher, Nicholas Zill (1986,
pp. 23–24), put it:

“The child is the best authority on his own feelings, even if he has some trouble verbal-
izing those feelings . . . and . . . there are aspects of a child’s daily life that his parents or
teacher know little or nothing about.”

In Zill’s study of 2,279 children between 7 and 11 years of age, parents’ and children’s
responses to interview questions were judged to be equally truthful. Children’s reports
may be more limited than those of adults, but they are no less honest. Children were
especially truthful when their parents were not present. Thus, interviewing children
can provide unique and trustworthy information about children’s daily lives and feel-
ings. Special methods such as the puppet-interview or the story-completion technique
are used to probe the thoughts and feelings of young children in a more indirect and
fun way.
Asking children to provide narrative descriptions of their activities over the
recent past is another way to get self-reports. Children are asked to describe recent
social events, such as a conflict with a peer, a teacher, or a parent. Robert Cairns
and his colleagues (Cairns & Cairns, 1994; Xie et al., 2005) asked children, “Has
anyone bothered you recently or caused you any trouble or made you mad?” The
interviewer then followed up with questions such as, “Who was it? How did it start?
What happened? What did you do? How did it end?” This interview protocol pro-
vided information about whether conflicts had occurred and how the children
handled them. Similar interview protocols have been used to find out about chil-
dren’s positive social exchanges. However, coding narratives is very time consum-
ing, and the reported events often do not represent all of the child’s interpersonal
exchanges.
To provide a more representative sample of children’s experiences, researchers
can use the experience sampling method (ESM; more recently described as ecologi-
cal momentary assessment or EMA) (Csikszentmihalyi et al., 2006; Hektner et al.,
2007). They give children wrist beepers, pagers, personal digital assistants, or smart
phones that are programmed to beep at random times throughout the day. When
the signal sounds, the child records (in a notebook or on the device) answers to
the researchers’ questions, such as: “Where are you? Who are you with? What are
62  Chapter 2 Research Methods

esearch Up Close: The Puppet Interview Method

She found that children were able to describe

and Jeffrey Measelle, University

the kind of child they thought they were

Courtesy of Jennifer Ablow

simply by agreeing with one puppet or the
other. Using this method, Cassidy showed that
children with different types of early relation-
ships with their mothers developed different

of Oregon
self-concepts; those with high-quality relation-
ships were less likely to agree with the puppet
who said, “I’m a bad person” than children
Assessing the perceptions and feelings of a who had poor-quality relationships.
young child can be a real challenge. Traditional Other researchers have used puppets to
questionnaires and interviews are not suitable for assess children’s perceptions of their parents’
young children because of the children’s short relationships. In one study, 4- to 7-year-old
attention spans and limited cognitive and children were presented with two puppets;
language abilities. One solution has come from one puppet said, “My parents fight a lot”; the
clinical psychologists who for many years have other puppet said, “My parents don’t fight a
used puppets to help diagnose and treat lot.” One puppet said, “After my parents fight,
problems in young children. Together, the thera- they say they are sorry to each other”; the
pist and child make up a story about some other puppet said, “After my parents fight, they
problematic aspect of the child’s life, using don’t say they are sorry to each other.”
puppets as props to help the child. This Children’s responses to the puppets were found
approach has been adapted by researchers as to be related to reports from their fathers,
a tool for investigating the social experiences mothers, and outside observers who watched
and characteristics of young children (see the couple solve a problem—an indication
photo). Here is how it works: The interviewer poses that the children’s responses were reliable
a question to two puppets, for example, “What assessments of the quality of their parents’
kind of child are you—a nice one or a not-so- marriage (Ablow et al., 2009). Moreover, the
nice one?” The puppets then volunteer opposing children’s responses were related to their own
views about themselves, and the interviewer asks aggressive behavior at school: The more
the child to say which puppet he or she agrees conflict the children indicated they saw at
with or is most like. home between their parents, the more aggres-
Jude Cassidy (1988) is one researcher who sive and depressed the children were at school
has used puppet interviews. She presented (Ablow, 2005). The puppet interview method is
5- and 6-year-olds with two puppets who made clearly a useful and age-appropriate alterna-
either positive statements about themselves (“I’m tive to traditional interviews and questionnaires
a really nice kid a lot of the time”) or neg­ative for probing the views and perceptions of
statements (“I’m not a nice kid a lot of the time”). young children.

you doing? What is your mood?” This method of data collection allows children to
report on their behaviors and feelings in a structured way that samples the settings
in which the child’s activities take place. Beeper studies have provided a great deal
of information about how children spend their time, whom they spend their time
with, and how their moods are related to their activities (Larson & Sheeber, 2008).
This method is particularly helpful for documenting changes in children’s feelings
over the course of a week, a month, or a year. Figure 2.4 provides an example of a
beeper record of a child’s activities and moods.
 Gathering Data  63

Time signaled: 4:05 Time filled out: 4:06 7. Circle an answer for each question about what you were
doing.
1. Where were you?
Not at Some- Pretty Very
in the cafeteria at school all what much much
a. How much choice did you
2. Were you at the after-school program? Yes No have about this activity? 1 2 3 4
st
b. How important was this
21 Century activity to you? 1 2 3 4
c. Was it interesting? 1 2 3 4
3. What was the main thing you were doing? d. Was it challenging? 1 2 3 4
e. Did you enjoy what you
homework
were doing? 1 2 3 4
f. How hard were you
4. What else were you doing?
concentrating? 1 2 3 4
g. Were you using your
eating snack
skills? 1 2 3 4
h. Did you wish you were
5. Who was doing this activity with you? Circle all that apply. doing something else? 1 2 3 4
No one Other adults I know
Mom/stepmom 8. How were you feeling when you were signaled? Circle
1 friend
an answer for each feeling.
Dad/stepdad 2 or more friends
Brother/sister Age Not at A Some- Very
Other kids
all little what much
Adult relative Boyfriend/girlfriend
Lonely 1 2 3 4
Child relative Age Anyone else? Who? Happy 1 2 3 4
Teacher(s) Angry 1 2 3 4
Stressed 1 2 3 4
Program staff
Excited 1 2 3 4
Bored 1 2 3 4
Scared 1 2 3 4
6. Who else was around but doing something else?
Sad 1 2 3 4
No one Other adults I know Relaxed 1 2 3 4
Mom/stepmom 1 friend Proud 1 2 3 4
Worried 1 2 3 4
Dad/stepdad 2 or more friends
Brother/sister Age Other kids
Adult relative Boyfriend/girlfriend
Child relative Age Adults I don't know
Teacher(s) Anyone else? Who?
Program staff

FIGURE 2.4 A sample answer sheet completed by a child using the experience sampling method. The child completed these ques-
tions when beeped throughout the day. In recent studies, these questions might appear on a smart phone and be transmitted to
the researchers immediately upon completion.
Source: Vandell, D. L., Shernoff, D. J., Pierce, K. M., Bolt, D. M., Dadisman, K., & Brown, B. B. (2005). Activities, engagement, and emotion in
after-school programs and elsewhere. New Directions for Youth Development, 105, 121–129. This material is reproduced with permission of John Wiley &
Sons, Inc.

One of the newest approaches to the collection of self-report data is the result
of another modern technological advance—the Internet (Fraley, 2004; Gosling &
Johnston, 2010). Instead of asking children or adolescents to complete a paper-
and-pencil questionnaire or conducting a phone interview, researchers can contact
subjects and present their questions to them online. Most children in Westernized
countries have access to a computer and the Internet (Child Trends, 2012b; Com-
mon Sense Media, 2017; Patriarca et al., 2009; Pew Research Center, 2006). Until
children of all income levels and ethnic groups have equal access, however, care must
be taken to avoid recruiting biased and unrepresentative samples. Despite this prob-
lem, this approach to data collection has many advantages. Most obvious, Internet
assessments are more convenient for both researchers and respondents. Children do
64  Chapter 2 Research Methods

not have to be physically present at a specific time—and neither do the researchers.

As one very busy parent said:

I was happy to participate in the research project on the effects of divorce because I
could be part of it without leaving home. I just sat down at the computer twice a year
and answered the research questions. It was really easy. I might have been less willing to
take time to make a special trip to the university. Being able to use the Internet was a big
reason for my involvement in the study.

Moreover, the Internet provides a way of increasing sample sizes and broadening
research participation. It even offers an inexpensive and feasible way to include
children from other countries. In addition, data collection by means of Internet
surveys may be especially valuable for inquiries about sensitive topics that children
might feel uncomfortable or embarrassed about answering in a face-to-face inter-
view. Topics such as adolescent drinking, smoking, or sexuality may be more accu-
rately assessed in the relative privacy of an Internet survey. This privacy has its own
problems, though; because there is no researcher to supervise, children might not
finish the survey or, worse, have someone else finish it for them. Careful follow-up
reminders and incentives for completion can help limit these problems. As chil-
dren become increasingly sophisticated Internet users at younger and younger ages,
it is likely that the Internet will become even more valuable for studying social
development.
One relatively recent development in Internet-based research is the increased
use of tools such as Amazon’s Mechanical Turk (MTurk), which has been described
as a “one-stop shop for getting work done, bringing together the people and tools
that enable task creation, labor recruitment, compensation, and data collection.
The site boasts a large, diverse workforce consisting of over 100,000 users from
over 100 countries who complete tens of thousands of tasks daily (Pontin, 2007).
Individuals register as “requesters” (task creators) or “workers” (paid task com-
pleters). Requesters can create and post virtually any task that can be done at a
computer (i.e., surveys, experiments, writing, etc.) using simple templates or techni-
cal scripts or linking workers to external online survey tools (e.g., SurveyMonkey)”
(Buhrmester, Kwang, & Gosling, 2011, p. 3). Of course, the use of such tools in
many areas of social development is complicated by the fact that child participants
cannot themselves consent to participate in research (their caregivers must consent
on their behalf, as we discuss in greater detail later in this chapter).

Reports by Family Members, Teachers, and Peers

A second way of collecting data on children’s social development is to solicit infor-
mation from the people, generally known as “informants,” who know the children
well. Most commonly, researchers seek this information from family members,
teachers, peers, or friends, though child-care providers, romantic partners, cow-
orkers, and supervisors (just to name a few) are also viable potential informants in
research on social development.

Family members One advantage of interviewing parents is that their reports are
generally based on many observations made over time in a variety of situations.
Another advantage is that, even if they are not totally accurate (and indeed no
informant is likely to provide a totally accurate perspective on a given child’s experi-
ences or behaviors), parents’ perceptions, expectations, beliefs, and interpretations
 Gathering Data  65

of events and behavior may be just as important as objective reality (Bugental &
Grusec, 2006; Collins & Repinski, 2001). Children’s behavior may be more influ-
enced by their parents’ perceptions of them than by their actual behavior.
Investigators have devised various strategies to increase the accuracy of inform-
ant reports, including those from parents. For example, they ask parents and other
informants to report only very recent events to ensure more reliable memories;
they may even phone in the evening to ask which specific behaviors (such as crying
or disobeying) children have exhibited during the past 2 hours (Patterson & Bank,
1989). They ask parents or other informants to keep a structured diary in which
to record the child’s behaviors at regular intervals, such as every hour (Hether-
ington, 1991). Social development researchers have even asked parents and other
informants to carry the same kinds of devices they have given child participants and
had them record their activities and feelings and those of their children (Larson &
Richards, 1994).
Another way that researchers have collected useful data from family members
in particular is by asking them to share their family stories, accounts of personal
experiences that have meaning to the family as a whole (Pratt & Fiese, 2004). We
all recall stories we were told about our parents’ or grandparents’ experiences:
“When I was your age, I used to walk three miles in the snow to get to school”
or “When I was a little girl, I had to feed the chickens and the pigs every day.” These
stories reflect the values parents are instilling in their children. Family stories can
also reveal cross-cultural variation (Wang, 2004a). Chinese and North American
families, for example, emphasize different themes in their stories. Chinese families
emphasize group loyalty and moral correctness; North American families focus
on autonomy and self-assertiveness. Collecting family stories is an alternative to
administering questionnaires and interviews and can provide unique information
about families’ lives.

Teachers and Peers To find out about children’s behavior in school and other
settings when parents aren’t present, researchers ask teachers and schoolmates.
They may ask teachers to rate children on dimensions such as attentiveness, aggres-
siveness, and sociability, which the teachers have observed in the classroom or on
the playground. They may ask children’s classmates to rate how well children are
accepted. For example, they might ask all youngsters in a class to rate each of the
other children in terms of “How much I like to play with him” or “How much I like
to work with her.” The researchers then combine the ratings to get a picture of each
child’s social status in the classroom (Ladd, 2005; Rubin et al., 2011). Often teach-
ers and peers are asked to report on current or recent events, which is helpful since
all reporters (not just parents) are susceptible to problems of poor or distorted
recall of past events.

Focus Groups
Another approach to studying social development is to use a focus group. Focus
groups are commonly used in disciplines such as sociology and anthropology as
well as by advertising agencies to help decide how to market soap, shampoo, salad
dressing, and Saabs, but recently psychologists have begun to use them too
(Liamputtong, 2011). Usually six to ten adults or children participate. An inter-
viewer poses a set of questions that the members of the group answer. These groups
provide a unique opportunity for parents and children to talk about their concerns,
values, and goals in a context that is less constrained and more relaxed than the
66  Chapter 2 Research Methods

more formal interview format. As one adolescent stated, this approach allows non-
adult perspectives to be heard:

“Lots of times they say that they want an adolescent’s opinion, but they don’t give a shit
what we think. They’re like ‘Oh this is good for them, let’s do this.’ We are different peo-
ple, we have different thoughts. It’s good when they give us a chance to actually express
our opinions and talk about our concerns.”

This technique is particularly valuable in the early stages of a study when

researchers are identifying salient issues for the participants they propose to study.
For example, using focus groups has proved useful for identifying the roles of non-
family mentors such as compadres (godparents) in Latino American families when
simply asking questions based on European American families would have missed
this important aspect of Latino children’s socialization. Focus groups can increase
the validity of a study by making sure that researchers ask the right questions and
include all relevant factors. Focus groups can help researchers construct question-
naires by identifying culturally appropriate and inappropriate items (Silverstein,
2002). Finally, focus groups can help researchers understand cultural preferences
in interviewing styles and alert them to topics they should avoid when talking to
families of particular ethnic backgrounds.
The value of focus groups is not limited to the early stages of a research project.
They are also useful at the end of a study after the data have been collected when
researchers are trying to make sense of their findings. Talking to members of a focus
group improves interpretive validity (Maxwell, 1992) by ensuring that researchers’
interpretations of people’s behaviors and narrative reports are consistent with the
people’s own understandings. For example, if researchers have videotaped African
American parents and their children discussing common family problems such as
curfews, homework, and time spent watching television, they can determine whether
their interpretations of the interchanges are accurate by using a focus group of Afri-
can American families. This approach helps avoid misinterpretations observed in
earlier studies when European American researchers saw more conflict and restric-
tiveness in African American parent–child interactions than African Americans did
(Gonzales et al., 1996). Clearly, it is critical to be sure researchers understand the
meanings of children’s and parents’ behaviors and expressions in cultural groups
that differ from their own.

Direct Observation
Direct observation also provides unique insights into children’s behavior. Students
of social development make observations in naturalistic settings, such as children’s
homes, school playgrounds, lunchrooms, and after-school clubs and in (more or
less) structured settings, such as laboratories or playrooms where they give children
and sometimes their parents tasks to perform.

Naturalistic observation Data collected in the child’s natural settings can

provide critical information about how children act in these settings. By using a
naturalistic observation, researchers can find out how much time children spend
interacting with other people and whether their interactions tend to be positive or
negative. The problem with observations, though, is that the data are valid only if
the presence of an observer has not distorted the participants’ behavior. Parents
 Gathering Data  67

et You Thought That . . .: Parents Can Accurately

Report Retrospectively About Their Children’s
Early Years
mothers were interviewed retrospectively, pedia-
trician Dr. Benjamin Spock made it clear that he

Blend Images/Getty Images

disapproved of allowing children to suck their
thumbs and approved of giving them pacifiers.
All of the mothers who gave inaccurate reports
about their children’s thumb sucking denied that
the children had ever sucked their thumbs and
said that they had given them pacifiers—even
though the actual records showed that the
babies had sucked their thumbs, not pacifiers.
Who knows more about a child’s early rearing Why are parents so inaccurate when they
experiences than his or her parents? It would not report retrospectively about their children’s
be surprising if you thought that parents could earliest experiences? The simplest reason is that
provide the most accurate reports of their child’s memory is fallible and, importantly, this is a
early years. Some researchers have thought so potential problem for acquiring accurate infor-
too. To find out about children and child rearing mation not only from mothers and fathers, but
during the early years of life researchers have from others as well. Indeed, that memories are
often relied on mothers’ and fathers’ reports fallible and subject to systematic distortions
about those caregiving experiences months or applies to all informants asked to retrospectively
years after they occurred. However, it turns out provide information about earlier events and
that such retrospective reports are often unreli- experiences, perhaps especially when those
able, inaccurate, and systematically distorted. earlier experiences are emotionally charged and
Parents’ reports of their early child-rearing occurred long ago (e.g., Roisman, Padrón, Sroufe,
practices and details of the timing of their & Egeland, 2002). Distortions fit with idealized
children’s developmental milestones are seldom expectations, cultural stereotypes, and expert
consistent with independent assessments advice. People are motivated to remember
(Holden, 2015). themselves in the best possible light. This is one
In one study, researchers collected mothers’ reason that parents remember themselves as
reports of their infant-rearing practices when their more consistent, patient, and even-tempered
children were 3 years old and compared them than more objective assessments reveal (Holden,
with reports collected when the children were 2015). As one mom said upon learning how
infants (Robbins, 1963; see also Yarrow et al., inaccurate her memory of her children’s
1970). This was possible because mothers had childhood:
described their child-rearing practices prospec-
tively during regular well-baby checkups, and the “Boy was I shocked. I thought that I would
researchers were able to compare these records never forget those special moments in
kept by the pediatricians with mothers’ later Aiden’s life such as when he first walked and
recollections. They discovered that many mothers when he spoke his first words. I’m so glad
had forgotten their earlier practices, and distor- that I wrote things down because it is now
tions in the mothers’ recall tended to line up with clear to me that my memory is not as good
the opinions of the child-rearing experts of the as I thought it was. And my husband was
day. For example, in the edition of the book Baby just as bad. We were so preoccupied with
and Child Care that was widely used when the being parents that we just forget the details!”
68  Chapter 2 Research Methods

and children often behave differently when they know an outside observer is watch-
ing them; for example, they are likely to inhibit their negative behavior (Brownell
et al., 2015; Graue & Walsh, 1998).

“Who wouldn’t change their normal routines when an observer, wearing dark glasses
to conceal the direction of his gaze and making notes on a clipboard appears regularly
with the evening dinner. I got used to it and went back to bugging my kid sister, but at
first it was pretty weird being watched by this extra dinner guest who didn’t eat but just
watched us.”

Attempts to minimize distortions in naturalistic observations include conduct-

ing repeated observations and using less-obtrusive observational methods, such as
an inconspicuous camera or an observer who pretends to be reading a notebook.
In one study, for example, an observer came to the family’s home each evening at
dinner time for a period of several weeks (Feiring & Lewis, 1987). Families reported
that they gradually become almost unaware of being observed. In another study,
researchers observed increases in less acceptable behaviors, such as quarreling,
criticizing, punishing, and using obscene language, as the number of observations
increased (Boyum & Parke, 1995). Children and parents can become accustomed
to being observed and display their real feelings and customary actions as long as
researchers fade into the background.
One way for researchers to fade into the background is to observe children’s
behavior from a distance (Asher et al., 2001). In one study of aggression and bully-
ing, for example, Debra Pepler and her colleagues set up a video camera overlook-
ing a school playground and outfitted each child in the study with a small remote
microphone and pocket-sized transmitter (Pepler et al., 1998). The remote mic
allowed the researchers to eavesdrop on children’s conversations with their peers
during lunch and recess. These eavesdropping techniques picked up not only chil-
dren’s socially desirable behaviors but also their antisocial behavior and gossip-
ing. Participants grow accustomed to these audio devices after a few hours, which
indicates that these remote audio recording devices are a useful tool and likely
to provide unbiased data. The newest generation of these devices for conducting
ecological momentary assessment, including the Electronically Activated Recorder
(EAR; Mehl & Holleran, 2007) use a small, unobtrusive microphone linked to a
smartphone.
The advantage of naturalistic observation is, of course, that researchers can
observe children’s and adults’ behavior in the settings in which they typically occur,
so generalizability and validity are high. However, there are drawbacks. Problems
of reactivity can occur, and if the assessments are too brief, the social behaviors of
interest might not be observed (Hartmann et al., 2010). For example, a researcher
interested in how parents respond to children’s conflicts or cooperation could go
home with a blank notebook after a long afternoon of observation if the siblings did
not hit or share while she was there. This type of data collection is expensive and
time consuming. It takes many more hours to collect samples of specific kinds of
social behavior in a naturalistic observation than it does using questionnaires.
A further problem in naturalistic observation is observer bias. Observers’ expec-
tations may lead them to distort or misinterpret observed behaviors (Rosenthal,
2002). Researchers can reduce this problem by carefully training observers, clearly
defining target behaviors, keeping observers “blind” (unaware of the hypotheses
that guide the study), and frequently assessing the reliability or the extent to which
two independent observers agree on their observed scores (Miller, 2012).
 Gathering Data  69

Structured observation Researchers also use structured observation in a labo-

ratory to elicit specific social behaviors and overcome some of the problems of
naturalistic observation. To avoid the problem of infrequently occurring behav-
ior, researchers arrange situations in which the behaviors are likely to occur. For
example, they instruct parents to ask the child to obey certain rules or do certain
tasks, such as cleaning up and putting away toys at the end of a play session. This
structured observation permits an evaluation of the parents’ disciplinary strate-
gies and the child’s compliance. In another structured observation, researchers
set up opportunities for children to exercise self-control by not eating a candy
or by resisting the temptation to touch a wrapped present (Kochanska & Aksan,
2006). In a relatively short time, researchers can collect a variety of measures in
a standard set of tasks that permits comparisons across children of different ages
and family backgrounds.
Although this approach solves some of the problems of naturalistic observa-
tion, there are concerns about whether the observed behaviors are similar to those
observed in everyday situations. In fact, children and parents often behave differ-
ently in a structured observation. They tend to express less negative emotion and
exhibit more socially desirable behavior when observations are conducted in unfa-
miliar settings, such as a laboratory playroom, a doctor’s office, or a hospital setting
compared with their own homes (Hartmann et al., 2010).
To increase the ecological validity of structured observations, researchers try to
make laboratories feel more like home. They hide an observer behind a one-way
window or use a video camera camouflaged in a bookcase. They bring in couches,
easy chairs, and magazines. One ingenious solution is to create a “laboratory apart-
ment.” Many decades ago, Arnold Gesell (1928) designed a laboratory hotel in
which mothers and infants could come and stay for a few days under the watch-
ful eyes of an observer who recorded their behaviors as the family went about
daily routines of cooking, eating, napping, diaper changing, and playing. More
recently, researchers have resurrected the concept of the laboratory apartment as
a setting for observing parents and children under more naturalistic conditions
(Inoff-Germain et al., 1992; Radke-Yarrow & Klimes-Dougan, 2002). The apartment
is fully equipped with all the comforts of home
including sofa and armchairs, toys, kitchen,
bathroom, books, and television. Families are
videotaped (with hidden cameras) over the
course of a day or across several days according
to a schedule of events, such as breakfast, tel-

Richard T. Nowitz/Science Sourceimages

evision viewing, nap time, toy play, and cleanup
so that all families are observed under similar
structured conditions. Researchers who study
marital relationships have used a similar strategy
in which couples spend a weekend in a labora-
tory apartment and researchers watch how they
resolve disputes and disagreements (Gottman
& Gottman, 2008). This strategy offers greater
validity than brief laboratory visits and at the
same time increases the likelihood that phe-
nomena of interest, such as parental discipline Research with very young children, like this 6-month-old infant, is becom-
and marital conflicts, occur so that they can be ing increasingly common as psychologists seek to expand knowledge about
observed and analyzed. But few researchers have early social development. A video or digital recording will permit closer
the resources to set up laboratory apartments. study of this child’s behavior after the observation session is over.
70  Chapter 2 Research Methods

Ways of Recording and Coding Observations

When researchers observe children and their families directly, they must decide
what behaviors to record, either live or on video, and how to code them.

Behavioral observations If researchers are interested in a broad range of

behaviors, they may use a specimen record to describe everything the child or par-
ent does during a specified period of time, say an hour or an afternoon. If they are
interested in a particular type of behavior, such as the way a child responds to the
parents’ directions, they might use event sampling to capture only those incidents
in which a specific event occurs, in this case, when a parent gives the child an order
or request. With time sampling, the researcher records a set of predetermined
behaviors that occur during a specific—relatively brief—time period. For example,
if researchers want to observe a family for an hour, they might divide the hour
into 120 30-second units, prepare a grid showing behaviors and time blocks, and
then put a check beside each behavior that occurred in each block of time. This
approach would provide a measure of the frequency of different kinds of behaviors
during the hour. If the researcher wanted to examine a continuous stream of behav-
ior, a better strategy would be to record events sequentially across the entire obser-
vation period (Bakeman & Quera, 2011, 2012; Brownell et al., 2015; Hartmann
et al., 2010). This would allow the researcher to discover which behaviors came
first and which responses followed; for example, the baby threw her cereal bowl to
the floor; her mother scolded her; the baby cried; the mother picked up the baby
and comforted her. This stream of behavior provides a picture of mother–child
interaction and enables researchers to answer questions such as: When the baby
misbehaves, what is the mother’s most common response? Observational methods
are central to the study of social development. However, using multiple methods in
the same study, such as combining observations with parent surveys or interviews, is
also valuable. If findings from a variety of methods converge, researchers can more
reasonably conclude that they have operationalized and measured their constructs
adequately and their results are valid.

Ethnographic approaches Ethnography is a qualitative approach to research

used in a variety of disciplines, especially anthropology; it involves using intensive
observations and interviews to gather data about the beliefs, practices, and behav-
iors of individuals in a particular context or culture. For example, Margaret Mead
(1928) gathered detailed accounts of daily life and routines in Samoa by living as a
member of the community, interviewing key adults and adolescents, and recording
her participant observations. More recently, Linda Burton and her colleagues have
used the ethnographic approach to study children in neighborhoods, collecting a
rich lode of data from field observations, focus groups, participant observations,
and life history interviews with children and their families (Burton, 2007; Burton
et al., 2011). According to one ethnographic researcher:

“You find out the details of the everyday lives of children and their families just by
being around for extended periods of time watching and listening to conversations.
The richness of the information that you discover through ethnographic approaches is
unique and difficult to gather in any other way. That is what makes this time-consuming
approach so rewarding and so illuminating.”
 Gathering Data  71

Ethnographic techniques have some drawbacks, however. They offer somewhat

subjective views of the community, context, or culture when community mem-
bers try to put their group in the most favorable light. The usual routines of the
group can be disrupted by the presence and participation of an outside observer.
The researcher’s field notes may be selective and biased. Analyzing the wealth of
information provided by these techniques can be overwhelming. Limited gener-
alizability is another obstacle for ethnography because the focus is usually on a
single community or group and it is difficult to determine how much the in-depth
portrait is unique to that group or context. Despite these drawbacks, the ethno-
graphic approach is valuable for studying social development, most so when it is
used in combination with other, more objective approaches. For example, in the
study of neighborhoods, researchers can use census tract data, objective descrip-
tions of the physical characteristics of neighborhood conditions, and tallies of
neighborhood resources (stores, schools, social services) to complement data
gathered using ethnographic observations (Leventhal, Dupéré, & Shuey, 2015;
Parke, Lio, et al., 2012).

Nonverbal measures To assess social development in babies and young children,

researchers can observe their nonverbal responses. Even newborn infants make
motor responses to social stimuli. Researchers can measure how much they move
when a person approaches or talks. They can also record infants’ sucking patterns,
which change in intensity and duration as they encounter different social stimuli,
including faces and voices (Saffran et al., 2006). Other useful nonverbal responses
are smiling and vocalizing: 3-month-old babies smile more at their mother’s face
than at a stranger’s, for instance (Camras et al., 1991). Crying is a response research-
ers can use to tap into babies’ internal states because infants use different cries to
communicate hunger, pain, and anger (Barr & Fujiwara, 2011).
Another informative nonverbal response is gazing. Researchers use this response
in the visual preference method. They show infants pairs of stimuli, such as two faces
(one smiling and one neutral) or a picture of a face and a picture of a target, and
measure the amount of time the infant spends looking at each. If infants look longer
at one image than the other, it indicates that they are more interested in it.
Another response that is present in infancy is habituation. Babies, like the rest of
us, get bored after seeing or hearing the same thing over and over again, and they
habituate to a stimulus that is presented repeatedly or for a long time. The intensity
of their reaction to the stimulus gradually decreases with each presentation until
they respond only faintly or not at all. Babies habituate to sights, smells, tastes, and
tactile sensations, and therefore these responses can be used to explore infants’
social capabilities.
Finally, researchers use babies’ directed movements to study early social develop-
ment. Young children use directed movements such as reaching, pointing, crawling,
or toddling to express their interest in particular people. All of these nonverbal
behaviors can be used as windows into infants’ and young children’s social responses
and development.

Biological responses In recent years, researchers have begun to use psycho-

physiological techniques to examine internal processes that occur when children
encounter social stimuli. Some of these psychophysiological techniques probe the
autonomic nervous system (ANS), which controls such functions as heart rate and
72  Chapter 2 Research Methods

breathing (Bornstein et al., 2013). Researchers measure changes in a baby’s respira-

tion following changes in the pitch or volume of the mother’s voice, for example.
The usefulness of techniques probing the ANS is not limited to infants, however;
they can provide information about social responses at any age. Changes in heart
rate, for example, can be used to assess children’s emotional reactions to different
stressful events or to assess children’s empathic reactions to other children’s distress
(Eisenberg et al., 2015; Liew et al., 2011). Researchers also use psychophysiological
techniques to probe what is going on inside children’s brains during social experi-
ences and events.
Table 2.2 outlines some of these techniques. Although researchers have long
been able to measure children’s brain waves by using well-placed electrodes
to create an electroencephalograph (EEG), more recent techniques, such as
­positron-emission tomography (PET) and functional magnetic resonance imaging
(fMRI), permit a look at changes in the brain when specific events or experiences
occur. These techniques are more easily used with older children and adults, but
researchers have modified them for use with infants and young children as well
(Figure 2.5). These brain imaging techniques show differences in brain activity
related to what adults or children are thinking or feeling (Figure 2.6). They also
reveal differences in the brain structures of children who have grown up in dif-
ferent circumstances, for example, in normal environments or under conditions

TABLE 2.2

Techniques for Studying Human Brain Function and Structure

Technique What It Is Advantage Disadvantage
Electroencephalography Recording of the brain’s Detects very rapid Provides poor spatial
(EEG) spontaneous electrical activity changes in electrical ­resolution of the source
over a short period by means activity, allowing of electrical activity
of multiple electrodes placed analysis of stages of
on the scalp cognitive processing
Positron-emission A visual image of an injected Provides spatial resolu- Cannot follow rapid
tomography (PET) radioactive substance show- tion better than EEG changes (faster than
and single-photon ing blood flow or glucose but less than MRI 30 seconds); requires
emission tomography use, reflecting changes in exposure to low levels
(SPECT) ­neuronal activity of radioactivity
Magnetic resonance MRI provides high spatial resolu- Provides high spatial High cost to operate
imaging (MRI) and tion of brain anatomy; fMRI resolution; requires
functional MRI (fMRI) provides images of changes in no exposure to
blood flow that indicate specific radioactivity
anatomical details and changes
in neural activity
Transcranial magnetic Shows which brain regions are Temporarily disrupts Long-term safety is not
stimulation (TMS) necessary for given tasks by a specific region of well established
changes after TMS is applied brain by exposing it
to a location to intense magnetic
energy

Source: Bernstein et al., 2008.

 Gathering Data  73

Alexander Tsiaras/Science Sourceimages

FIGURE 2.5 Brain imaging of

infants. This infant is about to be
given a brain scan.
Mark D’Esposito and Charan Ranganath, Department of

FIGURE 2.6 Here are four fMRI scans. In

Psychology & Helen Wills Neuroscience Institute,

scan 1, the person was asked to remember

a face. Areas at the rear of the brain that
process visual information and an area in
Experiment reported in November 2000.

the frontal lobe were activated. In scan 2, the

person was asked to “think about this face.”
University of California, Berkeley,

1 2
The hippocampus was activated, showing
that this part of the brain responds when we
are remembering new information. In scans
3 and 4, the person was asked to compare
another face to the remembered face. Some
of the same visual areas were activated as
during the initial memory task, but other
areas, such as part of the frontal lobe, were
also involved in making a decision about
3 4 the memory.

of social deprivation or abuse (Hanson et al., 2017; Nelson et al., 2011; Sheridan
et al., 2012).
A third kind of psychophysiological technique used to study social development
is measurement of hormone levels in the body. Cortisol is a hormone secreted
by the adrenal glands in response to any kind of physical or psychological stress;
it is a natural steroid that increases the activity of the part of the brain involved in
vigilance and the control of arousal. Researchers use cortisol to assess children’s
emotional reactions to stress. In one laboratory, Megan Gunnar and her colleagues
ask preschool children to play the Tasting Game (Gunnar et al., 2003). They offer
the children a taste of sweet tart crystals and then ask them to hold a cotton roll or
Q-tip in their mouths to absorb saliva. Analysis of cortisol in the children’s saliva
reveals how well they manage stress. These researchers have found that children
who have poorer relationships with other children at school have higher levels of
cortisol when they are assessed in their classrooms than children who get along
well with their classmates and that children in child care exhibit increased levels
of cortisol as the day wears on, which contrasts with the typical diurnal cycle of
74  Chapter 2 Research Methods

decreasing cortisol levels over the day (Watamura et al., 2003). They and other
researchers have also found that babies living in stressful environments, such as
insensitive or physically abusive caregivers or violent, crime-ridden neighborhoods,
show atypical cortisol levels (Cicchetti et al., 2010; Quevedo et al., 2012; Roisman
et al., 2009).

Analyzing Data
After researchers have completed their data collection, the final step in the
research process is to analyze the information that has been accumulated. For
researchers conducting a qualitative study, this requires searching for meaning-
ful themes in the notes and transcripts they have collected during open-ended
interviews, participant observations, focus groups, ethnographic observations,
and individual cases. This approach is appropriate when the researcher’s goal is
not to provide support for or falsify a hypothesis but to explore the characteristics
of a specific individual, group of individuals, or context. For some researchers tak-
ing this approach, a series of subjective summaries describing these individuals or
contexts represents the final step in the research process. Other researchers use
qualitative insights to guide an additional phase in the research process: Develop-
ing quantitative measures that reflect the qualitative themes and designing a study
to investigate them in a larger sample. In this case, the qualitative phase functions
as a pilot study that helps ensure that the quantitative inquiry includes relevant
aspects of the issue.
In a quantitative study, analyses involve turning observations, interviews, and
test results into numbers and making sense of them. The first step is to summa-
rize the numbers using descriptive statistics, such as the average (mean) score
for children in a particular group. For example, the researcher could calculate
average aggression scores for children who are high, medium, and low viewers
of violent TV programs. The next step is to determine whether these differences
are statistically significant or merely due to sampling error—that is, differences
that might be observed in a given sample even if the true difference between
the groups in the population from which that sample was drawn is zero. Analy-
ses of variance (ANOVA, for use when comparing more than two groups) or a
t test (for comparing two groups) are related statistical techniques for estimat-
ing the size of the mean differences between groups and to determine whether
those differences are attributable to sampling error. If the researcher’s data
came from an experiment in which children were exposed to violent TV and
then were observed pummeling and punching their peers, the analysis of differ-
ences would be used to compare aggressive behavior exhibited by children in
the experimental and control groups. Based on the outcome of this statistical
test, the researcher can make a first estimate of whether there is support for the
hypothesis that watchers of violent TV are more aggressive than nonwatchers.
Alternatively, the researcher could investigate whether a significant correlation
exists between the amount of violent TV watched and the amount of aggressive
behavior displayed.
In most studies, researchers go beyond these simple analyses and investigate the
effects of multiple variables. In a study of children’s aggressive behavior, for exam-
ple, they might analyze variables such as the child’s ethnicity, IQ, temperament, and
gender as well as TV viewing. They can statistically control the contributions of these
 Analyzing Data  75

FIGURE 2.7 Path analysis showing direct link

Child between poverty and child aggression (top line)
Poverty Violent TV and indirect link mediated by violent television
aggression
watching (bottom lines).

other variables or compute the relative contributions of each to the child’s aggres-
sive behavior. Either way, they would use a multiple regression analysis. This is an
extension of the correlation approach that analyzes associations among a number
of predictor variables simultaneously or sequentially. A particular kind of regression
analysis, path analysis (Figure 2.7), can be used to investigate the mechanisms or
processes that account for why two variables are correlated. For example, should a
researcher observe a nontrivial association between the experience of poverty and
aggressive behavior (suggesting that children who grow up poor are more aggres-
sive) she can then examine what factors mediate that association. For example, it is
possible that children growing up poor are monitored by their parents less and thus
watch more violent TV programs, which in turn lead to more frequent aggression
(for more about mediational analyses, see MacKinnon & Fairchild, 2009). In this
example, the degree to which children watch violent TV programs is one of possibly
many mediators that account for and thus explain the initial association between
poverty and aggressive behavior. Multiple regression analysis can also be used to
determine whether one variable moderates the effect of another—that is, regression
analyses can serve to identify the conditions under which or the subpopulations for
whom the association between two variables is stronger or weaker in magnitude. For
example, is the effect of TV viewing on aggression moderated by the child’s tempera-
ment such that children with difficult temperaments are more affected by watching
violent shows than are children with easy temperaments? In that case, temperament
might serve as a moderator and the researcher might conclude that having an easy-
going temperament provides a buffer against the effect of violent TV.
Structural equation modeling (SEM) is a powerful type of multivariate analysis
that creates latent variables representing higher-level psychological constructs—for
example, a latent variable representing “aggressiveness” might be derived from the
frequency with which a child hits and insults classmates during an observation at
school recess, the number of violent tactics the child endorses in a questionnaire,
and the child’s preference for sword fighting over playing Scrabble. The researcher
then analyzes associations among latent variables to test hypothesized causal rela-
tions (for more about SEM, see Schumacker & Lomax, 2010).
Statistical techniques are also available to analyze changes in children’s social
behavior over time. These techniques identify trajectories or growth curves in social
behaviors and indicate whether individual differences in these trajectories are
related to predictor variables; for example, is watching TV violence related to an
increase in aggressive behavior as children get older?
In studies of changes in children’s social behavior over time, researchers
often face the problem of participant attrition. This can bias the sample because
parents with less education and motivation are more likely to drop out. It also
reduces sample size and thereby researchers’ ability to evaluate their hypoth-
eses. In recent years, strategies have been developed for estimating the scores of
the missing participants and using these substitute scores to restore the sample
76  Chapter 2 Research Methods

size to an adequate level for statistical analysis (Enders et al., 2012; MacKinnon
& Dwyer, 2003). This is just one improved statistical technique now available
to researchers. Every year, statistical advances allow more sophisticated analysis.
You should remember, though, that the simplest techniques often can provide
meaningful results, and the most complex techniques cannot salvage a poorly
conceptualized study.

Ethics of Research with Children

In recent decades, awareness of the ethical issues involved in doing research with
children has been growing. Government boards and professional organizations
have suggested guidelines to protect children from dangerous and harmful proce-
dures (see Table 2.3). In addition, all legitimate research projects involving children
are scrutinized (as children are considered a vulnerable population) and approved
by an institutional review board (IRB) where the research is conducted. This scru-
tiny ensures that researchers follow ethical guidelines.

TABLE 2.3

Children’s Rights in Social Development Research

The right to be fully informed. Every child has the right to full and truthful information about the purposes and procedures
of a study in which he or she is to participate. The Society for Research on Child Development (2007) ethical guidelines
note further that “whenever withholding information or deception is judged to be essential to the conduct of the study,
the investigator should satisfy research colleagues that such judgment is correct. If withholding information or decep-
tion is practiced, and there is reason to believe that the research participants will be negatively affected by it, adequate
measures should be taken after the study to ensure the participant’s understanding of the reasons for the deception.
Investigators whose research is dependent upon deception should make an effort to employ deception methods that
have no known negative effects on the child or the child’s family.”
The right to give informed and voluntary assent. Every child has the right to agree, orally or in writing, to participate in a
research project. This is called assent. Children under the age of 18 years are generally considered too young to under-
stand the study and make an informed decision. As such, researchers must also obtain the informed consent of the
child’s parents or those who act in loco parentis, such as teachers or camp counselors who are temporarily responsible
for the child.
The right not to be harmed in any way. Every child has the right not to experience physical or psychological harm as a result
of the research procedures.
The right to withdraw voluntarily from research. Every child has the right to withdraw from participation in the study at any
time.
The right to be informed of the results of research. Every child has the right to information about the results of the research. If
the child is too young to fully understand, the information must be provided to the child’s parents.
The right to confidentiality. Every child has the right to know that personal information gathered as part of the research will
remain private and confidential and will not be shared with any other individuals or agencies.
The right to full compensation. Every child has the right to be compensated for time and effort as a research participant even
if he or she withdraws from the study. Incentives must be fair and not exceed the range children normally receive; this
precaution ensures that incentives are not used to coerce the child to participate.
The right to beneficial treatments. Every child has the right to profit from any beneficial treatments provided to other par-
ticipants in the research. When experimental treatments are deemed beneficial, for example, participants in control
groups have the right to the same beneficial treatment after the project is completed.
Sources: Based on reports from the American Psychological Association (2002) and the Society for Research on Child Development, Committee on
Ethical Conduct in Child Development Research (2007).
 Ethics of Research with Children  77

All research with human subjects requires that researchers obtain informed con-
sent from participants before they are enrolled in the study. Informed consent is
an agreement to participate based on a clear understanding of the purposes of the
study and the procedures that will be followed. When participants are children,
their parents or legal guardians must provide informed consent on their behalf
because the children do not have the capacity to fully understand the goals, risks,
and benefits of the research (Institute of Medicine, 2004).
If children are recruited through a school or other institution, teachers and
administrators provide another layer of consent that is particularly important when
parents don’t pay close attention to school activities, or when, for some reason, they
neglect their children’s interests (Alderson & Morrow, 2011; Fisher, 2008). When
children reach an age at which they begin to understand what they are going to
be asked to do in a study, usually around age 8 years, they are also asked to give
their assent before the study begins. As noted earlier, using the Internet for collect-
ing data is a new approach to research and raises new ethical issues about gaining
informed consent (Fraley, 2004). The challenge is to ensure that the participants
are old enough to give consent, and if they are not, to obtain consent from the
child’s parent(s).
Ethical guidelines include protecting participants from harm—not only physical
harm but also psychological and emotional harm. Children have the right not to
be made to feel uncomfortable or to act in ways that lessen their own view of them-
selves or the way other people view them. Review boards examine research protocols
carefully to be sure that the procedures will not make children feel embarrassed,
rejected, unhappy, or tricked.
Although it is easy to agree in principle that research participants, especially chil-
dren, should not be harmed, determining what is harmful is not always easy. For
example, in an experimental procedure called the Strange Situation, which is used
to assess infants’ social relationships with their caregivers, babies are left alone for
several minutes, and often they fuss or cry, indicating that they are distressed. This
procedure has yielded important information about early social-emotional develop-
ment, but is the infants’ distress justified? The general rule is that if children’s level
of discomfort or embarrassment does not exceed what they are likely to experience
during their regular daily life, it is permitted. Because babies are often left alone
briefly, this procedure is considered ethical.
What about deceiving children? In Liebert and Baron’s (1972) experiment show-
ing children violent TV programs, was it ethical to let the children believe they were
causing another child actual physical harm when they pushed the “hurt” button?
How might the children have viewed themselves—or the experimenters—after the
study? It is important to debrief children after the experiment is over, but is this
enough? Laboratory research involving deception is becoming less common as IRBs
demand more careful scrutiny of ethical issues. Another ethical issue is whether pro-
viding participants with full disclosure before the study begins is necessary. Even if
there is no outright deception, details can sometimes be omitted. What if revealing
this information could encourage the parents or children to act in ways that turned
the hypotheses into self-fulfilling prophecies? In the final analysis, the guiding prin-
ciple involves a careful cost–benefit analysis. What effects, if any, might participation
in the research project have on the children to be studied, and how do these effects
weigh against the possible gains from whatever information may be obtained from
the research?
78  Chapter 2 Research Methods

Social developmental research is a tool for increasing our knowledge about

children, and it is hoped that children will benefit from the knowledge. Although
some investigators and child advocates have called for more stringent criteria
regulating the participation of children in psychological research, others worry
that too many additional restrictions will seriously impede psychologists’ abil-
ity to learn more about issues that could ultimately lead to benefits for chil-
dren. The ethics of research in social development will continue to be a topic
of debate.

earning from Living Leaders: L. Rowell Huesmann

followed a group of more than 700 American
children who were first evaluated for their aggres-
siveness when they were 8 years of age, to
determine whether punitive discipline or violent
Courtesy of L. Rowell Huesmann

television was related to later aggression. They

found that children who received harsh punish-
ment and watched violent TV programs were
more aggressive in childhood and that children
who were highly aggressive, especially boys, were
more likely as adults to have aggression-related
problems, such as criminal convictions, moving
traffic violations, drunk driving arrests, and inci-
dents of domestic violence. His use of a longitudi-
Rowell Huesmann is the Amos N. Tversky Colle-
nal design allowed Huesmann to discover these
giate Professor of Communication Studies and
links between childhood TV viewing and disci-
Psychology at the University of Michigan (where
pline and later problems in adulthood as well as
he was once an undergraduate). He intended to
the mediating cognitive processes. Huesmann
become a computer scientist and study artificial
suggests that the next step is to develop a better
intelligence, but after receiving his Ph.D. from
understanding of the processes that operate at
Carnegie-Mellon University in 1969, he became
both the psychological and neurophysiological
intrigued by the issue of how the environment
levels when one views violence. Huesmann is a
shapes aggressive behavior in children. For the
recipient of the American Psychological Associa-
past 45 years, his work has been guided by one
tion’s award for Distinguished Lifetime Contribu-
question: “What makes one child grow up to be
tions to Media Psychology.
more aggressive than another?” Huesmann was
particularly interested in two possible causes of
Further Reading
aggression: the type of discipline parents use and
Huesmann, L. R., Dubow, E. F., Boxer, P., Landau, S. F.,
how much and what type of television programs, Gvirsman, S. D., & Shikaki, K. (2017). Children’s exposure
movies, and video games children watch. In a to violent political conflict stimulates aggression at
peers by increasing emotional distress, aggressive script
longitudinal study with his colleagues, Len Eron,
rehearsal, and normative beliefs favoring aggression.
Eric Dubow, Monroe Lefkowitz, and Leo Walder, he Development and Psychopathology, 29, 39–50.
 Ethics of Research with Children  79

Reed Larson Larson has found his work with the ESM to be
rewarding because it led him into a variety of
research topics including family and peer
relationships, mental health, emotional develop-
ment, and cross-cultural comparisons. His most
recent work has focused on youth development
programs such as 4H clubs, extracurricular
activities, and structured afterschool programs, in
a number of instances adopting a qualitative
research approach described elsewhere in this

Courtesy of Reed Larson

chapter. The work has practical applications that
he hopes will help sustain and improve these
programs. Larson is past President of the Society
for Research on Adolescence. For him, the most
pressing issue in developmental psychology is to
understand the changing nature and chal-
lenges of the transition from adolescence to
Reed Larson knew he wanted to be a psy- adulthood in nations around the world. He
chologist even before he finished high school. believes that we need to focus more on the
He attended his local university, the Univer- positive aspects of development in adolescence
sity of Minnesota, as an undergraduate and rather than just on the problems. Consistent with
then completed his Ph.D. at the University of this view, he has a positive message for students:
Chicago. Today he is Professor in Human and “We need good people to enter the field and
Community Development and Psychology your insight and creativity could make a valu-
and Educational Psychology at the University able contribution.”
of Illinois. While in graduate school, Larson
became interested in how people spend their Further Reading
time. He and his mentor developed a new Larson, R. W., Izenstrak, D., Rodriguez, G., & Perry, S. C. (2016).
method to study this issue, the experience The art of restraint: How experienced program leaders
use their authority to support youth agency. Journal of
sampling method (ESM). Like most innova- Research on Adolescence, 20, 845–863.
tive methods that turn out to be popular, the
method was relatively simple and easy to use. Linda M. Burton
Sometimes called the beeper or daily diary
method, the ESM tracked people’s activities by
asking them to wear a beeper set to sound at
predetermined times. When the beeper went
off, research participants indicated in a diary
where they were, whom they were with, what
Courtesy of Linda M. Burton

they were doing, and how they were feeling.

Using this method, Larson gathered detailed
information about how children and adoles-
cents in many countries around the world
spend their time, the nature of their social lives,
and how their moods and activities change
with development.
The ESM approach is now used by researchers
in a wide variety of fields from geography to Linda Burton is the James B. Duke Professor of
anthropology, and it has enriched our under- Sociology and director of the Duke Center for
standing of children’s daily lives across a variety Child and Family Policy at Duke University, but
of settings from home to school to playground. you might have seen her as a game contestant
80  Chapter 2 Research Methods

on The Price is Right, Joker’s Wild, or Dream Megan Gunnar

Home. She was born, raised, and educated
in California, and she taught at Pennsylvania
State University, where she was the director of
the Center for Human Development and Family
Research in Diverse Contexts before she went to
Duke. Her work focuses on the impact of poverty
on families.
As an ethnographer, she recognizes that close

Courtesy of Megan Gunnar

observation of children and families in their
everyday settings such as homes and neighbor-
hoods is a valuable approach to research
because it provides richer descriptions of chil-
dren’s lives than other methods. She uses fre-
quent visits and in-depth interviews with
participants to better understand family dynam-
ics. She also attends weddings, baby showers,
and Sunday outings to observe families in Megan Gunnar is a Regents Professor and
different contexts. Studying poverty from a Director of the Institute of Child Development
distance, she believes, gives an unrealistic, at the University of Minnesota. She is a pioneer
biased perspective. The strength of fieldwork is in studying children’s stress reactions and has
that it allows her to look at the nuanced behav- championed the measurement of stress through
iors people engage in. She also uses surveys, the collection of saliva, which contains the stress
psychological studies, and geographic com- hormone cortisol. She did not set out to become
puter mapping systems to generate insights into the “queen of cortisol.” In college, she thought
the deeper issues of poverty. She is currently she would be a music therapist. However, her
involved in a multisite collaborative study of the experience as a Stanford University graduate
impact of welfare reform on families and children student working with Eleanor Maccoby set the
and an ethnographic study of rural poverty. stage for her career-long pursuit of stress and
Burton’s interest in poor families began when development.
she was growing up in Compton, a city in The burning question that guided her work
California known for its gang violence and a was: “What are the neurobiological and behavio-
community where many girls are mothers by age ral processes that shape the development of risk
16. She took it as her responsibility to investigate and resilience to adverse life circumstances?” To
ways to help families in poverty. If she gets on answer this question, she studied a variety of
Deal or No Deal, she says, she will use her stressful events in children’s lives, ranging from
winnings to help the families she has worked with separation in child care to severe deprivation in
over the years. But even if she is not a game Romanian orphanages. Although biologically
show winner, Burton has already made a differ- minded, she recognizes the importance of
ence in the lives of many poor children and environmental factors in determining stress
families through her close look at real- reactions. Her proudest accomplishment—­
world poverty. demonstrating that a secure attachment to the
mother regulates the neurobiology of stress in
Further Reading infants and young children—illustrates the inter-
Burton, L. M. & Stack, C. B. (2014). Breakfast at Elmo’s: Ado-
play between biology and environment. Her work
lescent boys and disruptive politics in the kinscripts nar- identifying contexts that increase children’s stress
rative (pp. 174–191) in A. Garey, R. Hertz, and M. Nelson led to efforts to improve adverse early environ-
(Eds.), Open to disruption: Practicing slow sociology.
Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press.
ments such as child care and orphanages.
 Chapter Summary  81

She has been recognized for her work with duck, not the theory of the duck. Observe care-
awards from the American Psychological fully and ponder.” She has taken this advice as
Association and the Society for Research in Child her guide, and the field has reaped the benefits.
Development. She hopes that in the future, the
increased integration of genetics and neurologi- Further Reading
cal development will lead to more effective Gunnar, M. R. (2017). Social buffering of stress in develop-
interventions for children in high-stress situations. ment: A career perspective. Perspectives in Psychologi-
cal Science, 12, 255–273.
Her advice for undergraduates is to “Follow the

Chapter Summary
Scientific Method, Hypotheses, and Questions
• Following the scientific method, social development researchers use reliable
and replicable techniques to collect and analyze data to answer their questions
or test their theory-based hypotheses.
Research Methods: Correlations and Experiments
• The correlational method involves computing associations between pairs of
variables, varying from –1.0 to +1.0. Correlated variables are related to each
other, but one does not necessarily cause the other.
• A laboratory experiment permits a researcher to establish a causal associa-
tion by manipulating the independent variable and assessing the effect on the
dependent variable in a controlled setting. Researchers randomly assign par-
ticipants to experimental and control groups.
• One way to increase ecological validity is to conduct a laboratory analogue
experiment, trying to duplicate in the laboratory features or events from eve-
ryday life.
• Another way to increase ecological validity is to conduct a field experiment, delib-
erately producing a change in a real-life setting and measuring the outcome.
• In a natural experiment, the investigator measures the effect of a naturally
occurring change. Interpreting the results is challenged by the fact that the
researcher lacks control over the independent variable and other factors that
could affect behavior.
• Lab and field designs can be combined to permit the introduction of the inde-
pendent variable in the field and measurement of the dependent variable in
the lab, or the independent variable can be introduced in the lab and the
dependent outcome is measured in the field.
• The case study method takes an in-depth look at a single child or a small group
of children who often have some uncommon feature that makes them of spe-
cial interest.
Study of Change over Time
• In the cross-sectional method, researchers compare groups of children of dif-
ferent ages. This approach is economical, but it yields no information about
change or causes of change. The longitudinal method overcomes these two
drawbacks because the researcher examines the same children at different
times in their lives. Longitudinal research has disadvantages that include high
cost, loss of subjects, untested age-cohort effects, and limited flexibility to
incorporate new measures.
82  Chapter 2 Research Methods

• The cross-sequential method combines features of cross-sectional and longitu-

dinal studies and enables researchers to compare groups of children of differ-
ent ages, track individual children as they get older, and compare age cohorts.
Sample Selection
• Samples should be representative of the population of interest to the researcher.
Stratified sampling can be used to ensure that subgroups of boys and girls or
individuals from different ethnic or social class groups are represented in the
same proportions as they exist in the population.
Data Collection and Analysis
• Self-reports provide information about children’s thoughts, attitudes, and feel-
ings. In the experience sampling method, a beeper signals children to record
their activities, thoughts, and emotions at random times.
• The accuracy of reports from parents, siblings, teachers, or peers can be
improved by focusing on recent events and using structured procedures such as
daily diaries, phone calls, or other ecological momentary assessment methods.
• A focus group allows children or adults to share their views about different
aspects of children’s social experience. This strategy is especially useful in the
early stages of a research project or with a new cultural group.
• Observations can occur in natural settings, such as a child’s home, or in a labo-
ratory. One limitation is that when children and parents know they are being
watched, they act in more socially acceptable ways. To minimize such distor-
tions, researchers try to observe unobtrusively for relatively long periods. A
structured observation allows researchers to observe children performing in
specific situations that occur infrequently in normal everyday life.
• Researchers can record everything the participant does (a specimen record),
record only particular events (event sampling), identify which behaviors of a
predetermined set occurred during a particular time period (time sampling),
or record events in order of occurrence (sequential observation).
• Ethnographic data collection involves becoming a participant observer by
spending time with community members and recording information about
their activities and the setting.
• To study infants, who cannot express their thoughts and preferences verbally,
researchers use nonverbal responses such as visual preferences, habituation to
stimuli, physical movement, and sucking patterns.
• Psychophysiological assessments of heart rate, respiration rate, brain activ-
ity, and hormone levels are useful for obtaining information about children’s
responses to social situations and stress.
• In qualitative studies, researchers search for meaningful themes in transcripts
of interviews or participant observations. In quantitative studies, statistical anal-
yses are performed to determine differences between groups of children or
associations between variables. Multiple regression analysis is used to examine
associations among a number of variables, and can also provide insights into
the mechanisms (i.e., mediators) by which and conditions under which (i.e.,
moderators) two variables are associated with each other.
Ethics
• Ethical issues are a major consideration in research on children. Guidelines for
ethical treatment include the right to assent and the right not to be harmed. To
determine whether research procedures are ethical, costs to participants are
carefully weighed against the potential benefits to the participants or society.
 Key Terms  83

Key Terms
attrition ethnography laboratory analogue psychophysiological
case study event sampling experiment qualitative study
construct experience sampling longitudinal design quantitative study
cortisol method (ESM) meta-analysis reactivity
cross-sectional design field experiment natural experiment representative sample
cross-sequential focus group naturalistic observation self-report
design habituation observer bias specimen record
dependent variable hormone operationalization structured observation
direct observation independent variable participant observations time sampling
ecological validity informed consent propensity score matching
effect size intervention prospective

At t h e M ov i es

A number of movies illustrate the methods researchers doctorate and he has remained with them ever since. The
use to study social development. One of the best is The Up film The Ethnographer (El Etnógrafo) (2012) follows Palmer as
Series (Seven Up; 7 Plus Seven; 21 Up; 28 Up; 35 Up; 42 Up; 49 he works with the Wichi—campaigning, advocating, assist-
Up, and, in released in 2012, 56 Up). These documentary ing, and advising. It also captures his home life with his
films demonstrate how a longitudinal design gives unique Wichi wife and their four young children.
and invaluable information about development over many A DVD containing films from the 1940s that shows
years. The series started in 1964 when the filmmaker inter- some classic psychological studies is 1940’s Child Psychology &
viewed 14 children from diverse backgrounds from all over Sociology Tests on Film: History of Child Development & Human
England, asking them about their lives and their dreams for Behavior: On this DVD, Growth Study of Johnny and Jimmy is a
the future. Then, every 7 years, he went back, tracked them case study intervention in which the researcher gave one
down, and talked to them, examining the progression of infant extra stimulation and documented his physical and
their lives. The individuals are now 56 years old. The series psychological development and compared it with an infant
provides an astonishing look at life in the 20th century and given no additional stimulation. Experimental Studies in the
demonstrates how children’s life paths could and could Social Climates of Groups portrays an experiment in which
not be predicted from an early age. Now The Up Series has three groups of children interacted with an adult leader
been taken to South Africa where a group of children was who demonstrated three different styles of management
filmed starting in 1992 at the age of 7. Boyhood (2014) is a (authoritarian, laissez faire, and democratic).
film about the progression of a young boy through the diffi- Structured observations are illustrated in ABC News
culties of growing up which include relocation; the divorce Primetime Ethical Dilemmas: What Would You Do? (2007). The
of his parents and their subsequent relationship; and his producers used a hidden camera to see what people would
own peer and romantic relationships. Filmed over 12 years do when confronted with an ethical dilemma, such as bullies
with the same cast, this is a groundbreaking story of growing ganging up on an innocent child. This parallels experi-
up as seen through the eyes of a child who literally grows mental procedures a researcher might follow, but Primetime
up on screen before our eyes. With snapshots of adoles- probably did not get IRB approval. A movie demonstrating
cence from road trips and family dinners to birthdays and a field experiment is Trust Me: Shalom, Salaam, Peace (2002).
graduations, Boyhood is both a nostalgic time capsule of the Christian, Jewish, and Muslim boys were sent to a mixed-
recent past and an ode to growing up and parenting. It is religion summer camp. The film follows their progress as
impossible to watch without thinking about our own devel- they engage in camp activities and forge friendships.
opmental journey. A number of films illustrate natural experiments.
John Hillary Palmer is an English anthropologist who Films about children living in extreme conditions include
has spent over two decades with the Wichi community in Children Underground (2001), a documentary following five
northern Argentina. He began his ethnographic study of homeless children in Romania after the collapse of commu-
these marginalized people while working on his Oxford nism led to a life on the street, and Kids of the Majestic (2008),
84  Chapter 2 Research Methods

a film about orphans living beneath the railway station in artists and activists moved to a remote California wilderness
Bangalore City. Soldier Child (2005) shows the army of brain- to create a new world in the early 1970s armed only with
washed children in Northern Uganda who were forced to the slogan “Free Land for Free People.” The documentary
commit unspeakable crimes against their own families. On offers a candid look into the joys and difficulties of free love,
a more positive note—not all natural experiments have to nude farming, survival in the wilderness, multiple-parent
be negative—Commune (2006) shows what happened when child rearing, and other aspects of communal living.
 CH AP TE R 3

Biological Foundations
Roots in Neurons and Genes

Baby Emma stares at her mother’s face while

she is nursing. Infant Aiden watches as his
father leans over the side of his bassinette. From
the first minutes of life, babies gaze, wiggle,
and cry. They are adept attention seekers and
able to communicate their needs with remark-
able effectiveness. Next door, baby Rehema is
crying as usual. She is irritable and difficult to
soothe. Her parent can’t get over how differ-
Kirill Zdorov/iStockphoto

ent she is from her older brother—or from other

babies in the Mommy and Me playgroup. Down
the street, 4-year-old twins Cassie and Sassie
dress alike and talk alike, and they both want
Luvabella dolls for Christmas. Underlying the
behaviors of all these children are biological
foundations of social development, which is the
topic of this chapter.
Biology provides a foundation for social develop-
ment in many ways. Hormones and brain activity,
DNA and physical appearance, as well as reflexes and other physical abilities are all
key aspects of biology that underlie social behavior. We have selected four aspects of
biology that contribute to children’s social development to discuss in this chapter.
The first is the biological preparedness that gives babies a head start in their devel-
opmental journey. Visual, auditory, olfactory, and tactile capacities present at birth
make infants ready for social interaction and ensure their survival. The second bio-
logical foundation we discuss is neurological, specifically, brain regions and brain
growth and how they are related to social behavior and advances in social develop-
ment. The third biological foundation is genetics. Genes help make each person
unique; they shape children’s characteristics and affect the ways the social world
responds to them as well. We examine what genes are and how they are transmit-
ted from generation to generation, how they guide social development, and how
they interact with environmental factors to shape social development. Finally, we
examine a fourth biological foundation that is related to both genes and neurons:
differences in temperament. From the moment they are born, babies differ from

85
86  Chapter 3 Biological Foundations

one another in how much and how intensely they gaze and cry. One baby might
sleep most of the time, while another is scanning his surroundings; one baby may
be irritable and cry a lot, while another lies quietly. These differences reflect the
infants’ temperaments, and they too affect social development.

Biological Preparedness for Social

Interaction
All children are born wired for feeling and ready to learn (Shonkoff & Phillips,
2000, p. 4). As one mother rejoiced after her baby was born,

“A mother’s job is so much easier because babies come into the world ready to play their
role as social partners.”

Infants are well equipped to respond to their social environments. Their sensory
and perceptual systems are biologically prepared to be sensitive to social stimuli
such as human voices, faces, and smells, and their capacity to notice and respond
to social stimuli propels them into social interactions. Such preparation is clearly
adaptive because babies’ responsiveness to other human beings increases their car-
egivers’ interest and attention and ensures the infants’ well-being.

How Are Babies Prepared?

From biological rhythms to social rhythms One way babies are biologically pre-
pared for social interaction is that their behavior follows biological rhythms, which
they soon learn to control and regulate. Babies who acquire biological regulatory
skills over the first 3 months of life are able to interact with their mothers in a
synchronous way (Feldman, 2015). By synchrony, we mean that the mother and the
infant show a predictable degree of responsiveness to each other’s signals during
a brief interaction. When infants are born 6 to 10 weeks prematurely, biological
rhythms, such as the sleep–wake cycle, have not fully developed; this, plus later
deficiencies in arousal regulation, are linked to poorer social interaction synchrony
with the mother at 3 months. This evidence suggests that under typical develop-
mental conditions, babies develop biological rhythms that help them deal with the
time-based nature of social interaction.

Visual preparation for social interaction A second way infants are biologically
prepared for social interaction is that they are attracted to visual social stimuli.
They stare longest at objects that have large visible elements, movement, clear con-
tours, and a lot of contrast—all qualities that exist in the human face (Farroni
et al., 2005). Faces are appealing because they have boundaries, such as hairlines
and chins, and contrasts, such as dark lips and light skin, and are often moving and
bobbing. People are also likely to exaggerate their facial expressions when they are
interacting with a baby, taking a longer time to make a face and prolonging the
expression (Schaffer, 1996). Young infants scan these faces, looking at the features
they can see best: eyes, mouth, and hair (Figure 3.1; Haith et al., 1977; Maurer &
­Salapatek, 1976). They are particularly interested in eyes, as their preference for
faces that are looking directly at them indicates (Farroni et al., 2002). In fact, studies
have shown that when adults are given a nasal spray of oxytocin, a neurotransmitter
 Biological Preparedness for Social Interaction   87

Finish
Start

Finish
FIGURE 3.1 How infants scan the human face. (a)
A 1-month-old baby focuses on the outer perimeter
of the face, although also showing some interest in
the eyes. (b) A 2-month-old scans more broadly and
focuses on the features of the face, paying atten-
tion to the eyes and mouth, which suggests that
some pattern detection may be occurring.
Start
Source: Maurer, D., & Salapatek, P. (1976). Developmen-
1-month-old 2-month-old tal changes in scanning of faces by young infants. Child
Development, 47, 523–527. This material is reproduced with
(a) (b) permission of John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

hormone that is released in large quantities in women during labor and childbirth
and passed on to their infants through the placenta, they—like infants—pay more
attention to the eye areas of the face (Guastella et al., 2008), and they remember
faces better (Rimmele et al., 2009). By 3 months of age, infants identify a face as a
unique whole (Dannemiller & Stephens, 1988). They look longer and show more
brain activity in response to faces than objects (Johnson, 2000) and their mother’s
face rather than a stranger’s (Carlsson et al., 2008; de Haan & Carver, 2013; de
Haan & ­Nelson, 1999; Nakato et al., 2011). Over the first year of life, infants become
increasingly skilled and speedy at processing human faces (Rose et al., 2002; Turati,
2004). Being able to extract information quickly and reliably is critical for develop-
ing social abilities. Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies suggest
that a cortical region is specifically devoted to face recognition (Kanwisher & Yovel,
2006; Tsao et al., 2006). Farroni et al. (2013) recently examined whether brain
cells in this region are specialized in human infants at birth or need experience
to fully activate the specialty cells. This work demonstrated that even newborns
(1–5 days old) are socially prepared and show greater cortical activation to
humans (a moving face) than a mechanical action video (a moving arm). Although
babies responded to the social stimulus from birth, over the first few days after birth,
the response to the social stimulus increased, which suggests that limited experi-
ence of face-to-face interaction with other humans can strengthen the activation
of relevant cortical regions. Clearly, babies are biologically prepared to respond to
faces through their brain architecture from a very early age.

Auditory preparedness for social interaction A baby’s auditory system is well

developed even before birth. When researchers have monitored changes in fetuses’
body movements and heart rates, they have found that they can hear complex sounds
outside the mother’s body (Kisilevsky & Muir, 1991). Babies can even remember a
story they have heard before they were born. In one study, researchers asked preg-
nant women to read aloud Dr. Seuss’s The Cat in the Hat twice a day for the last 6½
weeks of their pregnancies. After birth, their infants preferred to listen to The Cat
88  Chapter 3 Biological Foundations

in the Hat rather than an unfamiliar book (DeCasper & Spence, 1986). Apparently,
fetuses can distinguish sounds and rhythms. They may even be biologically pre-
pared to respond to the sound of human voices (Johnson & Hannon, 2015; Saffran
et al., 2006). Babies open their eyes wider and look for the speaker when they hear
voices. By 4 months of age, they can discriminate differences among almost all of
the more than 50 phonetic contrasts in adult languages (Hespos & Spelke, 2004).
Babies especially like a voice that is high in pitch with exaggerated pitch con-
tours (Butler et al., 2014; Fernald, 1992; Saffran et al., 2006). In fact, very young
babies are able to hear a high-pitched sound better than a low-pitched one (­Saffran
et al., 2006). Adults may be aware of this because they usually speak to infants using
a high-pitched and melodic voice (Fernald & Mazzie, 1991). Mothers and fathers
are likely to exaggerate their speech. They talk louder and slower and use longer
vowels with their infants than when they speak to anyone else. A mother might
say, “Hi-swee-eet-ee, Hiii, Hi-i-ya, watcha looking at? Hu-u-uh? O-o-o-o-o-o, yeah, it’s
mommy ye-e-a-ah” (Stern, 1974, p. 192). Adults also speak to infants and young chil-
dren in shorter sentences, more slowly, often ending sentences with a rising into-
nation (Fernald & Morikawa, 1993). This type of infant-directed speech increases
with increases in maternal oxytocin levels (Feldman & Eidelman, 2007), which sug-
gests that this speech is part of a broader pattern of hormonally based caregiving
behaviors designed to attract the infant’s attention. In fact, infants prefer to listen
to this kind of baby talk and enjoy it more than speech directed to an adult (Cooper
& Aslin, 1990; Werker et al., 1994) whether the speaker is a man or a woman (Pegg
et al., 1992) and even if the speech is not in their native language (Werker et al.,
1994). Soon babies develop a preference for the language they hear around them
(Kinzler et al., 2007; Mehler et al., 1988), and pay more attention to objects noted
by native speakers than non-native speakers, which suggests that they learn to rely
on native speakers more for information (Marno et al., 2016). By 9 months of
age, they tune out words and sounds from other languages (Jusczyk et al., 1993).
The familiar tones and speech patterns they hear lead to a pattern of interaction
between infants and parents that facilitates early social bonds as well as language
acquisition (Golinkoff et al., 2015). Infants also respond to speakers’ emotional
tones, responding positively to warm and inviting utterances and negatively to angry
and prohibitory ones (Mumme et al., 1996). Early auditory skills and preferences
thus have functional significance for social development.

Smell, taste, and touch Infants’ senses of smell, taste, and touch provide other
avenues for social development. Newborns can discriminate among different odors
and tastes and prefer those that adults find pleasant (Rosenstein & Oster, 1988;
Steiner, 1979). They cry less, open their eyes, and try to suck when they smell their
mother’s breast, and they prefer the odor of their mother’s milk to that of another
mother (Doucet et al., 2007; Marin et al., 2015; Porter, 2004). Mothers, too, rec-
ognize the scent of their babies after only 1 or 2 days (Forestell & Mennella, 2015;
Mennella & Beauchamp, 1996) and prefer the scent of their infant over that of
an unfamiliar baby (Corter & Fleming, 2002). Clearly, infants’ sense of smell pro-
vides an early guide to the people in their world, and the ability of babies and their
mothers to recognize each other by smell may play a role in the development of
their relationship (Porter & Winberg, 1999). Infants also develop preferences for
the food flavors consumed by their mothers (Forestell & Mennella, 2015; Mennella
& Beauchamp, 1996). Perhaps one benefit of breast-feeding is that it provides an
opportunity for the infant to become familiar with the flavors of the foods favored
by the mother, her family, and her culture.
 Biological Preparedness for Social Interaction   89

The sense of touch is one of the first senses to develop. The skin is the larg-
est sense organ in the body, and from the beginning of fetal life, babies’ skin is
surrounded and caressed by warm fluid and tissues. After birth, infants are clearly
responsive to different types of touch, from gentle stroking to the pain of a blood
draw (Field, 2014). They smile and vocalize more and cry and fuss less when they
are patted, stroked, and rubbed (Field, 2001a, 2014; Peláez-Nogueras et al., 1996).
In one study, researchers gave premature infants three 15-minute massages daily
for 10 days; another group of preemies received no massage. The infants given the
extra tactile contact averaged 47 percent greater weight gain, were awake and active
more of the time, showed more mature behaviors, and spent 6 fewer days in the
hospital than the other infants (Field, 2001b). Infants are also able to discriminate
among objects using only their sense of touch (Streri & Pecheux, 1986; Streri et al.,
2000). It is likely that infants come to recognize their mothers and fathers by their
skin textures and touches as well as the appearance of their facial features.

Beyond faces and voices: primed to be a social partner Infants are attracted
to people not simply because of their faces, voices, smells, and touches. They also
like their behaviors. By 2 to 3 months of age, infants are enjoying ­face-to-face play
with their parents. They show more positive facial expressions, vocalize more, and
exhibit less distress in these interactions than when they play with toys (Legerstee,
1997). In these face-to-face interactions, parents respond contingently and predict-
ably to the infant’s gestures and emotional displays. They model positive emotional
expressions and encourage the infant to do the same. They take turns with the
infant, inserting their behaviors into pauses in the baby’s repeated vocalizations or
sucking patterns. Infants contribute to these interactions by gazing, smiling, vocal-
izing, and reaching (Bornstein, 2013). They regulate the interactions largely with
their gaze: When the amount of stimulation gets to be too much or the play goes on
too long, infants turn away, cry, or distract themselves with something else. P ­ arents
do their best to keep the infants interested with exaggerated facial displays or rhyth-
mic and repetitive vocalizations (e.g., see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_
wEic3Oo9j4&feature=related). When babies look away, however, it is helpful for
the parents to respect the child’s need for time-out by reducing their stimulation
and waiting for the infant to resume the next cycle of activity (­Schaffer, 1996).
This pattern of mutual responsiveness has been termed parent–infant attunement
(­Bornstein, 2013).
Often, despite the parents’ best efforts, things do not go smoothly; missteps
occur because either the parent or the baby misreads a social cue or responds too
late to the other person’s smile or gesture. According to one estimate, only about
30 percent of face-to-face interactions between mothers and infants are smooth and
well coordinated (Tronick & Cohn, 1989). Some mothers and children have spe-
cial problems with their interactions. Infants who are exposed prenatally to cocaine
have difficulty managing face-to-face interactions; they are more passive and with-
drawn and express more negative affect (Tronick et al., 2005). Similarly, infants
who are born prematurely have more regulatory problems than full-term infants
in face-to-face interchanges (Montirosso et al., 2010). Mothers who are depressed
also have difficulty. Their interactive behaviors are often poorly timed or intrusive;
their affective displays are often negative (Campbell et al., 1995). The result is more
negative affect and self-directed regulatory behavior by the infant. Researchers have
asked mothers to engage in behaviors that are similar to those of depressed moth-
ers so they can investigate this process. Mothers are instructed to be unresponsive
and silent and to present a placid, unmoving face while they are face-to-face with
90  Chapter 3 Biological Foundations

their infants. As early as 2 to 3 months of age, infants react negatively and become
upset at the mother’s still face (Tronick, 1989). Those who have a history of success-
ful interchanges with the mother try especially hard to solicit the mother’s normal
behavior by leaning forward, vocalizing, smiling, and reaching out. After attempts
to rouse the mother fail, they turn away, drool, lose postural control, and try to calm
themselves by sucking their thumbs and rocking.
These focused face-to-face interactions contribute to the infants’ growth of social
skills and social expectations (Bornstein, 2013; Thompson, 2015). Infants learn that
adults are responsive to their overtures and that through their actions they can con-
trol these other people’s behavior. The infants learn that they can alter the course
of interaction by their behavior and their emotional expressions (Malatesta et al.,
1989). They learn about turn taking. Over time, infants improve their ability to shift
attention from one vantage point or person to another (Nelson et al., 2006). They
are able to sustain attention for longer periods of time (Bornstein et al., 2011).
They learn some rules of social exchanges and begin to realize that their role is to
be both an initiator and a responder. Parents learn important lessons as well. They
learn to more sensitively and accurately read the baby’s signals and to adjust their
behavior to maintain the baby’s attention and interest. From these early dialogues,
parents become increasingly attuned to their infants and, in turn, infants become
more attentive to their parents.

Why Are Babies Prepared?

Infants are prepared by evolution to expect certain types of environments and to
process some types of information more readily and efficiently than others. Accord-
ing to evolutionary theorists, this preparedness is adaptive and useful for ensuring
the survival of the human infant and more generally the species. Because infants
depend on the support and nurture of parents and other caregivers for an extended
period of time, they are biologically programmed to be responsive to social partners
and have a set of social responses that ensures that their needs are met. Imagine
infants not being equipped with these social propensities that make them attrac-
tive social partners and able to elicit care from adults! The conditions that origi-
nally led to this set of adaptive behaviors developed in the far distant past when the
threat of predators made such behaviors necessary for protection and survival. But
even though their original purpose might have disappeared, these capacities have
remained to keep parents involved and invested. The evolutionary perspective does
not suggest that there is no further learning and refining of early social response
and signaling systems; modern evolutionary theorists assume that development
depends on being born into and reared in a species-typical environment that sup-
ports adaptive behaviors such as the ability to send, receive, and understand social
messages (Bjorklund & Pellegrini, 2011; Tomasello & Gonzalez-Cabrera, 2017).

The Neurological Basis of Social

Development
Shaped a little like a loaf of French country bread, our brain is a crowded chemistry lab,
bustling with nonstop neural conversations . . . a shiny mound of being, that mouse-gray
parliament of cells, that dream factory, that petit tyrant inside a ball of bone, that hud-
dle of neurons calling all the plays, that little everywhere, that fickle pleasuredome, that
 The Neurological Basis of Social Development  91

wrinkled wardrobe of selves stuffed into the skull like too many clothes into a gym bag.
(Ackerman, 2004, pp. 3–4)

The brain provides a second biological foundation of social development. Brains

are good not just for learning letters and numbers but for helping us navigate the
social world, too. Here we review the basics of brain development and the links
between brain development and social behaviors.

The Brain
The largest part of the human brain consists of the two connected hemispheres
that make up the cerebrum. This mass of tissue is what allows us to have the attrib-
utes that make us human, such as speech and self-awareness, and those that we
share with other vertebrate animals, such as sensory perception, motor abilities, and
memory. The covering layer of the cerebrum, the cerebral cortex, is a highly con-
voluted surface containing about 90 percent of the brain’s cell bodies. Although we
do not yet know how these cells control complicated traits, we do know that specific
functions, such as seeing, hearing, moving, feeling, thinking, and speaking, can be
traced to specific regions of the cerebral cortex (see Figure 3.2). For example the
frontal cortex is associated with the processing of emotional information (LeDoux,
2000). The limbic system, the set of brain structures that forms the inner border of
the cortex, plays a major role in the regulation of emotion and social behavior. The
amygdala, one of the structures in the limbic system, plays a major role in recogniz-
ing fear and surprise expressions (Akirav & Maroun, 2007; Gee et al., 2013; Kim
et al., 2003).

Brain Growth and Development

In the prenatal period, the brain grows very rapidly, and it continues to grow at
an amazing pace after birth. The newborn infant’s brain weighs only about one-
fourth as much as a mature brain, but by the time the baby is about 6 months old,

Motor
Sensory
cortex
cortex
Language
structure

Concentrating, Parietal
planning, problem lobe
solving
FIGURE 3.2 The brain’s cortex. The
cortex is divided into four lobes—­
Frontal lobe Occipital frontal, temporal, occipital, and
lobe parietal—and specific areas within the
lobes tend to specialize in particular
functions.
Source: Republished with permission
Primary Primary of McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. From
hearing visual ­Postlethwait, J. H., & Hopson, J. L. (1995).
The nature of life (3rd ed.). New York:
Interpreting Temporal Language McGraw-Hill. Permission conveyed through
experiences lobe comprehension Copyright Clearance Center, Inc.
92  Chapter 3 Biological Foundations

the brain weighs half that of an adult brain, and the brain of the 2-year-old weighs
three-fourths of an adult brain (Shonkoff & Phillips, 2000). Brain development has
an orderly sequence during this time, but development is not evenly paced. As well
as some gradual continuous growth, periods of relatively rapid development, which
are linked to advances in socioemotional development, occur (Fischer & Bidell,
2006). Using a variety of brain recording techniques, researchers have identified
several brain growth spurts in infancy and childhood.
First, the motor cortex has growth spurts. As the baby moves from mostly reflex-
ive behavior in the early months of life to voluntary control over movements, the
motor area of the brain develops rapidly. When the infant is about 2 months old,
the frontal motor cortex undergoes a period of rapid change, and at the same time,
motor reflexes such as rooting (automatically turning the face toward a stimulus
and making sucking motions when the cheek or lip is touched) and the startle
response disappear and the ability to reach for objects improves. This shift in motor
skills also changes the nature of social interaction because the infant is able to ini-
tiate social overtures and gain others’ attention by reaching. At 8 months of age,
another brain spurt occurs; it is associated with the infant’s abilities to crawl and
to search for hidden objects and people. A brain spurt at 12 months is associated
with walking, which, as any parent can tell you, changes infants’ relationships with
others dramatically. Babies who can walk can explore their environments more fully
and initiate contact with others more easily. Their newly found independence also
changes the ways caregivers respond; parents begin to set limits and restrictions and
engage in more testing of wills (Biringen et al., 1995).
Changes also occur in the visual cortex. Again, this development occurs in spurts
(Cameron, 2012). A growth spurt when the baby is 3 months old, for example,
is associated with looking longer at facelike stimuli than nonface stimuli (Nelson
et al., 2006). A growth spurt in the auditory cortex allows the infant to be more
sensitive to human voices and language input from caregivers (Nelson et al., 2006).
Growth between 18 and 24 months is associated with rapid advances in language
development (Goldman-Rakic, 1997).
Another major growth spurt in the cortex occurs in the 5- to 7-year age period.
This involves the development of the prefrontal cortex and is associated with the
appearance of executive processes, which give children the abilities to think flexibly,
act appropriately in challenging situations, plan and organize, control impulses,
and allocate attention (Del Giudice, 2014; Diamond, 2002). These skills are impor-
tant for social development. For example, the child’s ability to regulate attention is
linked to higher levels of social skills with peers (NICHD Early Child Care Research
Network, 2009).
Finally, brain changes in adolescence are associated with social behavior
(Blakemore, 2012; Steinberg, 2007). When puberty begins, abrupt changes occur
in the interior limbic and paralimbic areas of the brain, regions including the amyg-
dala and the medial prefrontal cortex. These changes are associated with social and
emotional processing. Another brain area involving the lateral prefrontal region
does not show a growth spurt or reorganization at puberty but continues its gradual
development until late adolescence and early adulthood (Chambers et al., 2003;
Keil, 2006; Kuhn, 2006); this area is associated with executive functioning. The fact
that socioemotional processing improves suddenly in early adolescence whereas
impulse control develops more gradually could account for adolescents’ emotional
lability and risk taking. By early adulthood, the gradual maturing of the lateral pre-
frontal region results in a better balance between the two systems and hence less
risk taking (Steinberg, 2014). As this discussion illustrates, brain development is an
important contributor to social development.
 The Neurological Basis of Social Development  93

Hemispheric Specialization
One of the most important organizing features of the brain is its division into two
halves, the cerebral hemispheres. The left and right hemispheres, connected by a
set of nerve fibers called the corpus callosum, are anatomically different and, in
general, control different functions (Kandel et al., 2000). However, because of a
great deal of cross-wiring between them, the separation is by no means complete.
Not only do both hemispheres play some role in most functions but also when one
side of the brain suffers damage, the other half may take over some of its functions.
Hemispheric lateralization is the term used to indicate the specialization of each
hemisphere for specific tasks.
The right hemisphere controls the body’s left side. It processes visual–spatial
information, nonspeech sounds such as music, and the perception of faces (De
Heering & Rossion, 2015; Nelson, 2013; Nelson et al., 2006). When damage occurs
to the right side of the brain, people often have trouble completing a task requir-
ing visual–spatial perception, their drawing skills deteriorate, they have trouble fol-
lowing a map or recognizing friends, taking another person’s perspective and they
become spatially disoriented (Carter et al., 1995; Krall et al., 2016). The right hemi-
sphere is also involved in processing emotional information, as the fact that peo-
ple with right-brain damage have difficulty interpreting facial expressions indicates
(Dawson, 1994; Nelson et al., 2006). At the same time, right-hemisphere damage
can sometimes make people indifferent to or even cheerful about things that would
normally upset them because the right hemisphere is activated in the emotions that
make people turn away or withdraw, such as distress, disgust, and fear (Davidson,
1994; Fox, 1991).
The left hemisphere controls simple move-
ment in the right side of the body. It is acti-

© Barbara Smaller/The New Yorker Collection/The Cartoon Bank

vated in approach emotions such as joy, interest,
and anger. It is also associated with language
processing. Brain-imaging studies show that
speech stimuli produce more activity in the left
hemisphere than the right hemisphere even in
2- and 3-month-old infants (Dehaene-Lambertz
et al., 2002, 2010). People with left-hemisphere
damage can recognize a familiar song and tell
a stranger’s face from an old friend’s, but they
are likely to have trouble understanding what is
being said to them or speaking clearly (Springer &
Deutsch, 1993). The degree to which people’s
brains are lateralized, or specialized, has a
genetic component: For example, parents and
children usually have similar levels of language
lateralization (Anneken et al., 2004).
Lateralization begins in utero (Kasprian
et al., 2011) and continues to develop in early
life (Stephan et al., 2003). However, if children experience a brain injury, they often
recover functioning because their brain is not fully developed and hemispheric
specialization is not yet complete (Fox et al., 1994; Stiles, 2000). For instance,
when the left hemisphere is damaged in early infancy, a child can still develop
almost normal language ability (Bates & Roe, 2001). In people who are deaf and
use sign language to communicate—a language that involves motor movements of
the hands—the right side of the brain can take over language functions (Neville
94  Chapter 3 Biological Foundations

& Bruer, 2001; Sanders et al., 2007). Even adults still have a great deal of modifi-
ability, and lost function can often be partially recovered through treatment and
practice (Black et al., 1998; Briones et al., 2004; Sailor et al., 2017). In addition,
the adult brain has the capacity to regenerate nerve cells (Rosenzweig et al., 1996;
Sailor et al., 2017).

Neurons and Synapses

At birth, a baby’s brain has most of its neurons, or nerve cells—100 to 200 b ­ illion
of them (LeDoux, 2002). In fact, most neurons are present in the brain by the
seventh month after conception (Goldman-Rakic, 1997). Neurons multiply at a
very rapid pace during the embryonic period in a process called neuron prolifera-
tion; about 250,000 new neurons are added every minute (Kolb et al., 2003). After
birth, the brain increases in size because existing neurons grow and the connec-
tions between them increase. Glial cells, which surround and protect the neurons,
also grow. These cells provide structural support to the neurons, regulate their
nutrients, and repair neural tissue. Some glial cells are responsible for myelina-
tion, which covers parts of neurons with layers of a fatty, membranous wrapping
called myelin. This insulation makes neurons more efficient in transmitting infor-
mation (­Johnson, 1998; Nelson et al., 2006). Most myelination occurs during the
first 2 years, although some continues into adulthood (Lebel & Deoni, in press;
­Sampaio & Truwit, 2001). Neurons are always on the move as they migrate to their
final locations in the brain guided by neurochemical processes (Poduri & Vople,
2018; Rosenzweig et al., 1996). This neural migration ensures that a sufficient
number of neurons serves all parts of the brain. The absence of a sufficient num-
ber of neurons in their proper locations is associated with various forms of mental
disability and with disorders such as dyslexia and schizophrenia (Johnson, 1998;
Kolb et al., 2003; Nelson et al., 2006).
The connections between neurons, known as synapses, are as essential as the
neurons themselves. Synapses form at the junctions between neurons when the
extended axon of one neuron transmits a message to the projected dendrite of
another neuron, usually by means of chemicals that cross the small space between
them. Synaptogenesis begins early in prenatal life, as soon as neurons appear,
and soon there are many more synapses than neurons. For example, at birth, an
infant has 2,500 synapses for every neuron in the brain’s visual cortex. A child of
about 2 years old has about 15,000 synapses for every neuron (Huttenlocher, 1994;
­Huttenlocher & Dabholkar, 1997). In the visual cortex, the number of synapses
per neuron is multiplied six times within the first 2 years of life. As a result, infants’
visual capacities are greatly enhanced; for example, they become more skilled at
focusing on objects and people at different distances (Johnson & Hannon, 2015;
Nelson et al., 2006).
Are all these neurons and synapses necessary? Do they continue to function
throughout life? The answer to both these questions is no. The brain is programmed
to create more neurons and connections than it needs. With development, two pro-
cesses reduce the number of neurons and connections (Sowell et al., 2003). Pro-
grammed neuronal death eliminates immature neurons surrounding new synapses
(Kandel et al., 2000; Yamaguchi & Miura, 2015). This provides more space at these
crucial loci of information transmission. Synaptic pruning disposes of understimu-
lated neurons’ axons and dendrites (Abitz et al., 2007). This frees space for new
synaptic connections. The goals of both neuronal death and synaptic pruning are
to increase the speed, efficiency, and complexity of transmissions between neurons
 The Neurological Basis of Social Development  95

and to allow room for new connections that develop as children encounter new
experiences (Huttenlocher, 1994; Kolb et al., 2003). By adulthood, each of the
brain’s approximately 1 trillion neurons makes 100 to 1,000 connections with other
neurons. That adds up to about 1 quadrillion synapses in the adult human brain
(Huttenlocher & Dabholkar, 1997).

Brain Development and Experience

Two types of processes influence the brain’s development (Greenough & Black,
1999). Experience-expectant processes require experiences that are almost always
experienced in people’s normal environments, such as touch, patterned visual
input, sounds of language, affectionate expressions from caregivers, and nutrition.
These processes trigger synaptic development and pruning and are critical for nor-
mal brain development.

“Every lullaby, every giggle and peek-a-boo, triggers a crackling along his neural path-
ways, laying the groundwork for what could someday be a love of art or a talent for soc-
cer or a gift for making and keeping friends.” (Kantrowitz, 1997, p. 7)

When children lack these experiences, their basic abilities are impaired. For exam-
ple, when children have congenital cataracts, their visual system is deprived of
stimulation and fails to develop properly so that, even when the cataracts are later
removed, the children are functionally blind. Experience-dependent processes
depend on experiences that are unique to individuals, that is, experiences encoun-
tered in particular families, communities, and cultures. The brain responds to these
specific experiences by developing synaptic connections encoding unique experi-
ences. For example, in Mozambique, children’s motor cortexes reflect skills associ-
ated with hunting and fishing, whereas in the United States, children’s brains are
more developed in the area that reflects the fine motor and eye-hand coordination
needed for success at video games.
Studies of humans and other animals have demonstrated how experience can
modify brain size, structure, and biochemistry (Black et al., 1998; Rosenzweig,
2003). Lack of stimulation as well as exposure to traumatic events can damage the
brain and cause it to malfunction. In abused children, for example, both the cor-
tex and the limbic system, which are involved in emotions and social relationships,
are 20 to 30 percent smaller and have fewer synapses than in nonabused children
(Perry, 1997). Children in unstimulating orphanages also have reduced brain activ-
ity and less connectivity between regions of the brain (see Figure 3.3; Eluvathingal
et al., 2006; Gee et al., 2013; Nelson, 2007; Pollak, 2012; Pollak et al., 2010). This
may account for the difficulties they have recognizing social signals and forming
relationships with other people (Pollak & Sinha, 2002).

Mirror Neurons and the Social Brain

When we watch a movie, we often share the experience of the actors. Our hearts
beat faster when we see an actor slip from the roof of a tall building. We hold our
breath as we watch a predator stalking a victim. Why? Specific neurons and regions
of the brain transform what we see into what we would have done or felt in the
same situation. As a result, understanding other people does not require lengthy
and deliberate thought but rather an intuitive sharing of emotions, sensations, and
96  Chapter 3 Biological Foundations

Romanian orphan

FIGURE 3.3 How early deprivation Typical child

affects brain activity. In the brain
of a typical child, positron-emission
tomography (PET) reveals many

Courtesy of Harry Chugani

regions of high activity, whereas
the brain of an institutionalized
Romanian orphan who suffered
extreme deprivation from birth has
fewer active regions. The arrows
point to the temporal lobes, the
most affected part of the brain.

actions. Our brain attunes itself to the state of the person we are watching or with
whom we are interacting and adjusts our own feelings and actions to get into sync
with those of the other person (Winkielman & Harmon-Jones, 2006).
Mirror neurons are key to this sharing. These are neurons that fire both when
a person acts and when a person observes the same action performed by some-
one else (see http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/sciencenow/3204/01.html). These
neurons have been directly observed in monkeys, and activity consistent with mir-
ror neurons has been found in a number of specific brain areas in humans includ-
ing the motor cortex (Fadiga et al., 1995), the somatosensory cortex (Gazzola
& Keysers, 2009), and the inferior frontal gyrus (Kilner et al., 2009). For exam-
ple, researchers using fMRI recordings have found that when a person observes
another person’s physical action, activation of the motor cortex occurs (Fadiga
et al., 1995). These brain regions have been defined as the human mirror neuron
system (Iacoboni et al., 2005).
The human mirror neuron system has clear links to social behavior. Mirror
neurons are important for learning new skills by imitation (Dinstein et al., 2008;
­Iacoboni, 2008; Lanzoni, 2016) and they appear to be important for understand-
ing other people’s actions and intentions. In one study, researchers used monkeys
to illustrate the link between mirror neurons and social understanding. The mon-
keys watched an experimenter either grasp an apple and bring it to his mouth or
grasp an object and place it in a cup. When the monkey observed the “grasp-to-
eat” motion, 15 mirror neurons fired, but the mirror neurons registered no activity
when the monkey saw the experimenter simply grasp the object and put it in the
cup (Fogassi et al., 2005). Clearly, the activity of the neurons reflected the monkey’s
knowledge of the experimenter’s intention to eat the apple. Data from studies of
human infants, similarly, suggest that the mirror neuron system helps them under-
stand other people’s actions (Falck-Ytter et al., 2006).
 The Neurological Basis of Social Development  97

The mirror neuron system has also been linked to language acquisition (Théoret
& Pascual-Leone, 2002), development of theory-of-mind skills (i.e., understanding
other people’s mental states, which we discuss in Chapter 6, “Self and Other”; Key-
sers & Gazzola, 2006), and feelings of empathy (Decety & Jackson, 2004). Research-
ers have found that people who report that they are more empathic have stronger
activation of the mirror neuron system (Jabbi et al., 2007). It has also been sug-
gested that problems with the mirror neuron system might underlie cognitive dis-
orders, and, in particular, that people with autism have deficiencies in social skills,
­imitation, empathy, and theory of mind because they lack mirror neurons (Dapretto
et al., 2006; Hamilton, 2013; Hadjikhani et al., 2006; Oberman et al., 2005).
One area in which the human mirror neuron system is found is what has been
labeled the social brain—a network of brain regions involved in understanding other
people. This part of the brain has increased in size in recent evolution. Its regions
include the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC), inferior frontal gyrus (IFG), tem-
poroparietal junction (TPJ), superior temporal sulcus (STS), interparietal sulcus
(IPS), anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), anterior insula (AI), and amygdala (see
Figure 3.4). These brain regions are involved in social functions that range from
recognizing faces and bodily gestures to evaluating what other people are think-
ing or feeling, predicting what they are about to do next, and communicating with
them (Blakemore, 2008, 2012). Brain-imaging studies show that these brain regions
are activated when people experience empathy, understand another person’s emo-
tion, or interact with other people.
The medial prefrontal cortex seems to have a special role in understanding our
own and others’ communicative intentions (D’Argembeau et al., 2007; Grossmann,
2013; Kruegera et al., 2009). It enables us to encode social event knowledge so we
can plan and monitor our own behavior and understand and predict the behavior

ACC

mPFC

Amygdala

IFG IPS
AI
TPJ
FIGURE 3.4 Regions in the social brain. Regions
pSTS
include the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC),
the temporoparietal junction (TPJ), the
posterior superior temporal sulcus (pSTS), the
inferior frontal gyrus (IFG), the interparietal
sulcus (IPS), the anterior cingulate cortex
(ACC), the anterior insula (AI), the amygdala,
and the frontal insula (FI).
Source: Reprinted by permission from Macmillan
Publishers Ltd. Blakemore, S.-J. The social brain
Frontal in adolescence. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 9,
insula 267–277. (fig 1, p. 269) ©2008.
98  Chapter 3 Biological Foundations

of others. In one study, for example, when mothers looked at their infants’ smiling
face their mPFC was activated, but when the infant had a neutral face it was not;
similarly, when infants looked at their mothers’ smile it activated the baby’s prefron-
tal cortex (Minagawa-Kawai et al., 2009).
The amygdala and the superior temporal sulcus are regions of the social brain
that are involved in processing emotional facial expressions (Adolphs & Tranel,
2004; Decety et al., 2014; Narumoto et al., 2001). In one fMRI study demonstrat-
ing these connections, college students viewed animated male characters approach-
ing them in a hallway and making either a happy face or an angry face (Carter &
­Pelphrey, 2008). When they saw the angry facial expression, the students experi-
enced increased activation in their amygdala and STS.
Another region of the social brain that is particularly active when people experi-
ence emotions is the frontal insula (FI). This area seems to play a role in generat-
ing social emotions such as empathy, trust, guilt, embarrassment, and love (Chen,
2009). It also becomes active when a mother hears a crying baby or when someone
scrutinizes a face to determine the other person’s feelings. The FI provides a link
between the person’s own emotions and those of other people, making it possible to
understand others’ feelings. Unusually large von Economo neurons expedite com-
munication between the FI and the rest of the brain and enable people to adjust
quickly to changing social contexts. In the ancient past, this neural wiring might
have given our ancestors a survival edge by enabling them to make accurate split-
second judgments about whom they could trust.
Researchers are beginning to learn how the social brain develops from birth to
adulthood. They have found that all regions in the adult social brain show partial
responses in infancy. Even at 3 months of age, for example, prefrontal regions are
activated when babies process faces (Johnson et al., 2005). However, not until 1
year of age is a mature response seen. At this age, babies, like adults, discriminate
between upright and upside-down human faces but don’t discriminate between
upright and upside-down monkey faces. These results are consistent with the idea
that infants’ cortical processing of faces is initially relatively broad and poorly tuned
and only later in development becomes more specific to the upright human face.
Studies of this and other precursors of the social brain network in infancy, including
studies of infants’ abilities to perceive human emotions and actions, suggest that the
brain is adapted to develop within a social context and that this context contributes
to specializations in the adult cortex (Grossmann & Johnson, 2007).
With development, cortical tissues supporting social processing become increas-
ingly specialized. Activation in the mPFC decreases in late childhood and adoles-
cence and is replaced by activation of specialized subregions of the mPFC in adults
(Blakemore, 2008, 2012; Dumontheil, 2015). In one fMRI study demonstrating this
developmental shift, researchers had participants think about potentially embar-
rassing social situations, such as “Your dad started doing rock ’n’ roll dances in the
supermarket” (Burnett et al., 2009). Thinking about these situations activated the
social brain in both adolescents and adults. However, the mPFC was more active in
adolescents than in adults, and the temporal pole was more active in adults than in
adolescents. Thus, the relative roles of different areas changed with age, and activ-
ity moved from anterior regions (the mPFC) to posterior (temporal) regions, such
as STS.
In addition to becoming more specialized, the different cortical regions of the
social brain become orchestrated into networks as development proceeds (Johnson
et al., 2009). Researchers are now shifting their emphasis from trying to localize par-
ticular functions in specific cortical regions to understanding patterns of functional
connectivity among regions of the social brain.
 Genetics and Social Development  99

Genetics and Social Development

Genetic transmission is a third important biological foundation for social develop-
ment. Genetic transmission starts with the threadlike structures called chromosomes
located in each cell nucleus. On these chromosomes are genes, portions of the DNA
molecule containing the genetic code. Genes are located at particular sites on the
chromosome, where they code for the production of certain types of protein. When
a gene is activated, a copy of it travels from the cell nucleus to the body of the cell,
where it serves as a template for building a protein molecule. Each of the many dif-
ferent kinds of proteins in the human body serves a different function. All of them
working together are what makes a living organism. Genetic variability is the result
of three phenomena: the huge number of chromosome combinations that are pos-
sible during the formation of sperm and egg cells; the union of ovum with sperm,
as 23 chromosomes from the woman unite with 23 chromosomes from the man to
form the zygote; and crossing over, which occurs during cell division in the fertilized
egg and involves the exchange of genes on homologous chromosomes.
Genes contribute to shared characteristics of the human species, such as infants’
biological preparedness for social interaction, and to differences among people,
such as the outgoing and sociable nature of some individuals and the introverted
shyness of others. For years, psychologists interested in social development were

et You Thought That . . .: Genes Determine

Your Potential
Many myths and misconceptions You probably assumed that DNA is the fixed
exist about genetics. You might template of heredity, but even DNA appears to
share some of them. be subject to a good deal of environmentally
If you thought that genes determine potential, induced change, even in the womb.
you’re wrong. Genetic factors do affect a person’s Another myth about genetics is that strong
potential, but so do environmental factors. genetic effects = unimportant environmental
Change the environment, and potential changes, effects. Even a trait that is strongly linked to a
too. A dramatic illustration of this fact occurs gene can be modified by changing the environ-
when one identical twin transfuses blood to the ment. The gene (or more often set of genes)
other twin through their common placenta causes variability among individuals; the environ-
during prenatal development. In this rare disorder, ment can cause an overall increase or decrease
known as twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome, the in the trait for a whole population.
donor twin is born severely underweight and at You might also think that genetic influence
risk, which creates gross differences in the babies’ diminishes with age. But not so: The relation
potential for optimal development, despite their between genes and age is complex. Some
having exactly the same genotype (http://www. characteristics are most strongly related to heredity
dailymail.co.uk/health/article-452163/The- in early stages of development; others are more
amazing-little-large-identical-twins.html). strongly associated with genetic factors in later life.
If you thought that nature and nurture operate Finally, some people think that genes regulate
separately, you are wrong again. Both genes and only static characteristics. They are mistaken. Genes
environment are necessary for development: “No affect the dynamics of development as well.
genes, no organism; no environment, no organ-
ism” (Scarr & Weinberg, 1983). Sources: Charney, 2012; Rutter, 1992, 2006.
100  Chapter 3 Biological Foundations

curious about the origins of these differences in human behavior, and beginning in
the 20th century with the formation of the field of human behavior genetics, they
focused attention on estimating genetic contributions to the array of individual
differences in social behavior (Knopik et al., 2016; Rutter, 2006).
At first, behavior geneticists conducted their research without ever directly meas-
uring chromosomes, genes, or DNA. Instead, using sophisticated statistical tech-
niques, they calculated what are called heritability coefficients, or estimates of the
contribution that additive genetic variation makes to a particular ability or type of
social behavior. These percentage contributions of heredity depend on environ-
mental influences too. When children experience virtually the same environments,
individual differences in social behavior are likely to be the result of genetic contri-
butions; when environments are dissimilar, differences in children’s social behavior
may be the result of environmental factors, and sometimes this obscures the effect
of genetic influences. Behavior geneticists also try to assess the interactions between
genes and environments and to estimate the extent to which each contributes to a
trait or behavior.
The concepts of genotype and phenotype provide a framework for understand-
ing the interactions of genes and environment. A genotype is the particular set
of genes that a person inherits from his or her parents and that determine such
characteristics as height and eye color. During the course of development, the geno-
type interacts with the environment to produce the phenotype, which is the observ-
able and measurable genetic expression of the individual’s physical and behavioral
­characteristics.

Methods of Studying Genetic Contributions

to Development
The method that behavior geneticists use most often to investigate the contributions
of genetic variation and environmental variation to individual differences is the study
of family members whose degrees of biological relatedness are known. Researchers
conducting studies of this type generally compare adopted children with their bio-
logical and adoptive parents, examine similarities and differences between fraternal
and identical twins, or explore the effects of similar and different environments on
twins and siblings (Gregory et al., 2011; Knopik et al., 2016; ­Rutter, 2006).

Behavior genetics: adoption and twin studies In adoption studies, research-

ers compare characteristics of adopted children with those of their adoptive par-
ents and, if available, their biological parents (Knopik et al., 2016; Moffitt & Caspi,
2007; Plomin et al., 2001; Rutter, 2006). They assume that no genetic connection
exists between the adoptive parents and children, so any similarity between them
is due to environmental influences. The opposite is true for adopted children and
their biological parents; their connection is solely hereditary, and any similarity
must be the result of similar genetic makeup. (These studies ideally include only
adopted children who have no contact with their biological parents.) Researchers
in adoption studies also sometimes study the similarities between biological siblings
and adopted children who live in the same homes.
In twin studies, researchers investigate whether identical twins are more similar to
each other than are fraternal twins to each other in terms of a given social behavior.
Identical, or monozygotic, twins are created when a single zygote splits in half and
 Genetics and Social Development  101

each half becomes a distinct embryo with exactly the same genes; both embryos come
from one zygote (mono means “one”), they start out with exactly the same genes. As
such, they roughly share 100 percent of their species-specific genetic variation in com-
mon. Fraternal, or dizygotic, twins develop from two different eggs that have been
fertilized by two different sperm, producing two different zygotes (di means “two”).
Fraternal twins are no more similar genetically than any other pair of siblings; on aver-
age, they share half their (species-specific) genes in common. Researchers assume
that if identical twins show more resemblance on a particular trait than fraternal twins
do, the resemblance is influenced by genes. In contrast, if on a given trait the two
types of twins resemble each other almost equally, the researchers assume that the
resemblance is influenced by the environment.
The behavior-genetic research design has limitations (Gregory et al., 2011). For
example, it is possible that being a twin in itself has an effect on social development, so
results from twin studies might not be generalized to non-twin populations. In addi-
tion, identical twins are more likely than fraternal twins to experience birth defects,
which can also contribute to differences between them. Finally, in interpreting the
results of studies of child twins, behavior genetics researchers usually assume that
twins in the same family experience basically the same environment (this is called
the equal environments assumption). But is this a fair assumption? Some investiga-
tors have questioned whether identical and fraternal twin pairs experience similar
environmental conditions. They argue that because of their identical genes and
inherited predispositions, identical twins are treated more similarly by their parents,
evoke more similar responses from people outside the family, and select more simi-
lar settings, companions, and activities than do fraternal twins (Scarr, 1996; Scarr &
McCartney, 1983). Despite these limitations, the twin design remains a useful strategy
for assessing genetic influences on social behavior.
One variation of the twin design is to study children whose mothers are identical
twins. Because this design is based on the twin status of the parents rather than the
children, it is possible to divide variation in parenting into aspects that are attribut-
able to genetic sources and to environmental sources and to estimate the separate
consequences of each for child outcomes (Lynch et al., 2006; Narusyte et al., 2011;
Neiderhiser et al., 2004). To illustrate, if one twin mother uses harsh punishment
and the other does not, a comparison of their children (i.e., genetically related
cousins) provides a strong test of the causal link between parents’ punitiveness
and children’s outcomes because, in this type of discordant-twin comparison, most
genetic and shared environmental variables are controlled.
Yet another variation on the twin design is to study whether genetic contributions
to a trait or behavior vary across time or environmental conditions. For example,
there is evidence that general mental ability is more heritable as we age (Briley &
Tucker-Drob, 2013; McCartney et al., 1990), which has been interpreted by some
scholars as evidence that as adolescents become young adults they are increasingly
able to select environments (e.g., colleges and workplaces) consistent with their
genetic potential. Likewise, studying how heritability varies over different environ-
mental conditions provides an opportunity to use twin research to study gene by
environment interactions, which are described in more detail below. For example,
there is a robust meta-analytic evidence in U.S. samples that the genetic contribu-
tion to intelligence is weaker for children growing up in poverty and stronger at
higher incomes, suggesting that, in impoverished environments, genetic potential
is swamped by environmental factors (Tucker-Drob & Bates, 2016). Interestingly,
in studies from Western Europe and Australia—where social policies ensure more
102  Chapter 3 Biological Foundations

uniform access to high-quality education and health care—these kinds of gene by

environment interactions tend not to be observed.

Shared and nonshared environments As noted above, in the most basic

­behavior-genetic analyses of twin data, the heritability of a social behavior or trait
is estimated by examining the degree to which identical and fraternal pairs dif-
fer in terms of similarity on a given social developmental outcome. As fraternal
twins share on average 50 percent and identical twins 100 percent of their genetic
variation, evidence that identical twin pairs are more alike on average than frater-
nal twin pairs suggests a role for genetic variation in the development of a social
behavior. More specifically, heritability (which importantly reflects the correlation
between genetic relatedness and the trait or social behavior of interest) is esti-
mated by subtracting the similarity of fraternal twin pairs on an outcome of interest
from the similarity of identical twin pairs and then multiplying the resulting value
by two (it is necessary to multiply by two as behavior-genetic comparisons of identi-
cal and fraternal twins only reflect half of the full range of genetic variation—that
is, these analyses often don’t include a comparison of sibling pairs that are geneti-
cally unrelated).
After first accounting for the degree to which genetic variation correlates with
the outcome of interest, twin designs also allow for the estimates of what behavior-
genetic researchers call effects of the shared environment and nonshared environ-
ment. In the context of behavior-genetic research, the shared environment is a
­technical term that refers to the degree to which siblings living in the same ­family
are similar to one another on a particular social behavior for nongenetic reasons,
not necessarily whether the pairs had objectively similar observable experiences. More spe-
cifically, the shared environment in behavior-genetic research is estimated by deter-
mining how similar identical twins are on a social behavior of interest and then
subtracting out similarity that can be attributable to (i.e., is statistically accounted
for by) genetic variation. Finally, the nonshared environmental effect reflects both
within and outside the family (nongenetic) factors that make siblings different, and
also includes measurement error. Said another way, the nonshared environment
is literally the variation in an outcome that is “left over” once accounting for addi-
tive genetic and shared environmental contributions to a social behavior or trait of
interest.
The way in which behavior-genetic researchers think about and ultimately meas-
ure shared and nonshared environmental factors might seem less than intuitive.
It is therefore important to keep in mind that, even if an experience is objectively
shared between two twin siblings—for example, the experience of an alcoholic
father growing up—the effects of that experience would only be estimated as a
shared environmental effect in behavior-genetic research with twins if this experi-
ence resulted in twin siblings becoming more similar on a particular trait (e.g.,
aggressiveness) for nongenetic reasons. If instead the experience of having an
alcoholic father on average tends to lead children, for environmental reasons, to
diverge from one another (i.e., within pairs, for one sibling to become aggressive
and the other sibling depressed), such a scenario would, perhaps paradoxically, be
estimated as a nonshared environmental effect in behavior-genetic models studying
those children’s social developmental outcomes.

Molecular genetics: The human genome project The Human Genome

Project was an international cooperative scientific endeavor, the primary aim of
which was to locate and describe all the genes in the human genome. Scientists
 Genetics and Social Development  103

completed this task in 2003, mapping and sequencing about 20,000 protein-coding
genes exactly 50 years after the discovery of the structure and function of DNA
by James Watson and Francis Crick (1953). Having identified these genes didn’t
mean that the scientists knew everything about genetic influence, however. Some
geneticists compare the segments of genes in the human genome to books on a
library shelf: The books are now shelved in the correct order, but scientists still
haven’t deciphered the meanings of most phrases (genes) and letters (nucleotide
sequences) within the volumes. In addition to their work on the human genome,
scientists have also studied animal genomes to place the human genome in its evo-
lutionary context (National Institutes of Health, 2002; U.S. Department of Energy,
2002). Researchers have found that more than 1,000 genes appear in the human
genome that are not in the rodent genome—including, for example, two families of
genes that encode proteins involved in the extended period of pregnancy unique to
humans. Other genes have stopped functioning, such as those involved in o ­ lfactory
reception, which might account for humans having a poorer sense of smell
than rats.
Although the Human Genome Project provides information about the basic
workings of the human body, most illnesses, such as cancer or heart disease, and
most social behaviors, such as aggression or helpfulness, are determined by multi-
ple genes. Figuring out the gene packages that cause these diseases and behaviors
is a truly daunting task (Benson, 2004; Plomin, 2013). This task is possible only
because new technology allows researchers to perform DNA microarrays and gen-
otype a million DNA markers simultaneously. Studies using this technology have
shifted research toward studies of genome-wide associations with the ultimate goal
of sequencing each individual’s entire genome (Plomin, 2013). As costs decrease,
it is becoming feasible for individuals to purchase their own genome sequence to
help guide medical decisions. So far, results of genome-wide studies indicate that
for most complex social traits, genetic effects are much smaller than previously
thought, suggesting that hundreds if not thousands of genes are responsible for
the heritability of social behavior in childhood. Progress in identifying packages of
genes has been slower than anticipated as a result of this recognition of the multiply
determined nature of most social traits and of the small contribution of each gene
to social outcomes (Plomin, 2013).
Researchers are already using the results of the Human Genome Project to
advance investigation of social development, though. Avshalom Caspi and his col-
leagues have studied one gene identified through the Human Genome Project that
affects the breakdown and uptake of neurotransmitters in the brain (Caspi et al.,
2002; Moffitt & Caspi, 2007). They have found that this gene increases children’s
antisocial behavior—but only if the children also experienced abuse. As scientists
have learned more and more about how genes influence human development, they
have discovered that genes never work in isolation but always in combination with
environmental influences (Rutter, 2006; Turkheimer, 2000). In fact, a gene’s coded
message cannot even be read unless it is embedded in an environment that signals
when and how it should respond.

Models of Genetic Influence

Because the topic of genetic transmission is so complex, scientists have offered a
number of increasingly detailed models to help us understand this process. In this
section, we discuss some of these models.
104  Chapter 3 Biological Foundations

The transmission of traits: A basic model The simplest model of genetic trans-
mission applies to characteristics determined by single genes, which is unusual in
the case of complex human behaviors. Two basic concepts are important in this
model. First, because people have pairs of chromosomes, they can have more than
one form of each gene. These alternative forms are called alleles. One allele comes
from the mother, the other comes from the father. Second, if the alleles from both
parents are the same, the person is homozygous for that particular gene or for the
trait associated with it; if the two alleles are different, the person is heterozygous for
the characteristic. A person who is homozygous exhibits the trait carried by both
alleles. For example, a person with two identical alleles for dark skin has dark skin;
a person with two identical alleles for light skin has light skin. Heterozygosity can be
expressed in several ways. First, a heterozygous trait may be a blend of the two alleles:
A person who is heterozygous for light and dark skin color might have intermediate
skin color. Second, a heterozygous trait may be a combination of the two alleles: A
person who is heterozygous for blood type can have AB blood because the alleles
for blood types A and B combine but do not blend. Third, a heterozygous trait may
reflect the dominant allele: A person who is heterozygous for curly and straight hair
has curly hair because the allele for curly hair is dominant over the weaker, recessive
allele for straight hair. Fortunately, many deleterious alleles that result in serious
disorders are recessive, which greatly reduces the incidence of expressed genetic
abnormalities in the population. One of the reasons that societies prohibit marriage
between close blood relatives is that a harmful recessive allele possessed by one rela-
tive is more apt to occur in another relative as well, thus increasing the chance that
their children will be homozygous for the harmful trait.

Interactions among genes A more complex model of genetic influence is

based on the interaction of multiple genes, a phenomenon known as epistasis.
Single pairs of alleles do not determine most characteristics of social development,
such as sociability, social problem solving, and style of emotional expression. These
attributes involve multiple pairs of genes acting together. This might help explain
why some traits influenced by genes do not run in families. Socially outgoing extra-
verts, for example, are sometimes born to parents who are quite shy and go on to
have other children who are themselves relatively shy. Development of traits such
as shyness and extraversion depends on a certain configuration of many genes,
and that ­particular configuration is not likely to be passed on from parent to child
(­Turkheimer, 2000). Adding further to the complexity of genetic influences on
development, a single pair of alleles can influence more than one trait, and if they
are modifier genes, they can do so not directly but indirectly by affecting how other
genes are expressed.

Environment influences gene expression Adding another layer of complex-

ity to genetic transmission are models that incorporate environmental effects on
genetic expression. For example, in a now classic version of this model, heredity
does not rigidly fix behavior but establishes a range of possible developmental out-
comes that occur in different environments (Gottesman, 1963; Knopik et al., 2016).
This model, stressing the interplay between genes and environment, is more useful
for explaining the complexity of social development than the two previous models;
Figure 3.5 shows an example of the model. Each of three children (A, B, and C) has
a different range of possible scores on a measure of sociability. If all three children
experience the same environmental conditions, Child C will always outscore Child
A and Child B. However, Child B could achieve a higher score than Child C if he
 Genetics and Social Development  105

Sociability score
100
90 Child C
80 Child C’s
Child B
70 range
40–100
60
Child A Child B’s
50 range
Child A’s 30–70
40
range
30 20–50
20 FIGURE 3.5 Interaction between environment and geno-
10 type. Providing a child with an enriched social environ-
0 ment can improve the child’s performance on a measure
Restricted Enriched
of sociability. However, the child’s genotype determines
Environment the limits within which his or her performance can vary.

or she experienced a more socially enriched environment. Child C has the widest
reaction range; that is, the difference between Child C’s performance in a restricted
environment and in an enriched environment is larger than the analogous differ-
ence for Child B and Child A. Child A has the lowest and the most limited reac-
tion range. This child, whether raised in a stimulating or unstimulating situation,
not only scores below average but also is less able to respond to environmental
enrichment.
When a reaction range for a trait is extremely narrow, it is said to be highly
canalized (Waddington, 1966). The degree to which a trait is canalized affects how
much it is influenced by the environment. The development of a highly canalized
trait is restricted to just a few pathways, and intense environmental stimulation is
required to alter its course of development. We know that a baby’s tendency to
babble is strongly canalized, for example, because babbling occurs even in babies
who are born deaf and have never heard a human voice; sociability and intelli-
gence are less canalized and can be modified by a variety of social and educational
experiences.
A more recent version of this general kind of model, which stresses the potential
of the environment to directly shape gene expression, involves the relatively new
science of epigenetics (literally, “on top of” genetics). More specifically, epigenetics
is the study of heritable changes in the ways in which gene expression is activated
or silenced without altering the underlying genetic sequence. Social developmen-
talists are now just beginning to harness the tools of epigenetics to understand how
genetic contributions to social behavior may depend critically on earlier exposures
(e.g., Van IJzendoorn, Bakermans-Kranenburg, & Ebstein, 2011).

Genetic makeup helps shape the environment Not only do environments

influence the expression of genes but genes also can influence the environment
in several ways (Moffitt & Caspi, 2007; Price & Jaffe, 2008; Scarr 1996; Scarr &
­McCartney, 1983). One way is that parents with certain genetic predispositions cre-
ate a home environment that suits those predispositions and also encourages these
inherited predispositions in their children. Socially competent and outgoing parents
are more likely to provide a home with lots of visitors and stimulating conversation,
enhancing their children’s inherited tendency to be social and encouraging them
106  Chapter 3 Biological Foundations

to enjoy and develop social relationships. Parents who are irritable and unhappy,
in contrast, are more likely to provide a negative environment without much social
stimulation, encouraging their children, who have similar genetic predispositions,
to become antisocial or depressed. This is referred to as a passive gene–­environment
association.
Evidence for passive gene–environment associations comes from two sources
(Reiss, 2005). First, studies using twins who are parents have demonstrated genetic
influences on parenting. In one study, for example, twin mothers’ reports of their
own warmth, hostility, and monitoring of their children were more highly correlated
if the mothers were identical twins than if they were fraternal twins (Neiderhiser et al.,
2004). Second, adoption studies have demonstrated genetic links between parenting
and children’s behavior. The passive genetic effect, whereby parents’ genes influence
their parental behavior and, in turn, their children’s behavior, would be present only
in families in which the parents were raising their own biological children, not when
children were being reared by unrelated adoptive parents. As expected, researchers
in one study found that correlations between adolescent behavior problems and rat-
ings of the quality of family relationships were higher in biological families than in
adoptive families (McGue et al., 1996). Findings from these two sources thus suggest
that genotypic differences among parents influence parenting and are transmitted
to children, who manifest them in their own behavior.
Genes also influence the environment through people’s inherited tendencies to
evoke certain responses from others in their social world. This is referred to as an
evocative gene–environment association. For example, babies with a genetic ten-
dency to smile tend to elicit more positive responses from others than do sober,
unresponsive infants (LaFreniere, 2010; Plomin, 1995). In one study of this gene →
environment connection, researchers using a sample of more than 1,000 5-year-old
twins found that parents’ physical punishment was strongly influenced by the chil-
dren’s genetic predispositions to be antisocial and defiant: Links between parents’
punishment and children’s antisocial tendencies were higher in pairs of children
who were identical twins than in pairs of fraternal twins (Jaffee et al., 2004). In a
second study, researchers found a high correlation (r = 0.62) between mothers’ nega-
tivity directed toward one identical twin adolescent and antisocial behavior shown
by the other identical twin adolescent; the correlation was much lower for fraternal
twins (r = 0.27) and approached zero (r = 0.06) for genetically unrelated stepsiblings
(Reiss et al., 2000; Reiss, 2005). These studies provide strong evidence that the same
set of genetic influences causes children’s antisocial behavior and provokes their par-
ents’ negative behavior, leading to increased antisocial behavior in the adolescent.
The third way genes influence environments is that people’s genetic predisposi-
tions encourage them to seek out experiences compatible with their inherited ten-
dencies (McCartney et al., 1990; Scarr, 1996; Scarr & McCartney, 1983). They search
for, select, or build environments or niches compatible with their traits. Thus, peo-
ple who are genetically predisposed to be gregarious actively seek the company of
other people and become involved in a range of social activities; individuals who
are aggressive sign up for the football team rather than the chess club (Bullock &
Merrill, 1980). This is referred to as an active gene–environment association. The
importance of this niche picking likely increases as children get older and have
more freedom to choose their activities and companions.

Gene by environment interactions (G × E) The next kind of model of genetic

transmission, the gene by environment interaction model, identifies an active role
for both genes and environment, and their contributions are taken beyond additive
influences. In fact, there are many different kinds of gene–environment interaction
 Genetics and Social Development  107

(G × E) models, in which genes are expressed in overt behavior more strongly under
certain environmental conditions, or, conversely, specific environments affect indi-
viduals with particular genetic predispositions to a greater extent. In these cases, an
interaction exists between genes and environments so that specific behavioral out-
comes emerge only with the right combination. Two of the most commonly studied
gene by environment interaction models that are the focus of research on social
development are the diathesis–stress (sometimes called dual-risk) and the differ-
ential susceptibility models. More specifically, the diathesis–stress model assumes
that poor developmental experiences (e.g., low-quality parenting) are most likely to
impact the development of individuals who carry genetic vulnerabilities, or diath-
eses. Many potential genetic vulnerability factors have been the focus of research
in social development, including the short allele of the serotonin transporter gene
described in more detail below (Caspi, Sugden, et al., 2003). In contrast, the dif-
ferential susceptibility model assumes that many such genetic markers are not risk
factors exclusively but instead function to make children more susceptible to their
experiences generally (Belsky & Pluess, 2011). That is, the differential susceptibility
hypothesis posits that many apparent genetic vulnerabilities are more accurately
understood as plasticity factors because they not only increase risk for bad outcomes
given poor caregiving experiences (as in the diathesis–stress account) but also
increase the probability of positive outcomes for children when they experience
high-quality caregiving (Belsky & Pluess, 2009; Roisman, Newman, et al., 2012).
These G × E models are especially important for understanding complex traits
and behaviors that are common in social development, such as empathy, aggression,
and sociability (Leve et al., 2010; Meaney, 2010; Rutter, 2007). As noted above, it
is now possible to identify some specific genes that are related to particular social
behaviors and to ask whether children who are at risk by virtue of having these genes
are more sensitive to specific environmental risks (Plomin, 2013). For example, when
researchers in one study assessed genes, environment, and behavior in a sample of
1,000 young adults, they found that a genetic predisposition for depression resulted
in depressive symptoms only when the person had experienced numerous life
stressors during the previous few years and had been abused in childhood (Caspi,
Sugden, et al., 2003). That is, a significant interaction occurred between a genotype
for depression and a stressful environment (see Figure 3.6). Studies of nonhuman

35 Depressive genotype 35 Non depressive genotype

Major depression episode (%)

(n = 581) (n = 264)
30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5
0 0
0 1 2 3 4+ 0 1 2 3 4+
Stressful life events
FIGURE 3.6 Gene–environment interaction (G × E) model. Percentage of individuals meeting diagnostic
criteria for depression at age 26, as a function of depressive genotype and number of stressful life events
between ages 21 and 26.
Source: Caspi, A., Sugden, K., Moffitt, T. E., Taylor, A., Craig, I. W., Harrington, H. . . ., & Poulton, R. (2003). Influence of
life stress on depression: Moderation by a polymorphism in the 5-HTT gene. Science, 301, 386–389. Reprinted with permis-
sion from AAAS.
108  Chapter 3 Biological Foundations

primates told a similar story; for example, rhesus monkeys with the depressive gene
showed more stress in response to harsh rearing conditions than monkeys without
the gene (Barr et al., 2004). Brain-imaging studies of humans also showed more
neural activity in the amygdala in response to fearful stimuli for people who had the
depressive gene (Heinz et al., 2005). Although there have been many recent studies
reporting G × E interactions (e.g., Brendgen et al., 2011; Latendresse et al., 2011;
Leve et al., 2010; Petersen et al., 2012; Sulik et al., 2012), there is also a great deal
of healthy debate in social developmental research these days about to what extent
such findings are likely to be robust and replicable, particularly when initial studies
are based on relatively small samples (Belsky et al., 2015; Munafò et al., 2009; Risch
et al., 2009; Rutter et al., 2009; Uher & McGuffin, 2010).

Gene–environment feedback loops An even more complex model of genetic

transmission suggests that genes and environments shape development together
as genes influence environments, which in turn influence genes, in complex feed-
back loops (Meaney, 2010; Rutter, 2006). Figure 3.7 gives an illustration of these
feedback loops (Gottlieb & Lickliter, 2004). As the figure indicates, influences are
bidirectional, directed from bottom to top and from top to bottom. In addition,
although each level generally influences the level directly above or below it, interac-
tions across nonadjacent levels are also possible. The most important point of the
feedback loop model is that genes are part of an overall system and their expression
is affected by events at other levels of the system, including the environment. The
message of this model is clear: Genes and environments are inextricably linked and
operate in a mutually dependent fashion.

Genetic Anomalies
Children born with genetic abnormalities also demonstrate the connection between
biology and social behavior. Chromosomes provide one source of genetic abnormal-
ities. In normal individuals, females have two large X chromosomes; males have one
large X and a smaller Y chromosome. Females with only one X chromosome, called
Turner syndrome, exhibit unusual social behavior patterns. They tend to be docile,
pleasant, and not easily upset, but they have problems in social relationships because
their internal reproductive organs and secondary sex characteristics do not develop
normally and they are immature, lack assertiveness, and have difficulty processing
and interpreting emotional cues (Hong et al., 2011; Kesler, 2007). People with a
pinched or narrowed X chromosome, fragile X syndrome, also have psychological

Environment

Behavior

Neural activity

FIGURE 3.7 A multilevel model of gene–environment

interactions.
Genetic expression
Source: Gottlieb, G., & Lickliter, R. (2004). The various roles
of animal models in understanding human development.
Social Development, 13, 311–325. This material is reproduced Individual development
with permission of John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
 Genetics and Social Development  109

esearch Up Close: A Genetic Risk for Drug Use

To assess the children’s genes, the researchers
analyzed DNA obtained from samples of the
children’s saliva. About 43 percent of the children
had either one or two copies of the short version
of the 5-HTT gene and, therefore, were genetically
susceptible to substance abuse.
These children did have a significantly higher
rate of substance use and increased their drug
use between ages 11 and 14 at a faster rate

Yvan Dubé/iStockphoto
than children without the genetic risk. However,
their parents’ behavior also made a difference.
When the parents were highly involved and
supportive of the children, drug use rose only
7 percent between ages 11 and 14; when the
parents were not involved or supportive, the
Genetic studies have identified one gene, 5-HTT, increase was 21 percent. Further support for this
that helps regulate transmission of serotonin. This G × E interaction comes from a study showing
gene appears to be linked to increased risk of that youth with a genetic predisposition to smoke
depression, lack of self-control, and drug use. reduced their smoking if their parents monitored
Most people have two copies of a long version of their activities more closely (Dick et al., 2007).
the gene, but about 40 percent inherit either one Several explanations have been offered for
or two copies of a short version. Having a short these findings. One explanation is that a genetic
version of the gene reduces serotonin transmis- predisposition for substance use is linked to
sion and is the apparent culprit that increases poorer self-control and greater impulsivity, which
the risk for drug problems. However, whether or leads to more substance abuse. Another expla-
not this gene is expressed and results in actual nation is that individuals with this genetic predis-
drug use depends on the environment in which position are more sensitive to environmental
the child grows up. The gene by environment G × E influences and so are more attuned to, and thus
interaction is illustrated in a study conducted by benefit from, involved and protective parenting.
Gene Brody and his colleagues (2009). Although these studies do not fully prove these
These researchers followed 253 African explanations, the findings provide support for a
American children from the time they were 11 G × E interaction and underscore the fact that
years old. The participants in the study were gene expression varies in different social environ-
interviewed about their use of cigarettes, alcohol, ments. The studies are notable for their integration
and marijuana at the beginning of the study of molecular genetic data (DNA) and environ-
and again each year until they were 14. To assess mental data (assessments of parenting) to
the children’s environments, the researchers had forecast substance use and clearly demonstrate
their mothers report on their parenting practices. the importance of both genes and parenting.

and social problems including anxiety, depression, hyperactivity, attention deficits,

and abnormal communication patterns (Garrett et al., 2004; Reiss & Hall, 2007).
Children who lack the long arm of chromosome 7 have Williams syndrome. Although
they have limited intelligence and visual–spatial ability deficits, they are unusually
sociable, empathic, and prosocial (Järvinen et al., 2013; Semel & Rosner, 2003).
More common than these chromosomal abnormalities are disorders linked to
specific genes or groups of genes. Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)
110  Chapter 3 Biological Foundations

is a persistent pattern of behavior that leads to difficulties at home, in the classroom,

and with peers (American Psychiatric Association, 2013; Barkley, 2015). Children
with ADHD have trouble sustaining their attention, run into conflict with adults,
and often think of themselves as being “no good” (Campbell, 2000; Whalen et al,
2006). In structured situations such as the classroom, they fidget, tap their feet,
poke their neighbors, and talk out of turn. This behavior disturbs peers and dis-
rupts the class, which may help account for the fact that their peers reject 50 to 60
percent of children with ADHD (Henker & Whalen, 1999). They often seem to act
before they think, and they find it difficult to follow rules such as, “When your lit-
tle brother takes one of your toys, don’t hit him, or you will be sent to your room,”
because they have problems tracking contingencies (Barkley, 2015). We know that
there is a biological basis for this disorder because brain-imaging techniques reveal
abnormalities in several areas (Liddle et al., 2011) and because children with more
severe ADHD tend to have specific variants of a large number of genes, including
the dopamine-receptor gene DRD4 (Kebir et al., 2009). Evidence also suggests that
ADHD behavior is more similar in identical twins than fraternal twins (Frieteg &
Retz, 2010). Genetic anomalies like this one clearly and dramatically demonstrate
the strong link between biology and social behavior.

nsights from Extremes: Autism

draw into his shell and live within himself.” When
Donald was 4 years old, his parents brought a
boy home to spend the summer with them, but
Donald never asked the boy a question or
answered a question or romped with him in play.
Donald was placed in a tuberculosis prevento-
rium to provide “a change of environment,” and
while there, he also exhibited a “disinclination to
play with children.” When clinicians at Johns
Hopkins Hospital observed him, he wandered
natasa778/iStockphoto

about smiling, making stereotyped movements

with his fingers, crossing them about in the air. He
shook his head from side to side, whispering or
humming the same three-note tune.
Most of his actions were repetitious; his
verbalizations were ritualistic. His mother was the
In 1943, Leo Kanner, the first child psychiatrist, only person with whom he had any contact, and
used the word autism to describe the withdrawn she spent all of her time developing ways of
behavior of 11 children he had seen at Johns keeping him engaged.
Hopkins University Hospital (Kanner, 1943). Case 1, Today, autism, or autism spectrum disorder
Donald T., was first seen when he was 5 years old. (ASD), the umbrella term for a family of similar
Donald’s parents had noticed that their son was disorders, is known to be a troubling condition
happiest when alone. As an infant, he almost that begins in childhood, lasts a lifetime, and
never cried to go with his mother, did not seem disrupts a person’s social and communication
to notice his father’s homecomings, and was skills. Autistic children can appear to lack interest
indifferent to visiting relatives. He expressed no in other people; sometimes they even seem to be
affection when petted. “He seemed almost to averse to human contact. They tend to avoid eye
 Genetics and Social Development  111

contact and fail to modulate social interactions. et al., 2012). Identification of genetic factors and
Absent early intensive intervention, they do not how they interact with environmental factors
develop normal social attachments or express such as heavy metals and pesticides and
empathy in social relations. Many fail to develop biological contributors such as advanced
friendships and become social isolates (American parental age and low birth weight will be impor-
Psychiatric Association, 2013; Baron-Cohen, 2003). tant steps in understanding the causes of autism.
Signs of autism—including lack of gesturing, Research also indicates a biological basis for
vocalizing, and eye contact to initiate communi- autism in the brain (Dawson & Sterling, 2008;
cation and inability to pick up cues from watching Waldie & Saunders, 2014). Neuroanatomical
facial expressions—are evident in the first year of studies suggest that autism alters brain develop-
life. The U.S. Center for Disease Control and ment soon after conception and affects many
Prevention recently estimated that the rate of ASD parts of the brain (Arndt et al., 2005). Children with
is 14.6 per 1,000 children, equivalent to 1 out of 68 ASD show less activity than normal children in
school-aged children (Centers for Disease Control areas of the social brain, such as the anterior
and Prevention, 2016). It is three to five times more cingulate cortex and the right anterior insula,
common for boys than for girls to be diagnosed when they are processing social information
with ASD (American Psychiatric Association, 2000). (Di Martino et al., 2009). They also have less
Kanner described autism as an innate disor- activity in mirror neuron regions of the brain when
der and foresaw the need for research into the they imitate other people (Dapretto et al., 2006;
genetics of autism at about the same time that Hamilton, 2013; Oberman et al., 2005). Moreover,
DNA was first identified as the bearer of genetic these cortical areas are thinner in adults with ASD
information. It took courage to offer that hypoth- than in nonautistic adults (Hadjikhani et al., 2006).
esis in 1943 when the prevailing view, based on Autistic individuals also have poorer connectivity
Freudian psychology, was that this pattern of between structures in the social brain (Maximo
behavior was due to poor parenting, with much et al., 2014; Pelphrey & Carter, 2008; Wicker et al.,
of the blame placed on “frigid” or “refrigerator” 2008). The underconnectivity theory of autism
mothers who rejected their children. Today, hypothesizes that autism is marked by underfunc-
although the exact cause of autism is still tioning high-level neural connections and syn-
unknown, it is almost universally accepted that chronization along with an excess of low-level
the disorder is genetically based. Chromosomal processes (Just et al., 2007; Mostofsky et al., 2009).
abnormalities have been found in some children Abnormal brain overgrowth (probably due to lack
with autism (Drew et al., 1996), and studies of of synaptic pruning) has been observed in
twins have made it clear that genetics is a autistic children, especially in the structures that
powerful contributor (Nigg & Goldsmith, 1994; underlie higher-order cognitive, social, emotional,
Robinson et al., 2012; Rutter, 2007). It is now and language functions; a study of brain tissue
estimated that heritability explains more than from deceased autistic children revealed that
90 percent of the risk of autism, assuming no they averaged 67 percent more neurons in the
other genetic or medical conditions (Caglayan, prefrontal cortex than nonautistic children
2010). But it is also clear that autism is not (Courchesne et al., 2011; Stoner et al., 2014).
inherited in a simple fashion. Many genes may As the search for the biological bases of
be involved, each one adding to the risk of autism continues, it is worth noting that Kanner’s
autism (Abrahams & Geschwind, 2008). descriptions of extreme patterns of behavior in a
Evidence for changes in DNA sequence, struc- handful of children was the inspiration for much
tural rearrangements of DNA including mutations, research being conducted today and still
and epigenetic modifications of DNA, which do provides clues about the neural bases of this
not change DNA but are heritable and influence disorder. To see some examples of children with
gene expression, have all been reported autism look at the videos at https://www.
(Volkmar et al., 2009). Recent evidence has youtube.com/watch?v=FeGaffIJvHM; http://
uncovered three specific gene mutations that www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0vCz2KWMM0 or
are linked to increased risk of autism (Sanders search You Tube for “autism.”
112  Chapter 3 Biological Foundations

eal-World Application: Genetic Counseling,

Genetic Selection
Advances in biology and Some day we may be able to replace defec-
genetics have opened new tive genes in a fetus through gene therapy, thus
opportunities for parents to be preventing a genetically determined disorder
forewarned about problems in before it happens. Gene therapy involves insert-
their children’s development. For some time now, ing normal alleles into patients’ cells to compen-
it has been possible to sample cells from a sate for defective alleles. The most effective
developing fetus to determine whether the fetus current technique uses modified viruses (viruses
carries genes for certain disorders. With a prena- from which harmful properties have been
tal sample of cells from amniocentesis or chori- removed) to carry the new genes into the
onic villi sampling, it is possible to examine the patient’s cells. Scientists have adopted this
fetus’s chromosomes and genes for any signs of strategy because viruses are by nature adapted
chromosome disorder. The critical abnormalities to penetrate another organism’s cells. Most often,
(e.g., missing or extra chromosomes) are clearly target cells are first removed from the patient’s
visible under a high-powered microscope. In body, infused with the new gene by way of the
addition, scientists have identified particular virus, and then returned to the body. This proce-
pieces of DNA, called genetic markers, that can dure was first used in 1990 to treat a 4-year-old
indicate many disorders caused by one or more girl who had a deadly genetic disorder that shut
defective genes. With this knowledge, parents down her immune system, leaving her defense-
may choose to terminate the pregnancy or to less against infections. Doctors inserted the gene
prepare for the arrival of a child who will need needed to produce a critical enzyme that her
special care. immune system lacked into some of the child’s
For most people, this is a very difficult choice blood. Ten years later, the girl continued to do
and raises the ethical dilemma of deciding when well with some additional medication
an abnormality is severe enough to warrant (Thompson, 2000). Since then, scientists have
termination. If a fetus has a lethal genetic had mixed but increasing success with gene
disorder that will lead to a painful death in a few therapy for immune deficiencies (Gaspar, 2012).
months or years, the choice may be easier than As science enters this new age of genetic
if the disorder is less devastating. What should a screening, selection, and engineering, parents
parent do about a fetus with Turner syndrome will confront more and more ethical issues (Kass,
(XO) or Klinefelter syndrome (XXY)? Although 2002; Murray, 1996; Parke, Gailey, et al., 2012). In
these children have both physical abnormalities the near future, prospective parents may be able
and cognitive impairments, they are capable of to pick and choose the traits they want in their
leading productive lives. Confronting prospective yet-to-be conceived children. Clinics all over the
parents with such difficult ethical choices is one United States already provide would-be parents
result of developing the technology to analyze with in-depth profiles of potential sperm and egg
chromosomes and genes (Murray, 1996). The donors. The Xytex Corporation in Atlanta, for
study of genes and their influence has made it example, offers a long list of genetically coded
possible to offer couples preventive genetic physical attributes, including length of eyelashes,
counseling. Couples wanting to have a child can presence of freckles, and whether ear lobes are
themselves be tested for defective genes. If they detached. Experts believe that parents may soon
find that they carry defective alleles, they may be signing up for “preimplantation genetic
elect to adopt a child or to conceive a child diagnosis” of embryos to check for genetic
through an assisted reproductive technique in defects and for desirable traits as well. (See
which a donor’s egg or sperm is substituted for Figure 3.8 as an illustration of the process.)
one of their own.
 Temperament: Causes and ­Consequences  113

Embryo Embryos identified with markers

A woman’s eggs are A single cell is removed from Only embryos with the The procedure virtually
fertilized with sperm each embryo, and then tested biomarkers for the guarantees that the child
in a lab, creating for biomarkers associated with required traits are placed will be female and increases
several embryos. female gender, blue eyes, in the woman’s womb. the probability she will have
and red hair. blue eyes and red hair.

FIGURE 3.8 How to increase the chance of having a blue-eyed, red-haired daughter.

The leap from genetic selection to genetic Gattaca, genetic selection is appealing because
engineering may be more problematic. It is one it can prevent enormous suffering. Vastly fewer
thing to replace a defective allele in a person babies hardwired with painful, incurable diseases
who is seriously ill, but what about using gene would be born, a prospect which some ethicists
therapy to improve performance or appearance believe should be supported (Savulescu, 2008,
(Kiuru & Crystal, 2008)? Gene therapy alters 2009). Perhaps it is inevitable that genetic
genes in a diseased organ to affect a cure, but selection will be widespread because—­
in the not-so-distant future, geneline therapy ultimately—parents are the ones who decide
could alter the blueprint itself, the human and parents generally do whatever they can to
genome, and thus be passed on to offspring. bring into the world children who will be healthy,
Researchers are, in fact, on the brink of develop- well-adjusted, and successful. You might give
ing low-cost machines that will provide personal some thought to the ethical considerations that
DNA profiles on demand. Just as in the movie should guide their decisions.

Temperament: Causes and

­Consequences
The final biological foundation for social development that we discuss in this chap-
ter is infant temperament.

Defining and Measuring Temperament

Even in their earliest hours, infants’ typical responses to the environment are mark-
edly different. One baby cries easily even during moderately stimulating play and is
readily distracted; another baby enjoys arousing play and has a good attention span.
These behavior patterns reflect the baby’s temperament, defined as an individual’s
typical mode of responding to the environment. Considerable evidence suggests
that temperament is biologically based and linked to genetics (Beekman et al.,
2015; Posner et al., 2007).
Alexander Thomas and Stella Chess identified a number of temperament dimen-
sions in infants based on interviews with their mothers (Thomas et al., 1968).
These dimensions included activity level, mood, distractibility, and the tendency to
114  Chapter 3 Biological Foundations

approach or withdraw. Using these dimensions, Thomas and Chess classified infants
as “difficult,” “easy,” or “slow-to-warm-up.” Difficult infants (about 10 percent of the
babies) slept and ate irregularly, became easily upset by new situations, and experi-
enced extremes of fussiness and crying:

Nothing was easy with Chris. . . . It would take me an hour and a half to get part of a
bottle into him and he’d be hungry two hours later. I can’t remember once in the first
two years when he didn’t go to bed crying. I’d try to rock him to sleep but as soon as
I’d tiptoe over to put him in his crib his head would lurch up and he’d start bellowing
again. He didn’t like any kind of changes in his routine. New people and places upset
him so it was hard to take him anywhere. (Chess & Thomas, 1986, p. 31)

As Jason lay in his crib he seemed fussy and fretful. His mouth grimaced, his face and
scalp went red, and he grumbled as his eyes flickered open. We thought that he might
be hungry. Charlie picked him up tenderly and I started to arrange myself to nurse him.
Within a few seconds he was flailing his arms and kicking his legs. His little body was
rigid with tension, his eyes were clenched shut, and I had no idea how to get him to
suck. I looked at Charlie and burst into tears.

Easy babies (about 40 percent) were friendly, happy, and adaptable:

John was my touchy feely baby. From the first day in the hospital he cuddled and seemed
so contented to be held I could hardly bear to put him down. He didn’t cry unless some-
thing was wrong—he was wet, or hungry, or tired. We took him everywhere because he
seemed to enjoy new things. You could always sit him in a corner and he’d entertain
himself. Sometimes I’d forget he was there until he’d start laughing or prattling (Chess
& Thomas, 1986, p. 28)

Abby got hungry every three hours as an infant. She was so healthy and sturdy and
good natured that she kept me from worrying about whether she was getting enough
to eat or whether I was letting too many people handle her or any of the scary things I
imagined as a brand new mother.

Slow-to-warm-up babies were low in activity level and tended to respond negatively
to new stimuli at first but slowly adapted to new objects and novel experiences after
repeated contact with them. Essentially, these children fell somewhere between dif-
ficult and easy children; on first exposure to something strange, they might look like
difficult children, but they gradually showed quiet interest, like easy children.

When Emma was just a few months old, it became clear to me that it took her a long
time to get used to things, and that was something we were just going to have to learn
to live with. I try to give her lots of time to get her feet wet. I introduce new foods, new
places very slowly. When she was 3½ and started preschool, she needed her blankie for
the first few weeks. I carpooled with Aiden’s mother, and even though Emma has known
her forever, I waited a whole month before she went in their car without me. If I pushed
Emma too fast too soon, she just couldn’t handle it.

Since the early work of Thomas and Chess, Mary Rothbart and her colleagues
have developed measures of temperament that include three broad dimensions
similar to those found in nonhuman animals (Rothbart, 2011). These dimen-
sions are more discrete and can be more precisely measured than Thomas and
Chess’s global temperament types. Rothbart’s three temperament dimensions are
 Temperament: Causes and ­Consequences  115

ultural Context: Are Temperaments the Same Around

the World?
controlling their impulses—for example, waiting

Kirill Zdorov/iStockphoto
their turn when helping someone build a block

Okea/iStockphoto
tower (Sabbagh et al., 2006).
A genetic pattern associated with the
impulse problems of ADHD is found in nearly
half (48 percent) of children in the United States;
in China, ADHD is virtually unknown, and the
genetic pattern occurs in almost no children
Researchers have compiled evidence about (2 percent according to Chang et al., 1996).
whether different cultures have differences in Links among dimensions of temperament also
temperament. Their evidence shows that the vary in the two different cultures. Chinese children
broad dimensions of temperament described in who are high in effortful control are also less
Table 3.1 are found in different cultures. However, extraverted; U.S. children who are high in effortful
significant differences between cultures exist as control are, instead, less negative (Ahadi et al.,
well (Chen & Schmidt, 2015). Perhaps the most 1993; Rothbart, 2011). The reason for these
consistent difference is between the tempera- differences may stem from the different kinds of
ments of Asian and white babies. As the photos behavior valued in the two cultures. In China,
illustrate, compared with white babies, Chinese parents expect their children to control their
babies are calmer, easier to console, more able impulses by age 2; in the United States, parents
to quiet themselves after crying, and faster to do not expect impulse control in their children
adapt to external stimulation or changes until later in the preschool years. Biological
(Freedman, 1974; Kagan, 1994). Japanese processes of temperament may be shared
infants, similarly, are on average less reactive across cultures, but outcomes apparently vary
than white babies during well-baby examinations depending on cultural values. Cultural beliefs
and less likely to display intense distress when shape temperament, just as temperament
they are inoculated (Lewis et al., 1993). Chinese shapes behavior (Kerr, 2001; Rothbart, 2011;
preschoolers are better than white children at Sameroff, 2009).

effortful control: attentional focusing, inhibitory control, perceptual sensitivity, and

low-­intensity pleasure; negative affectivity: fear, frustration, sadness, and discomfort;
and extraversion-surgency: positive anticipation, impulsivity, high activity level, and
sensation seeking (see Table 3.1). Of course, temperament is expressed in different
ways as children grow older. For example, in infancy, attentional focusing may be
indicated by the length of time a baby looks at an object, whereas in childhood this
component might be measured by the length of time a child continues to work on
a puzzle or a problem. Despite these changes in specific behaviors, temperament
qualities do tend to extend from infancy to adulthood.

The Biological Basis of Temperament

Genetic factors Scientists believe that temperament is at least in part genetically
organized and that genetic influences become increasingly prominent through
early childhood (Dunn & Plomin, 1991; Wachs & Kohnstamm, 2001). They have
116  Chapter 3 Biological Foundations

TABLE 3.1

Definitions of Temperament in the Children’s Behavior Questionnaire and the Early

Adolescent Temperament Questionnaire
Broad Dimensions and Scales Scale Definitions
Effortful control
Attention focus Can focus attention as well as to shift attention when desired
Inhibitory control Can plan future action and suppress inappropriate responses
Perceptual sensitivity Aware of slight, low-intensity stimulation in the environment
Low-intensity pleasure Derives pleasure from activities or stimuli involving low intensity, rate, complexity,
novelty, and incongruity
Negative affectivity
Frustration Reacts negatively to interruption of ongoing tasks or goal blocking
Fear Reacts negatively to anticipation of distress
Discomfort Reacts negatively to sensory qualities of stimulation, including intensity, rate, or
­complexity of light, movement, sound, or texture
Sadness Reacts negatively to exposure to suffering, disappointment, and object loss
Soothability Slow rate of recovery from peak distress, excitement, or general arousal
Extraversion-surgency
Activity High level of gross motor activity, including rate and extent of locomotion
Shyness (low) Low inhibition to novelty and challenge, especially social
High-intensity pleasure Pleasure is derived from activities involving high intensity or novelty
Smiling and laughter Responds positively to changes in stimulus intensity, rate, complexity, and incongruity
Impulsivity Short latency of response initiation
Positive anticipation Excited in anticipation of expected pleasurable activities
Affiliation Desires warmth and closeness with others (in Adolescent Questionnaire only)

Source: Rothbart, 2007.

found that heredity contributes to individual differences in temperament dimen-

sions, such as emotionality, fearfulness, anxiety, activity level, attention span, persis-
tence, and sociability (Kagan & Fox, 2006; Knopik et al., 2016). Some progress has
been made in identifying genes or clusters of genes that are associated with varia-
tions in temperament. For example, early evidence suggested that specific genes
are related to the intensity of 1-year-olds’ reactions to a stranger (Lakatos et al.,
2003) and 3-year-olds’ reactions to novel events (De Luca et al., 2003). Even so, the
environment plays a moderating role in how these genetic influences are expressed.
Infant temperament is affected by the prenatal environment and environmental
factors at birth (Riese, 1990). Childhood temperament is affected by interactions
with family members (Rutter, 2006). In one study, for example, children with a
version of the DRD4 gene, which has been shown to regulate attention, were at par-
ticularly high risk for deficits in effortful control and on an early trajectory toward
negative outcomes if they were exposed to high levels of negative parenting (Smith
et al., 2012). In adulthood, temperament becomes less closely linked to genetic
factors, and life experiences become more significant (Knopik et al., 2016; Plomin
et al., 1988). Most psychologists today consider temperament to be the result of
both genetic and environmental factors.
 Temperament: Causes and ­Consequences  117

Neurological correlates Researchers have discovered some of the neurochemical

and neurological underpinnings of temperament. Neurochemical molecules, such
as epinephrine, dopamine, vasopressin, and oxytocin, seem to play a role (Irizarry
& Galbraith, 2004). For example, extraversion has been linked to the availability
of dopamine (Rothbart & Posner, 2006). Neurologically, individual differences in
effortful control, impulsivity, and proneness to frustration have been linked to activ-
ity in the anterior and lateral prefrontal areas of the brain (Posner & Rothbart, 2007;
Rothbart et al., 2011). Jerome Kagan and his colleagues found that infants and chil-
dren who were highly reactive to unfamiliar events—timid children—showed more
activation in the amygdala region of the brain in novel situations than did children
who were low in reactivity—bold children (Kagan & Snidman, 2004; Kagan et al.,
2007). More recent work has also shown that in addition to amygdala activation,
timid or behaviorally inhibited adolescents display heightened activation of the stri-
atum, a region of the brain that plays a critical role in initiating both approach and
avoidance behavior (Helfinstein et al., 2012). As research continues, we will find out
more about the neurochemical and neurological underpinnings of temperament.

Early Evidence of Temperament

Temperamental characteristics appear early—even prenatally. Pregnant women
often comment on how active their babies are, and in subsequent pregnancies they
note differences in their fetuses’ squirming and kicking. After birth, newborn infants
exhibit differences in distress and avoidance, and a few months later, differences in
how much they smile at and approach social stimuli. By 2 to 3 months of age, babies
differ in their expression of negative emotions such as anger and frustration, and by
7 to 10 months, in their level of fearfulness. Over the next year or so they become
able to control and regulate their expression of these emotions through another
dimension of temperament, effortful control (Rothbart, 2011). Effortful control
allows children to inhibit an emotion or an action (not eat dessert), facilitate an
action (eat meat), make plans for future actions (eat more vegetables), and detect
errors in actions (don’t eat fruit that has turned brown).
This regulatory ability has been measured in the laboratory using a variety of
tasks in which children must control their behavior. These tasks include delay of
gratification (having the child wait before eating a candy that can be seen under a
transparent cover); controlled motor behavior (having the child draw a line very,
very slowly); controlled stopping and starting (having the child play a go-go-stop
game such as Simon Says); controlled attention (having the child pick out small
shapes hidden in a large shape); and controlled vocal output (having the child
lower the volume of his or her voice) (Kochanska et al., 2000). By the time they are
2½ years old, children perform in a consistent manner across these different tasks,
and, by 4 years old, effortful control appears to be a stable characteristic of individ-
ual children (Rothbart et al., 2008). Effortful control measured at 1 to 3 years of age
also predicts executive functioning (ability to plan) 14 years later (Friedman et al.,
2011). Extraversion-surgency is another aspect of temperament that can be assessed
in infancy and is stable between then and age 5 (Degnan et al., 2011).

Consequences and Correlates of Temperament

Temperamental characteristics have consequences for children’s social develop-
ment. Children who are irritable, difficult, impulsive, and emotional experience
a higher rate of problems in later life (Goldsmith et al., 2001; Halverson & Deal,
118  Chapter 3 Biological Foundations

2001; Rothbart, 2011). Fearful, shy, inhibited children, whose temperaments are
characterized by low levels of extraversion-surgency, are more likely to have inter-
nalizing problems, such as fear, sadness, and withdrawn behavior, anxiety symp-
toms and anxiety disorders, guilt, and low empathy (Lindhout et al., 2009; Muris
et al., 2009; Ormel et al., 2005; Rothbart, 2011; Tarullo et al., 2011). Children with
poor effortful control exhibit more externalizing problems, including disruptive,
aggressive, and hyperactive behavior (Ormel et al., 2005; Valiente et al., 2003).
Similarly, children with high negative emotionality are likely to have aggressive and
sometimes hyperactivity problems (Mathiesen & Prior, 2006; Sanson et al., 1993),
and highly exuberant children are more dominant, angry, and conflicted (Tarullo
et al., 2011).

“Jason was a fussy and stubborn infant—and he turned into a fussy and stubborn tod-
dler. Now he hits and fights with the other kids so often that even his preschool teach-
ers, who are extra patient, agree that he’s ‘high strung.’ He’s always been alert, but he’s
also touchy and boisterous, and so he gets into lots of fights.”

Several factors may contribute to these relations between temperament and later
problems. First, children with difficult temperaments may find it more difficult to
adapt to environmental demands and may be more affected by stress and the toll it
takes on emotional well-being. This is a simple direct continuation of temperamen-
tal vulnerability.
Second, children with difficult temperaments may elicit more adverse reactions
from other people and thus suffer the psychological damage caused by harsh par-
enting and social rejection (Reiss et al., 2000). Researchers have found that chil-
dren with difficult temperaments often serve as targets for parental irritability. In
this case, the effect of temperament is indirect: Behavioral outcomes are the result
of the differential experiences of children with different temperaments.
Third, temperament may interact with conditions in the environment, in a tem-
perament by environment interaction comparable to the gene by environment inter-
action we discussed earlier. If parents are under stress, have marital conflicts, are
hostile themselves, and lack a supportive family or friendship network, children’s
difficult temperaments are more likely to develop into externalizing problems
than if the family is positive and peaceful (Morris et al., 2002; Tschann et al., 1996).
Children who suffer the double whammy (dual-risk) of having a difficult tempera-
ment and a harsh or insensitive mother are more likely to develop aggression and
acting-out problems (Lorber & Egeland, 2011; Miner & Clarke-Stewart, 2008), self-
regulation problems (Kim & Kochanska, 2012), anxiety and depression problems
(Paulussen-Hoogeboom et al., 2008), and academic and social problems (Stright
et al., 2008) compared with children who have only one of these disadvantages
(­Roisman, Newman, et al., 2012). A recent meta-analysis of 84 studies has confirmed
these findings (Slagt et al., 2016). Temperamentally fearful children whose parents
use harsh discipline are more likely to develop internalizing problems (Colder et al.,
1997), emotion-regulation problems (Schwartz & Bugental, 2004), and low levels of
conscience (Kochanska, 1997), compared with children who either are not fearful
or have parents who are not harsh; fearful children whose mothers are depressed
also become more fearful and anxious (Gartstein et al., 2010). Likewise, children
with timid temperaments whose mothers are unsupportive, negative, or depressed
are likely to become fearful (Gilissen et al., 2008) and socially withdrawn (Hane
et al., 2008); they have more negative moods and develop more maladaptive ways of
regulating their negative emotions (Feng et al., 2008; Mills et al., 2012). However, if
 Temperament: Causes and ­Consequences  119

parents are calm and supportive, difficult children are less likely to suffer long-term
negative effects (Calkins, 2002; Rothbart, 2011). Children with more difficult tem-
peraments even profited more from positive parenting resulting in greater levels of
social and cognitive competence (Slagt et al., 2016). Similarly, fearful children can
be helped to develop more self-control if their parents use gentle rather than harsh
discipline (Kagan & Snidman, 2004; Kochanska, 1997). Together, these results sup-
port the differential susceptibility model, which suggests that children of varying
temperament react in different ways to child-rearing environments.
The consequences of temperamental predispositions to some extent depend on
how well parents and others are able to accept and adapt to the child’s particular
characteristics. Thomas and Chess (1986) termed this match between the child’s
temperament and the child-rearing environment “goodness of fit.”

“I’ve never been long on cuddling. I’m just too restless for that. My style is to do more
bouncing, jiggling, clapping, and pacing with my kids. Looking back on it, maybe Jason
could have used more cuddling and calming. But we just kinda hit sparks off each other
from the beginning.”

They suggested that development progresses more smoothly when parents and
children have a good fit and parents are naturally in tune with their infant or adjust
their approach to suit their child’s temperament. In less-fortunate families, over
time, parents and children engage in a transactional process by which infant nega-
tivity elicits less-than-optimal parenting which in turn increases the child’s negativity
and continues to elicit poor parenting in response (Sameroff, 2009). In several stud-
ies, researchers, for example, have documented how shifts in children’s emotional
reactivity increase harsh parenting, which, in turn, leads to heightened child reactiv-
ity (Lipscomb et al., 2011; Scaramella et al., 2008).
Finally, associations between temperament and later problems depend on the
temperament package the child comes with. Temperament traits exhibit tempera-
ment by temperament interactions in which one temperamental trait, such as
fearfulness or high effortful control, protects children from the negative effects of
another temperamental trait, such as impulsivity or negative affectivity. Researchers
have found that impulsivity is less likely to lead to externalizing behavior problems
if children are also high in attentional control (Eisenberg et al., 2004). These chil-
dren are able to offset the negative effect of their impulsive temperaments by being
focused and planful.
Temperament is often viewed as the core of personality. Personality traits have
clear links to temperament variables, both concurrently and longitudinally. Both
are characterized by positive and negative emotions, and both have clear genetic
correlates and are affected by experience. Temperament traits tend to be defined
as narrower lower-level traits that are substrates of the Big Five personality factors—
extraversion (being gregarious, cheerful, and energetic), neuroticism (being afraid,
touchy, and tearful), conscientiousness (being diligent, planful, and focused),
agreeableness (being considerate and trusting), and openness (being curious and
perceptive). These Big Five factors appear in children as well as adults, according
to parent and teacher reports, and are strongly correlated with similar tempera-
ment traits (rs = 0.5 to 0.7). Personality extraversion is correlated with temperamen-
tal extraversion-­surgency, neuroticism with negative affectivity, conscientiousness
with effortful control, agreeableness with affiliativeness (a temperament trait that
appears in adolescence), and openness with orienting sensitivity (Caspi & Shiner,
2006; Evans & Rothbart, 2007, 2009).
120  Chapter 3 Biological Foundations

nto Adulthood: Shy Children Thirty Years Later

peers. These men did indeed appear to have
been disadvantaged by their shyness. Shy girls
had followed a traditional pattern of marriage,
childbearing, and homemaking. More than half
(56 percent) had not been employed outside

YazolinoGirl/iStockphoto
the home or had left the labor force when they
married or had a child, compared with a third
(36 percent) of the outgoing girls. The shy girls
also typically married men who had a higher
occupational status at midlife than the outgoing
girls’ husbands. At the time these children were
growing up, shyness in women was considered a
What happens when shy children grow up? Are positive feminine attribute, suited to the wife–
they still bashful, or do they become the life of mother–homemaker role. This was good news for
the party? Are they socially disadvantaged, or these girls, but the situation may be different
do they make up for their early reticence? To find today when we expect outgoing behavior from
out, researchers have followed shy children from both women and men.
childhood into adulthood. In one study, children Several factors probably account for the
whose behavior was rated by examiners as shy, continuity in shyness observed in these studies.
fearful, and inhibited when they were 3 years old Genetic factors play a part (Rothbart, 2011).
were shy and cautious as adults (Caspi, Identical twins are more similar in shyness than
Harrington, et al., 2003). They preferred safe fraternal twins (Bartels et al., 2004), and clusters
activities over dangerous ones, were cautious of specific genes and hormones have been
rather than impulsive, enjoyed submissive rather related to differences in shyness across individu-
than leadership roles, and had little desire to als and continuities in shyness over time (Hartl &
influence others. In another study, children were Jones, 2005; Kagan & Fox, 2006). Variation in
rated by their elementary school teachers on a neurological activity, for example, in the amyg-
scale that ranged from very shy (acutely uncom- dala, also contributes (Kagan et al., 2007). Of
fortable, feeling panic in social situations) to course, environmental factors can increase or
outgoing (enjoy meeting new people) (Caspi decrease the stability of shyness across time.
et al., 1988). The very shy children were so Shy 2-year-olds are likely to become more
emotionally inhibited that other people reported sociable as they grow older if their mothers are
feeling strained and awkward in their company. less protective and discourage their shy behav-
They were less friendly, less sociable, more ior (Rubin et al., 2002) or if they are enrolled in
reserved, and more withdrawn than other child care before their second birthday (Fox
children. Their teachers viewed them as followers et al., 2001).
rather than leaders. Probably no shy child has ever thought that
When the researchers tracked down the shyness is a good thing. Fortunately, now there
children and interviewed them 20 to 30 years are programs to help shy children gain poise
later, the boys who had been rated as shy in and self-confidence. Children can often over-
childhood had delayed marrying, having come their shyness through coaching, modeling,
children, and establishing stable careers. They and instruction (Bierman & Powers, 2009; Rubin
held less-prestigious jobs than their outgoing et al., 2015).
 Temperament: Causes and ­Consequences  121

In a study in Finland, links between temperament in childhood and adolescence

and adult personality at age 50 were found (Pulkkinen, 2017). Childhood behav-
ioral activity predicted adult extraversion and openness; behavioral regulation
predicted adult conscientiousness; and negative emotionality was linked to adult
aggressiveness. Personality, however, includes a wider range of individual differ-
ences in feeling, thinking, and behaving than temperament, including attitudes,
beliefs, goals, values, motives, coping styles, and higher-level cognitive functioning
(Soto & Tackett, 2015). When researchers have combined measures of both temper-
ament and personality characteristics, prediction of children’s behavior problems is
even stronger than using either one alone (De Pauw et al., 2009).

earning from Living Leaders: Avshalom Caspi

collaborator, and faculty colleague, Terrie Moffitt.
Caspi has received many honors for his work

Courtesy of Avshalom Caspi

including the Early Career (followed by the
Distinguished Career) Contribution awards from
the American Psychological Association, the
Sackler prize for Distinguished Achievement in
Developmental Psychobiology, and the Lapouse
award for Excellence in Psychiatric Epidemiology.
If the challenge for the field of social develop-
ment is to unravel how genes and environments
Avshalom Caspi, Professor of Psychology and mutually shape the course of development,
Neuroscience at Duke University, is a pioneer in Caspi has made a fine start and given us a
the study of behavioral genetics. His work valuable roadmap for guiding this scientific
addresses three broad questions: How do quest. Professor Caspi has the following mes-
genetic differences shape the ways people sage for aspiring developmental scientists: “One
respond to their environments, particularly of the biggest challenges for our field is how to
stressful environments? What are the best ways handle, analyze, and integrate more and more
to measure personality differences between data from more and more sources (about brains,
people? How do these differences shape health, genomes, behavior, and the settings in which
wealth, and relationships? In trying to answer people live). My advice to undergraduates
these questions, Caspi has employed many follows from this challenge: master quantitative
methods: psychiatric interviews, epidemiological skills and learn how to communicate complex
surveys, molecular genetic assessments, behav- research findings to non-specialists. Don’t wait to
ior observations, and laboratory assessments. He do this in graduate school, and beyond. Get
has probed data from longitudinal studies in the going now.”
United States, New Zealand, and England. Caspi
grew up in Israel, and completed his education Further Reading
in the United States at Cornell University. He Caspi, A., Houts, R. M., Belsky, D. W., Harrington, H. L., Hogan, S.,
taught at Harvard, the University of Wisconsin, Ramrakha, S., Poulton, R., & Moffitt, T. E. (2017). Childhood
and the Institute of Psychiatry, King’s College forecasting of a small segment of the population with
large economic burden. Nature Human Behaviour, 1,
London before settling at Duke with his wife, Article number: 0005.
122  Chapter 3 Biological Foundations

Sir Michael Rutter degrees from a number of European and U.S.

universities. His hope for the future is that we
will see the effective integration of biological
and social approaches in a developmental
context, a better joining together of disciplinary
perspectives, and a better link between science
and practice. He challenges students to “be an
iconoclast and not afraid of challenging your

Courtesy of Sir Michael Rutter

seniors. Be self-critical in what you are doing but
never lose enthusiasm for new ideas and new
discoveries.”

Further Reading
Sonuga-Barke, E. J. S., Kennedy, M., Kumsta, R., Knights, N.,
Golm, D., Rutter, M., Maughan, B., Schlotz, W., &
­Kreppner, J. (2017). Child-to-adult neurodevelopmental
and mental health trajectories after early life depriva-
tion: The young adult follow-up of the longitudinal
Sir Michael Rutter, who was knighted by Queen English and Romanian Adoptees study. Lancet, 389,
Elizabeth II in 1992, has been described as the 1539–1548.
“father of child psychiatry.” He is Professor of
Developmental Psychopathology at the Institute Mary K. Rothbart
of Psychiatry, King’s College London. His child-
hood experience of being separated from his
family during wartime, as well as his observations
about how children cope with serious illness
and hospital admission, led him to a career

Courtesy of Mary K. Rothbart

focused on children’s social development. Few
scholars have had as wide an influence on this
field. His research includes studies of behavior
genetics, epidemiology, autism, early social
deprivation and stress, and continuities and dis-
continuities in normal and abnormal develop-
ment. Rutter also led a research team following
Romanian orphans adopted by British families
and made a number of significant discover- Mary Rothbart is Distinguished Professor Emerita
ies about how early experience affects social at the University of Oregon. She is regarded as
development. As both an active researcher one of the leading experts on child tempera-
and a practicing child psychiatrist, Rutter has ment, and her scale for measuring temperament
always stressed the importance of the two-way is widely used by researchers in this country
interplay between research and clinical work. and abroad. She was not always a tempera-
His work clearly illustrates this dual commitment ment guru, however, and for several years after
and has resulted in changes in both clinical completing her Ph.D. at Stanford University, she
practice and social policy. He is recognized for studied children’s humor. Her work on humor
helping establish child psychiatry as a medi- revealed a wide range of individual differences
cal specialty with a solid scientific base—an in children’s smiling and laughter, and this,
accomplishment that he rates as one of his combined with her observation that differences
proudest achievements. Rutter is an honorary between her two sons reflected differences
member of the British Academy and an elected between their parents, led her to study children’s
Fellow of the Royal Society and has honorary early temperament.
 Chapter Summary  123

She characterized temperament as biologi- for distinguished contributions to child develop-

cally based individual differences in reactivity ment from the Society for Research in Child
and self-regulation. With her colleague Michael Development and the Gold Medal Award for Life
Posner, she studied these differences and wrote Achievement in the Science of Psychology from
the book Educating the Human Brain, which the American Psychological Foundation.
describes the early development of attention Rothbart believes that the most pressing issue in
and self-regulation and explains where, when, developmental psychology is rearing children to
and how these characteristics promote social be open, loving, and caring members of society.
competence, school readiness, and expertise. She suggests to students that “you cannot do
Her research is valuable for clinical practition- anything more important than taking this course
ers, alerting them to the importance of indi- in social development because it will benefit
vidual temperament differences among you as a parent and citizen and help you
children. understand yourself and others.”
She was honored by the “Birth to Three”
organization in Eugene, Oregon, as a Further Reading
“Champion of Children”—her proudest Rothbart, M. K. (2011). Becoming who we are: Tempera-
ment and personality in development. New York:
achievement—and she received an award Guilford Press.

Chapter Summary
Biological Preparedness
• Babies are biologically prepared for social interactions at birth because of their
biological rhythms and their abilities to regulate them. Infants with better reg-
ulation of biological rhythms have more synchronous social interactions with
their mothers.
• Newborns are attracted to the properties of human faces—boundaries, hair-
lines, chins—as well as the movement of faces. By 3 months, infants identify
faces as unique patterns. The brain has specialized cells devoted to recognition
of faces.
• At birth, babies are attracted to high-pitched sounds, which parents typically
use when they talk to them.
• Newborns can distinguish their mother’s smell from that of other women.
They can also discriminate different tastes and come to prefer tastes they were
exposed to during breast-feeding.
• Newborns are responsive to and soothed by touch.
• Babies are attracted by their mothers’ responsiveness and expressiveness in
face-to-face play. They interact in synchrony by 3 months.
• Preparedness for social interaction has an evolutionary basis; it is adaptive and
ensures the survival of the infant.
The Neurological Basis of Social Development
• The cerebral cortex is divided into regions in which cells control specific func-
tions, such as speech, motor abilities, and memory. The cortex and the limbic
system play major roles in regulating emotion and social behavior.
124  Chapter 3 Biological Foundations

• There is an orderly sequence to brain development during infancy with both

gradual continuous changes and periods of relatively rapid development.
Changes are linked to advances in auditory, visual, motor, and socioemotional
development.
• In the 5- to 7-year period, development of the prefrontal cortex is asso-
ciated with the development of executive processes such as attention,
inhibitory control, and planning. Maturation of the cortex continues into
adolescence.
• The right cerebral hemisphere controls the left side of the body and is involved
in processing visual–spatial information, face recognition, and emotional
expressions. The left hemisphere controls the right side of the body and is
important for understanding and using language. Hemispheric specialization
and lateralization are evident early in infancy and are well developed by age
3 years.
• Although most of the brain’s neurons are present at birth, changes take place
in their size, number of connections (synapses), and production of the sur-
rounding, supportive glial cells. Myelination increases the speed, efficiency,
and complexity of transmissions between neurons.
• Neural migration distributes neurons throughout brain regions. The abun-
dance of neurons and synapses is trimmed over time through neuronal death
and synaptic pruning.
• The environment plays a critical role in brain development. Enriched environ-
ments are related to increases in brain size, connections among neurons, and
activities of key brain chemicals. Additional experience can also help reduce
damage or defects in one area or hemisphere of the brain.
• Two types of processes influence the development of the child’s brain.
­Experience-expectant processes are universal, that is, shared by all human
beings across evolution. Experience-dependent processes are related to expe-
riences in a particular family or culture.
Genetics and Social Development
• Genetic contributions represent an important biological foundation for social
development and account for individual differences, such as the outgoing and
sociable tendencies versus introversion and shyness.
• Genetic transmission starts with chromosomes, on which are genes—portions
of the DNA molecule containing the genetic code.
• Genetic variability is the result of the huge number of possible chromosome
combinations, crossing over during cell division in the fertilized egg, and sex-
ual reproduction as 23 chromosomes from a woman unite with 23 chromo-
somes from a man.
• The genotype is the particular set of genes that a person inherits. It interacts
with the environment to produce the phenotype, which is the observable
expression of physical and behavioral characteristics.
• The method that behavior geneticists use most often to investigate the contri-
butions of genetic variation and environmental variation to individual differ-
ences is the study of family members whose degrees of biological relatedness
are known.
• The simplest model of genetic transmission applies to characteristics deter-
mined by single genes. A more complex model is based on the interaction
of multiple genes. Most characteristics of social development involve multiple
 Key Terms  125

genes acting together. A third model stresses the interplay between genes and
environment.
• Environments influence genes, and genes influence environments. In a passive
association between genes and environment, parents create an environment
that suits their genetic predispositions and also encourage these inherited pre-
dispositions in their children. In an evocative gene–environment association,
people’s inherited tendencies evoke certain responses from others. In an active
gene–environment association, each person’s genetic makeup encourages him
or her to seek out experiences compatible with inherited tendencies (also
known as niche picking).
• In gene by environment interaction (G × E) models of genetic transmission
(including the diathesis–stress and differential susceptibility models), an active
role is given to both genes and environment, and their contributions are taken
beyond additive influences.
Temperament: Causes and Consequences
• Temperament is defined as an individual’s typical mode of responding to the
environment. Temperamental characteristics appear in early infancy.
• Three common temperament dimensions are effortful control, negative affec-
tivity, and extraversion-surgency.
• Heredity contributes to differences in temperament, especially differences in
emotionality, activity level, and sociability.
• Temperament has neurological and neurochemical underpinnings.
• Temperament traits tend to be defined as narrower lower-level traits that are
substrates of personality factors.
• Children with less-than-optimal temperament profiles experience a higher rate
of problems in later life.
• To some extent, the likelihood of problems depends on the environment
in which the child is reared and how well it suits the child’s temperamental
qualities.

Key Terms
active gene–environment association evocative gene–environment association monozygotic
alleles experience-dependent processes myelination
attention-deficit/hyperactivity experience-expectant processes neural migration
disorder (ADHD) externalizing problems neuron proliferation
attunement gene by environment (G × E) neurons
autism interaction models niche picking
cerebral cortex genes nonshared environment
cerebral hemispheres genotype passive gene–environment association
cerebrum glial cells phenotype
corpus callosum heterozygous programmed neuronal death
diathesis–stress (or dual-risk) homozygous reaction range
model human behavior genetics shared environment
differential susceptibility model internalizing problems synapses
dizygotic lateralization synaptic pruning
epigenetics mirror neuron synaptogenesis
epistasis modifier genes temperament
126  Chapter 3 Biological Foundations

At th e M ov i e s

Gattaca (1997) is a thoughtful science fiction drama in about autism, which suggests that there are more effective
which children are selected through preimplantation techniques for recovery, including one-on-one behavioral
­genetic diagnosis to ensure they possess the best heredi- therapy. Another documentary Messages of Hope from the
tary traits. Having a child is like shopping on Amazon.com. Autistic Spectrum (2009) traces a doctor’s journey through
(“Honey, let’s have a blonde rocket scientist with great the spectrum of Autism after his son was diagnosed. On
teeth and a voice like Beyoncé!”) Characters battle to the Spectrum: Coping with Asperger’s & Autism (2008) shows
find their place and discover who they are destined to be autistic adults and children overcoming challenges and
according to their genes. More compelling, nuanced—and having success in life. Other documentary films explore
technically accurate—than Gattaca is Jim (2010) (http:// the consequences for children’s social behavior of other
www.jimthefilm.com/), a movie that juxtaposes the worlds genetic problems, including ABC News Nightline Fragile X
of now and the future. The Human Genome Project Syndrome (2007) and Understanding Hemophilia (2008).
(2005) is a documentary that explains how automated gene The Brain (2008) shows how the brain works, takes
sequencing works, how genes are isolated and fragmented, the viewer inside the mind of a soldier under fire, exam-
and how their DNA bases are determined. It also addresses ines an autistic person’s remarkable skills, and takes on
ethical issues. Insight (2012), an Australian TV documen- the age-old question of what makes one person good and
tary, looks at the ethics of so-called designer babies: Should another evil. Two fictionalized accounts of how a person’s
humans embrace the new genetic technologies to “breed social and emotional behaviors change after a brain injury
out” disease? Or are we in the grip of “gene mania”? Movies are Regarding Henry (1991) and Recovery (2007). In Regarding
about individuals with genetic anomalies include poignant Henry, a ruthless trial lawyer’s life is turned upside down
accounts of people with autism. In Molly (1999), loosely when he is shot in the head during a robbery. He survives
based on a true story, a man’s autistic sister is released the injury with significant brain damage and must relearn
from an institution into his care. She verbalizes little and how to speak, walk, and function. To the surprise of his wife
is obsessed with lining up her shoes in neat rows. When and daughter, he becomes a loving and affectionate man.
her brother allows her to undergo an experimental medical In Recovery, Alan steps out in front of a passing car and the
treatment in which healthy brain cells are harvested from a resulting accident leaves him in a deep coma. His wife is
donor and implanted into her brain, Molly makes a mirac- delighted when he comes to, only to discover that the man
ulous “recovery,” but it is short lived. Recovered: Journeys she loved has disappeared and his behavior now veers from
through the Autism Spectrum and Back (2008) is a documentary angry to childlike.
 CH AP TE R 4

Attachment
Forming Close Relationships

At 3 months of age, Emma watched her

mother leave the room, but she did not pro-

Nick Stevens/ Cultura/ Getty Images

test. Instead, she began watching the brightly
colored mobile above her crib. At 9 months,
Emma frowned, cried, and stood up in her crib
to protest her mother’s departure. At 15 months,
she followed her mother around the house as
she did her daily chores and stood at the door
calling for her when she went to the mailbox.
Emma had clearly developed a special relation-
ship with her mother. Exploring and explaining
this remarkable developmental milestone—the
development of a specific attachment—and
what comes after is the goal of this chapter.
The development of attachment relationships is a
major achievement in the infant’s early social life.
In the first days, weeks, and months of life, infants
come to discriminate between familiar people and strangers, and by the end of the
first year or so, they develop a loving attachment to one or two of the special people
who are regular participants in their lives: mother, father, an older sibling, perhaps a
grandparent. Visible signs of attachment can be seen in the warm greetings children
give these people, smiling broadly and stretching out their arms as they approach,
and then initiating physical contact by touching and snuggling close. Children also
make efforts to stay near these people in unfamiliar situations, crawling or running
after them and grabbing on to an arm or a leg. They are often distressed when
these special people leave them temporarily. They have formed a deep, affectionate,
close, and enduring attachment to these important figures.
Attachment is of interest to researchers because it is intense and dramatic and
because it offers a window into children’s social development and emotional well-
being. In this chapter, we trace the remarkable journey by which children develop
these first love relationships. We present several theories that psychologists have pro-
posed to explain the development of attachment relationships. We then describe the
changes in infants’ behavior as attachments form, explore the factors that influence
the development of attachment relationships, and examine individual differences
in attachment relationships. We also examine the consequences of attachment for

127
128  Chapter 4 Attachment

other aspects of children’s development and how attachment is transmitted from

one generation to the next.

Theories of Attachment
Historically, a number of theories have been offered to explain the development of
attachment including psychoanalytic theory, learning theory, cognitive theory, and
ethological theory. Each theory has its own definition of the nature of the child’s tie to
primary caregivers. Different theories also emphasize different mechanisms under-
lying the development of attachment relationships and make different assumptions
about the factors that are important for the development of attachment.

Psychoanalytic Theory
According to Freud, infants become attached to their mother because they associate
her with gratification of their instinctual drive to obtain pleasure through sucking
and oral stimulation. The mother who breast-feeds her baby is a particularly impor-
tant attachment figure. The baby becomes attached first to the mother’s breast and
then to the mother herself during Freud’s oral stage of development. Although this
psychoanalytic explanation turns out to be incorrect—infants form attachments to
people who never feed them and for reasons other than enjoyment of sucking—
the proffered explanation was important because it drew attention to the notion
of attachment in the first place and pointed to the importance of early contact
between mother and infant.
Photo Researchers, Inc./Science Sourceimages

Infant monkey prefers the comfy cloth surrogate over the wire feeding surrogate.
 Theories of Attachment  129

Learning Theories
Some learning theorists also associated mother–infant attachment with mother–
infant feeding. Drive-reduction learning theorists suggested that the mother
becomes an attachment object because she reduces the baby’s primary drive of hun-
ger. Wanting the mother’s presence becomes a secondary or learned drive because
she is paired with the relief of hunger and tension (Sears et al., 1957). Research
findings challenged this view that feeding is critical for the development of attach-
ment, however. Harry Harlow separated infant monkeys from their real mothers
and raised them in the company of two “surrogate mothers.” One “mother” was
made of stiff wire and had a feeding bottle attached to it, so it provided food but
no physical comfort; the other “mother” was made of soft terrycloth, but it lacked
a bottle, so it offered comfort but no milk (Harlow & Zimmerman, 1959). Coun-
ter to the drive-reduction learning theory’s prediction, baby monkeys preferred to
cling to the cloth “mother”—especially in moments of stress—even though it dis-
pensed no food (see photo). Research on human infants told a similar story. Infants
reared by a mother who provided food but displayed little affection and a father
who spent more time stimulating and playing with the baby were likely to form their
first attachment to the father rather than the mother (Schaffer & Emerson, 1964).
Operant-conditioning learning theorists then suggested that the basis for the
development of attachment is not feeding, per se, but the visual, auditory, and tac-
tile stimulation that infants receive from their caregivers (Gewirtz, 1969). According
to this view, babies are initially attracted to their caregivers because caregivers are
the most important and reliable sources of this type of stimulation. As interactions
with these caregivers continue over weeks and months, infants learn to depend on
and value these special adults, becoming attached to them. The central point of this
learning theory explanation is that attachment is not automatic; it develops over
time as a result of satisfying interactions with responsive adults. This explanation
turns out to be correct but incomplete. One problem is that it cannot explain why
children form attachments to an abusive parent if that person is the only caregiver
available. A similar phenomenon has been observed in animal studies showing that
babies who are treated violently by their mothers continue to seek physical contact
with them (Seay et al., 1964).

Cognitive Developmental Theory

The cognitive developmental theory points to other important components of the
development of infants’ attachment. One component is the infants’ ability to dif-
ferentiate between familiar and unfamiliar people; another is the infants’ awareness
that people continue to exist even when they cannot be seen. Infants must have the
ability to remember what people look like and the knowledge Piaget called object per-
manence: understanding that objects, including people, have a continuous existence
apart from the baby’s own interactions with them. Evidence indicates that children
as young as 3½ months have some awareness of object permanence (Baillargeon,
2002), although Piaget believed that this awareness did not begin to appear until 7
to 8 months of age.
Infants’ cognitive development also helps account for the gradual shift in the ways
attachment is expressed. As infants grow older, physical proximity to the attachment
figure becomes less important. Children are increasingly able to maintain contact
with a parent through words, smiles, and looks. In addition, because they are also
able to understand that parents’ absences are sometimes necessary and usually
temporary, they are less upset by separations. Parents can reduce their children’s
130  Chapter 4 Attachment

distress over separations further by explaining the reasons for their departures. In
one study, for instance, 2-year-olds handled separations from their mothers much
better when the mothers gave them clear information (“I’m going out now for
just a minute, but I’ll be right back”) than when the mother left without a word
(­Weinraub & Lewis, 1977). Thus, cognitive developmental theory offers another
important, albeit partial explanation of attachment development.

Ethological Theory
The most complete explanation of attachment, and the consensus view of attach-
ment researchers today, was proposed by British psychiatrist John Bowlby (1958,
1969, 1973). Bowlby was born into an upper-middle-class family in London in 1907.
He was raised by a nanny and saw his mother only for a brief period every day
because she thought that giving children attention and affection would spoil them.
When Bowlby was about 4 years old, his beloved nanny left the family, and when he
was 7, he was sent off to boarding school. Not surprisingly, having experienced sepa-
rations that he later described as tragic and terrible, Bowlby was drawn to investigat-
ing the development of early attachments. Later, he had the opportunity to observe
children who had been orphaned in World War II. These children’s depression and
other emotional scars led him to develop a theory about the importance of devel-
oping a strong attachment to a primary caregiver, a tie that normally keeps infants
close to their caregivers and, therefore, safe.
Although he had been trained in psychoanalysis, Bowlby looked to fields such
as evolutionary biology, ethology, developmental psychology, and cognitive science
to formulate the innovative proposition that the mechanisms underlying infants’
attachment emerged as a result of evolutionary pressure. One set of studies that
influenced Bowlby was Lorenz’s (1952) demonstration of imprinting in ducklings.
Lorenz observed that newborn birds developed an attachment to the first object
they saw during a brief, critical period after birth, in a process called imprinting.
Some of the young ducklings Lorenz studied even became attached to Lorenz him-
self and followed him around.
Bowlby suggested that attachment has its roots in a similar (though not identical)
set of instinctual responses that are important for the protection and survival of the
species. The infant’s responses of crying, smiling, vocalizing, sucking, clinging, and
following (visually at first and later physically) elicit the care and protection that
the baby needs and promote contact between infant and parent. As we discussed in
Chapter 3, “Biological Foundations,” the infant is biologically prepared to respond
to the sights, sounds, and nurturance provided by parents. At the same time, parents
are biologically prepared to respond to the baby’s eliciting behaviors (i.e., attach-
ment “signals”), such as crying, smiling, and vocalizing. As a result of these bio-
logically programmed responses, parent and infant develop a mutual attachment.
Evolutionary biases in the infant’s learning abilities also interact with the parents’
support, making it likely that the infant will use the parent as a secure base, a start-
ing point from which the infant can venture forth to explore the world and a haven
of safety to which he or she can return in times of danger or stress. According to
Bowlby, attachment is linked to exploration. To learn about the environment, the
child must explore, but exploration can be tiring and even dangerous, so it is desir-
able to have a protector nearby. The exploration system functions optimally only
when an attachment figure is available and responsive.
One unique value of Bowlby’s theory lies in its emphasis on the active role played
by the infant’s early social signaling systems, such as smiling and crying. Another
important feature is the theory’s stress on the development of mutual attachments,
 Theories of Attachment  131

whereby parent and child form attachments to each other (Cassidy, 2008;
­Thompson, 2016). A third important feature is that an attachment is a relation-
ship, not simply a behavior of either the infant or the parent (Sroufe, 2002). More
controversial is Bowlby’s suggestion that infants’ early behaviors are biologically pro-
grammed. As we have seen, considerable evidence suggests that some attachment
behaviors, such as smiling, have social as well as biological origins. Another contro-
versy involves whether mothers are the only ones who can provide the kind of care
and support that fosters infants’ attachment development. Bowlby did assume that
mothers are the best caregivers. But remember, he was formulating his theory in an
era when children were cared for exclusively by their mothers—or nannies—and he
had missed out on the supportive contact with his own mother that he claimed pro-
moted attachment. Subsequent research has not supported the notion that mothers
are necessary for attachment development.

nsights from Extremes: Maternal Bonding

close to me had just died. . . . Hours later

Nick Stevens / Cultura / Getty Images

when I was brought the child, I knew imme-
diately that I did not want to hold him.”

Kennell and Klaus surmised that the separa-

tion immediately after birth interrupted some
fundamental process between the mother
and the new baby. “There is a sensitive period
in the first minutes or hours of life during
which it is necessary that the mother have
close contact with the neonate for later
In 1976, two pediatricians, Marshall Klaus and
development to be optimal” (Klaus & Kennell,
John Kennell, published the landmark book
1976, p. 14). Studies of animal species, such as
Maternal–Infant Bonding. Based on their work in
sheep and goats, supported their hypothesis,
a newborn intensive care unit, they had noticed
showing that when these mothers were not
that when babies and mothers were separated
permitted contact with their newborns, they later
immediately after birth, usually because the
rejected them. Klaus and Kennell advocated that
mother or infant was ill or because the infant was
to develop a deep emotional maternal bond
premature, the mothers were more likely to
with their infants, human mothers should be
neglect or abuse their infants. They were less
given skin-to-skin contact with their baby immedi-
comfortable and less certain that the infant was
ately after birth when the infant was in a state of
really theirs (p. 10):
quiet alertness and the mother was particularly
“Are you mine? Are you really mine? Are you receptive to the baby’s cues because of her
alive? Are you really alive?” elevated level of the hormone oxytocin.
Klaus and Kennell experimented with giving
Even mothers who had successfully raised other mothers extra contact with their infants, including
children seemed to have special difficulties with skin-to-skin contact, in the hospital immediately
infants who had spent time in the intensive care after birth and over the next few days.
nursery. According to one mother who missed
out on early contact (Sutherland, 1983, p. 17): Look at his little face. His little nails. Oh! His
little squashed up nose. He has red hair.
“I did not see my baby for 11 hours. . . . My He’s blowing bubbles. His little hands are all
sense of loss was as deep as if someone wrinkled—looks like he’s done the dishes,
132  Chapter 4 Attachment

doesn’t he? Oh, he’s opened his eyes, samples. However, positive practical changes
there—look. Hello (as baby opens his eyes did result from Klaus and Kennell’s suggestion
for the first time)! that maternal bonding and contact were
important. When Maternal–Infant Bonding was
They found that these mothers seemed to published, newborn infants were routinely
develop better rapport with their infants, to hold removed from their mother immediately after
them more comfortably, and to smile and talk to birth and kept in hospital nurseries except for
them more. They kept their infants closer and feeding. This changed after expectant parents
kissed and caressed them more often (Hales and hospital personnel learned about bonding.
et al., 1977; Kennell et al., 1974). Other research- Fathers and family members were allowed to
ers conducted studies with similar results, demon- remain with the mother during labor and
strating that mothers who experienced early delivery. Mothers were allowed to hold their
contact with their infants were more likely to infants immediately after birth, and in many
breast-feed, continued breast-feeding longer, cases, babies remained in their mother’s room
and behaved and spoke more sensitively to their throughout their hospital stay. Attention to
children (de Chateau, 1980). bonding also led to increased awareness of the
The importance of maternal bonding was natural capabilities of the infant at birth and so
touted in the medical community and the encouraged mothers to deliver their babies
popular press. In one popular book for mothers, without anesthesia (which depresses mothers’
the author wrote of the “avenue of discovery” of and infants’ responsiveness).
mutual feeling of mother and child during the first Subsequent research has shown that con-
hour after birth (Kitzinger, 1979, p. 49). Another tact between mother and baby immediately
author claimed that “the separation of mother after birth is not necessary for the mother to
and baby for a period as short as one to four form a close bond with the infant. Human
hours may result in disturbed mothering patterns” mothers are more flexible than sheep and
(Elkins, 1978, p. 204). Unequivocal acceptance of goats, and even if they miss the early sensitive
Klaus and Kennell’s bonding theory led to much period, they can still form close ties with their
anxiety and guilt among mothers who had not offspring. Mothers can form a strong bond if
experienced early contact with their infants. Poor they have given birth by a cesarean section, if
developmental outcomes—eating disorders, a child is unable to be held after birth due to
membership in a religious cult, psychological prematurity, or have adopted the child. Fathers
maladjustment, personality disorders, and sub- can also form bonds with their babies without
stance abuse—were all attributed to failures to the benefits of oxytocin or skin-to-skin contact.
bond (Crouch & Manderson, 1995; Davis, 1990). Early contact may start the process, but later
These dire predictions turned out to be and continuing contact is just as important for
largely unwarranted because they were based developing a bond that is deep and enduring.
on atypical high-risk samples (Lamb & Hwang, The development of a parent–infant bond is
1982; Meyers, 1984), and the key results of their not momentary magic but an ongoing
early studies tended not to replicate in lower risk social process.

How Attachment Develops

Inspired by theories of infant attachment, researchers have investigated infants’
early social–emotional development. They have found that infants’ attachment
does not develop suddenly but emerges gradually.
 How Attachment Develops  133

Formation and Early Development of Attachment

The early development of attachment can be divided into four phases (see Table 4.1).
In the first phase, which lasts only a month or two, the baby’s social responses are
relatively indiscriminate: It doesn’t matter whether it is Mom or a door-to-door sales-
man who holds and smiles at the baby. In the second phase, infants learn to dis-
tinguish between familiar people and strangers. They differentiate between their
primary caregiver’s face, voice, and smell and those of other adults.

“Matt was such a handful in the first two months. He cried and cried. We paced the
floor with him for hours on end. He stopped crying only long enough to take a bot-
tle. Then he’d spit it all up. But one day, as I was changing his diaper, my hand on his
stomach, Matt stopped squirming, opened his eyes wide, and looked at me. I was so
thrilled! It had been weeks of torture, but now it was okay. There was someone inside
that baby head.”

However, although they can make these discriminations and prefer a familiar car-
egiver to a stranger, infants do not protest when the familiar caregiver departs; they
are not yet truly attached to this particular person. In the third phase, which begins
when the baby is about 7 months old, specific attachments develop. Now infants
actively seek contact with certain regular caregivers, such as the mother, greeting
that person happily and often crying when he or she departs. The baby does not
show these behaviors to just anyone—only to specific attachment figures. When
the child passes the 2-year mark, the attachment relationship moves into the phase
called the goal-corrected partnership. At this point, as the result of advances in cognitive
development, children become aware of other people’s feelings, goals, and plans
and begin to consider these things in formulating their own actions. They become
partners in planning how the parent–child dyad will handle a separation.

What It Means to Be Attached

Unless children are reared without a regular caregiver—in an institution or in rotat-
ing foster care—by the time they are 1 year old, they have formed an attachment
to one special person. They prefer this person to others. They actively seek contact

TABLE 4.1

Phases in the Early Development of Attachment

Phase Age Description
1 Preattachment 0–2 months of age Indiscriminate social responsiveness
2 Attachment in the making 2–7 months of age Recognition of familiar people
3 Clear-cut attachment 7–24 months of age Separation protest; wariness of strangers;
intentional communication
4 Goal-corrected partnership 24 months on Relationships are more two sided; children
understand parents’ needs

Source: Schaffer, 1996.

134  Chapter 4 Attachment

and proximity with her more than with anyone else. They follow her around, cud-
dle, and snuggle. They play with her happily. They may move a short distance away
from her side to play, but they return periodically, using her as a secure base for
exploration. They go to her for comfort if they are tired or ill, hungry or afraid,
injured or upset. They often fuss or cry when she leaves them for a brief time,
expressing separation distress or protest. They greet her happily when she reap-
pears. If she is gone for a long time (more than a week), the children express grief
and mourning.

When Aiden was about a year old, his grandparents offered to take him while my husband
and I took a vacation. I agonized about whether to leave him, but we finally decided that
the vacation would do us good. We were gone for two weeks. When we got home, I ran
into the house to see him. But he took one look at me and turned his back. I was crushed.
I burst into tears. It took Aiden several weeks to accept me again. That really was hard.

Abby had to have surgery on her eye when she was a year old. The policies at the hos-
pital were very sensitive to babies’ needs. There was a bed for me near her so we didn’t
have to be separated overnight, and I was able to stay with her nearly all the time except
when she was in the operating room. I wouldn’t say that the experience was fun for
anyone, but at least it wasn’t the horror show it might have been.

Attachment to Whom?
Although infants are capable of forming attachments to any familiar person, the
mother is usually the first object of their affection. In an early study of attachment
development, researchers observed 60 infants in Scotland, most from working-class
families living with both parents, and recorded the infants’ separation protest in
seven everyday situations including being left alone in a room, being left with other
people, and being left in bed at night (Schaffer & Emerson, 1964). In the first year
of life, 93 percent of the infants showed that they had formed a specific attachment
to their mother by protesting more often and intensely when she left them; only
7 percent had formed a primary attachment to someone other than the mother.
Other researchers subsequently reported similar preferences for the mother (Ban
& Lewis, 1974; Lamb, 1976; Lytton, 1980).
However, although infants are likely to develop their initial attachment to the
mother, they also form attachments to other familiar people with whom they inter-
act frequently and fondly. In the Scottish study, when the infants were 18 months
old, only 5 percent were attached only to their mother; the others were also attached
to their father (75 percent), a grandparent (45 percent), or a sibling (24 percent).
These attachments can be very important from an evolutionary perspective because
infants’ capacity to form relationships with a range of caregivers ensures their sur-
vival if the principal caregiver becomes unavailable.
It is not surprising that infants typically form their first attachment to their mother,
because mothers are the primary caregivers for most infants during the first year of
life (Roopnarine et al., 2005). Even in hunter–gatherer societies, where the search
for food and other necessities requires the efforts of both men and women, moth-
ers are usually the primary caregivers (Griffin & Griffin, 1992; Morelli & T ­ ronick,
1992). Although fathers do hold, touch, talk to, and kiss their infants as much as
mothers when they are given the chance by a researcher, at home, they are more
likely to participate in caregiving when the mother supports their involvement and
views them as competent or when the mother is unavailable, for example, if she is
 The Nature and Quality of Attachment  135

recovering from a cesarean section delivery or is employed outside the home (Parke &
Cookston, 2019).
Rather than being the primary caregiver, the father may play a special role in his
infant’s life by being a playmate. In general, fathers spend four to five times more
time playing with their infants than caring for them, and compared with mothers,
they engage in more physically arousing and unusual games—especially with their
sons (Parke & Cookston, 2019). Thus, fathers enrich infants’ social development by
providing unique types of social experiences, and because infants can form multi-
ple attachments, fathers, too, often become attachment objects. Grandparents and
siblings, similarly, can become objects of attachment (Howes & Spieker, 2016; Smith &
Wild, 2018). However, the number of attachments a child can form is limited. Devel-
oping an attachment requires frequent, close, one-to-one interaction, and it would
be challenging and exhausting for a baby to engage in such intense interactions
with many partners.

The Nature and Quality of Attachment

Early attachments are not all the same; they differ in quality from one relation-
ship to another and from one child to the next. The majority of children form
attachments to their parents that are secure. A secure attachment means that the
infant is confident about the parent’s availability, responsiveness, and reliability to

et You Thought That . . .: Babies Become Attached

to Their Teddy Bears and Blankets
definitely want that scruff of fluff when they take a
nap, and their parents might have to sneak it
away to wash when the child is asleep. The term
security blanket was popularized by Minnesota-
native Charles Schulz’s cartoon strip Peanuts, in
which Linus dragged around his blanket as a
constant companion. Bowlby, too, recognized
that these objects can provide comfort and
security for the infant. In fact, more than
60 p­ ercent of children in the United States have a
Vyacheslav Oshokin/iStockphoto

“security object” or “comfort toy” at some time in

their lives (Hobara, 2003; Passman, 1998), and
having this object allows them to cope better
with new and stressful situations such as separa-
tion from their mother (Passman, 1998). It helps
them get to sleep and to feel at home in a
strange place. For example, 3-year-olds who are
in full time child care are more likely to use a
security object than those who spend only half
You’ve probably seen young children holding a time in non-home care (Fortuna et al., 2014). It
scraggly bit of blanket or a well-loved teddy bear, may be called a “transitional object” because it
maybe sucking on a corner or an ear. They helps them make the emotional transition from
136  Chapter 4 Attachment

dependence to independence. It works because comfort and emotional support for children
it feels good—soft and cuddly—and because it (Melson, 2003; Triebenbacher, 1998). But are
is familiar. children really “attached” to these objects? In a
technical sense, no. Attachment is not just about
Matt really liked to cuddle, but I couldn’t reducing children’s distress. Attachment figures
always be there. When I wasn’t around, he also respond to children’s other needs and
dragged his Pooh bear everywhere, some- support their interactions with the world. They give
times by an ear or maybe by a leg. Pooh the child an expectation of availability and
really seemed to help him feel safe when responsiveness and a sense that they are stronger
I wasn’t available. and wiser than the child. This goes beyond the
capacities of the softest blanket, the most loyal
Children are more likely to have a security object if dog, the cuddliest kitten. These objects do not
their mothers do not breast-feed them, do not offer the extraordinary scaffolding and contingent
hold them while they go to sleep, and do not responsiveness that parents do. Moreover, they are
sleep with them in the same bed (Green et al., no substitute for “real” attachment relationships.
2004; Hobara, 2003). Pets such as cats and dogs Even with a pet or a blankie, children still need
can also serve as security objects and provide love and attention from their caregivers.

simultaneously serve as a “secure base” of exploration and as a “safe haven” when

she or he is distressed. These infants believe that the parent will provide support
for their exploration of the world and a safety net if circumstances turn threaten-
ing (Waters et al., 2002). Both exploration away from the parent and contact after
returning to the parent are important parts of the attachment system, and securely
attached infants exhibit a balance between venturing out into the world and stay-
ing close to the parent in times of stress and uncertainty. Not all children develop
attachments to their parents that are secure and dependable, however. One of the
first researchers to study variations in the security of children’s attachments to their
parents was a student of Bowlby’s, Mary Ainsworth.

Different Types of Attachment Relationships

Ainsworth (1969) studied infants in Uganda and Baltimore and observed how, in
everyday settings, they used the mother as a secure base. She noted considerable
variation in their behavior. Some babies achieved a smooth balance between explor-
ing the world and keeping close to mother. Others explored actively but expressed
little concern about the mother’s whereabouts and showed little proximity seeking
to her. Still other babies were passive in proximity-seeking behavior, in exploration,
or in both. Because assessing attachment behavior in naturalistic observations was
so time consuming, Ainsworth devised a simple and less time-intensive laboratory-
based scenario to assess variation in infants’ ability to use their mother as a secure
base. In the scenario, known as the Strange Situation Procedure (SSP), the mother
leaves the baby in an unfamiliar room, first with a stranger and then alone (see
Table 4.2). The infant’s behavior when the mother returns to the room is coded
to reflect the nature of their relationship. A simplified description of this coding is
presented in Table 4.3.

Ainsworth’s classification of attachment types Of the white, middle-class

Baltimore infants Ainsworth studied, 60 to 65 percent displayed a secure attach-
ment to their mothers: They readily sought contact with her after the stress of her
 The Nature and Quality of Attachment  137

TABLE 4.2

The Strange Situation

Episode Participants Time Scenario
1 Primary caregiver, 30 seconds Observer introduces primary caregiver and baby to experimental room and
baby, and observer then leaves. (Room contains appealing toys scattered about.)
2 Primary caregiver 3 minutes Primary caregiver sits quietly while baby explores; if necessary, play is
and baby ­stimulated after 2 minutes.
3 Stranger, primary 3 minutes An unfamiliar woman enters. First minute: stranger is silent. Second
caregiver, and minute: stranger talks to primary caregiver. Third minute: stranger
baby approaches baby. After 3 minutes, primary caregiver leaves unobtrusively.
4 Stranger and baby 3 minutes or less First separation episode. Stranger is responsive to baby.
5 Primary caregiver 3 minutes First reunion episode. Primary caregiver returns to room and greets
and baby or more and/or comforts baby and then tries to settle the baby again in play.
Primary caregiver then leaves, saying “bye-bye.”
6 Baby alone 3 minutes or less Second separation episode.
7 Stranger and baby 3 minutes or less Continuation of second separation. Stranger enters and responds
to baby’s behavior.
8 Primary caregiver 3 minutes Second reunion episode. Primary caregiver enters, greets, and then picks
and baby up baby. Meanwhile, stranger leaves unobtrusively.

TABLE 4.3

Attachment Classification in the Strange Situation

One-Year-Old Six-Year-Old
Secure attachment
On reunion after brief separation from parent, child On reunion, child initiates conversation and pleasant interaction
seeks physical contact, proximity, interaction; often with parent or is highly responsive to parent’s overtures. May
tries to maintain physical contact. Readily soothed by subtly move close to or into physical contact with parent, usually
parent and returns to exploration and play. with rationale such as seeking a toy. Remains calm throughout.
Insecure–avoidant attachment
Child actively avoids and ignores parent on reunion, Child minimizes and restricts opportunities for interaction with
looking away and remaining occupied with toys. parent on reunion, looking and speaking only as necessary
May move away from parent and ignore parent’s and remaining occupied with toys or activities. May subtly
efforts to communicate. move away with rationale such as retrieving a toy.
Insecure–ambivalent attachment
Although infant seems to want closeness and contact, In movement, posture, and tone of voice, child seems to try to
parent is not able to effectively alleviate the child’s exaggerate both intimacy and dependency on parent. May
distress after brief separation. Child may show subtle seek closeness but appears uncomfortable, for example,
or overt signs of anger, seeking proximity and then lying in parent’s lap but wriggling and squirming. Shows sub-
resisting it. tle signs of hostility.
Insecure–disorganized attachment
Child shows signs of disorganization (e.g., crying for par- Child seems almost to adopt parental role with parent, trying
ent at door and then running quickly away when door to control and direct parent’s behavior either by embarrass-
opens; approaching parent with head down) or dis- ing or humiliating parent or by showing extreme enthusiasm
orientation (e.g., seeming to freeze for a few seconds). for reunion or overly solicitous behavior toward parent.

Sources: Ainsworth et al., 1978; Kerns & Brumariu, 2016; Main & Cassidy, 1988; Main & Hesse, 1990; and Solomon & George, 2016.
138  Chapter 4 Attachment

departure in the unfamiliar setting and were quickly comforted by her, even if they
were initially quite upset. These infants also were secure enough to explore the
novel environment when the mother was present. They did not whine and cling
to her but actively investigated their surroundings as if the mother’s presence gave
them confidence. In a familiar situation at home, these children were minimally
disturbed by minor separations from the mother and greeted her happily when she
returned. In Ainsworth’s coding scheme, these infants were classified as having a
secure attachment (Type B).
The remaining children were classified as having an anxious (insecure) attachment—
either an insecure–avoidant attachment (Type A) or an insecure–­ambivalent attach-
ment (Type C; also known as resistant attachment). Insecure–avoidant children
showed little distress over the mother’s absence in the Strange Situation, at least on
her first departure, and then they actively avoided her on her return. They turned
away from their mother, increased their distance from her, and paid her no atten-
tion. After the mother’s second departure, during which time these infants were
sometimes visibly upset, they again avoided the mother. About 20 percent of the
children studied by Ainsworth and other researchers in the United States were
insecure–avoidant. Insecure–ambivalent children might become extremely upset
when the mother left them in the Strange Situation but were oddly ambivalent or
resistant toward her when she returned; they were likely to seek contact with her
and then angrily push her away. About 10 to 15 percent of children in the United
States display this pattern of attachment.

Beyond Ainsworth’s A–B–C classification Later researchers identified another

type of insecure attachment: insecure–disorganized attachment (Type D) (Solo-
mon & George, 2016). When insecure–disorganized infants are reunited with their
mothers in the Strange Situation, they act disorganized and disoriented. They look
dazed, freeze in the middle of their movements, or engage in repetitive behaviors,
such as rocking. These children seem to be apprehensive and fearful of their attach-
ment figure and are unable to cope with distress in a consistent and organized way
even though their mother is available. These four attachment types (A, B, C, and D)
can be identified in the Strange Situation when children are about a year old. Simi-
lar attachment patterns have been observed in older children, ages 3 through 6, if
mother–child separations in the Strange Situation are lengthened to reflect changes
in children’s maturity (Cassidy & Marvin, 1992; Main & Cassidy, 1988; ­Solomon &
George, 2016). Children’s physical proximity and affect continue to be assessed in
these Modified Strange Situations as in the original Strange Situation Procedure,
but conversation and dialogue between child and parent play a more central role
in these assessments of older children. A simplified description of coding for the
Modified Strange Situation is also included in Table 4.3.

Other strategies for assessing attachment Other methods for assessing

attachment have also been developed. One method involves coding children’s
behavior in the Strange Situation Procedure along specific scales rather than clas-
sifying children into attachment types (Fraley & Spieker, 2003). Researchers have
coded children’s behavior in the two reunion episodes on four scales: proximity and
contact seeking, contact maintenance, avoidance, and resistance (pouting, fussiness, angry
distress). They have then reduced these scales to two dimensions using factor and
taxometric analysis. One dimension is proximity-seeking versus proximity-avoidance,
which reflects the degree to which children’s attachment systems are organized
around the goal of proximity maintenance, ranging from using the caregiver as
a secure haven to minimizing contact with the caregiver. The second dimension
 The Nature and Quality of Attachment  139

is anger and resistance, which represents the amount of overt conflict and anger
expressed toward the caregiver. Compared with the traditional taxonomy of three
attachment types (secure, avoidant, ambivalent), these continuous measures offer
statistical advantages, including improving our ability to identify the distinctive ori-
gins of avoidant and resistant attachments (Groh, Propper, Mills-Koonce, Moore, &
Calkins, in press). Even more important, research of this kind has pushed attach-
ment researchers to question whether individual differences in security are best
understood as categorically distributed in the population (i.e., natural kinds)—as
has been so widely assumed.
The Attachment Q-Set (AQS; Waters, 1995) is based on a lengthy observation of
the child at home or on the judgment of the parent or other caregiver who knows the
child well. The mother, other caregiver, or observer sorts a set of 90 cards containing
phrases that describe a child’s behavior into sets ranging from those that are most
descriptive of the child to those that are least descriptive (see Table 4.4 for sample
items). This method, which is useful for children between the ages of 1 and 5 years,
provides a score that reflects how much children resemble a prototypically securely
attached child, but it does not classify the type of attachment insecurity. A meta-
analysis of studies in which children were assessed with the AQS revealed that its scores
were moderately related to security in the Strange Situation and that the AQS distin-
guished between typically developing children and children with clinical problems
(Van IJzendoorn et al., 2004). AQS ratings provided by objective observers were more
highly related and therefore more valid than ratings provided by mothers.

TABLE 4.4

Items from the Attachment Q-Set Illustrating the Behavior at Home of a Child Who
is Securely Attached or Insecurely Attached to the Mother
Secure Attachment Insecure Attachment
Child readily shares with mother or lets her hold things Child refuses to share with mother.
if she asks to.
Child is happy or affectionate when returning to mother When child returns to mother after playing, he is sometimes
between or after play times. fussy for no clear reason.
When child is upset or injured, mother is the only one When he is upset or injured, child will accept comforting
he allows to comfort him. from adults other than mother.
Child often hugs or cuddles against mother, without her Child doesn’t hug or cuddle much unless mother hugs him
asking or inviting him to do so. first or asks him to give her a hug.
When child finds something new to play with, he carries Child plays with new object quietly or goes where he won’t be
it to mother or shows it to her from across the room. interrupted.
Child keeps track of mother’s location when he plays Child doesn’t keep track of mother’s location.
around the house.
Child enjoys relaxing in mother’s lap. Child prefers to relax on the floor or on furniture.
Child actively goes after mother if he is upset or crying. When child is upset about mother leaving him, he sits right
where he is and cries; doesn’t go after her.
Child clearly shows a pattern of using mother as a base Child is always away from mother or always stays near her.
from which to explore. Moves out to play, returns or
plays near her, moves out to play again, etc.

Source: Waters, 1987, Attachment Q-set, Version 3; http://www.psychology.sunysb.edu/attachment/measures/content/aqs_items.pdf

140  Chapter 4 Attachment

The California Attachment Procedure (CAP) focuses on how children use the
mother as a secure base when they experience stressful events such as a loud noise or
a scary robot instead of being separated from her and then reunited (Clarke-Stewart
et al., 2001). Like the Strange Situation, this assessment is coded into Ainsworth’s
attachment types. However, it has been found to provide a more valid measure of
attachment than the Strange Situation for children, such as those involved in child
care, who are accustomed to routine separations from their mothers.

ultural Context: Assessing Attachment

in Different Cultures
their mothers from the time they are born:
Mothers rarely leave their babies alone, they hold
and carry them and give them little floor free-
dom, and they usually sleep in the same bed
Marcus Mok/Getty Images Inc
with them (Colin, 1996; Mesman et al., 2016;
Rothbaum, Weisz, et al., 2000). Infants in Uganda
are unaccustomed to brief separations from their
mothers; they experience only lengthy separa-
tions while their mothers work (Colin, 1996).
Compared with U.S. babies, infants in all these
cultures find Strange Situation separations more
strange and stressful; they show more distress
and find accepting the mother’s comfort more
Many researchers have wanted to know whether difficult. They are more likely to be ambivalent
Ainsworth’s Strange Situation is valid in cultures and less likely to be avoidant than U.S. infants. In
other than the United States, so they have tried it Germany, Sweden, and Great Britain, parents
in different countries around the world. Their stress infants’ early independence even more
results suggest that children with different car- than U.S. parents do; not surprisingly then,
egiving experiences behave somewhat differ- German, Swedish, and British infants are more
ently in this assessment of attachment (Mesman likely to be avoidant in the Strange Situation than
et al., 2016). The Strange Situation depends on are American infants (Colin, 1996; Schaffer, 1996).
creating a situation in which an infant is some- In view of these findings, we may ask whether
what stressed and therefore displays proximity- the Strange Situation is the best instrument for
seeking behavior to the attachment figure, but assessing attachment relationships in other
infants differ in how familiar they are with key cultures. In cultures where babies are treated
components of the scenario—being left by the very differently from how they are in the United
mother and interacting with an unfamiliar States, it is a good idea to make sure the Strange
woman—and this affects how stressful they find it. Situation is a good predictor of their behavior at
In the United States, most parents encourage home, perhaps by using the Attachment Q-Set. If
their infants to play with toys, exercise their motor the two measures don’t agree, it is probably
skills, and nap alone. They stress active, explora- better to use the direct observations of attach-
tory behavior. Few bring their babies into bed ment behavior at home for research or clinical
with them. Gusii infants in Kenya, in contrast, are evaluation. Although some items in the AQS are
accustomed to being held by their mothers for a somewhat culture bound, researchers have
large part of the day until they are 1 year old found considerable overall cross-cultural consist-
(Fouts, 2013). Puerto Rican mothers also stress ency in mothers’ Q-sorts in China, Colombia,
close contact with their infants (Harwood et al., Germany, Israel, Japan, Norway, and the United
1995). Japanese infants are in close contact with States (Posada et al., 1995).
 The Nature and Quality of Attachment  141

Attachment types and the brain Geraldine Dawson and her colleagues exam-
ined electroencephalograph (EEG) activity in the prefrontal cortex of 1-year-
old infants during a series of episodes that were similar to a Strange Situation:
Mother plays with infant, stranger enters, familiar experimenter plays with infant,
mother leaves (Dawson et al., 2001). They found that infants whose behavior in
this abbreviated Strange Situation indicated that they were insecurely attached to
their mothers compared with infants who were securely attached showed relatively
less activity on the left side of the prefrontal cortex and relatively more activity
on the right side. Because other researchers have found that the left prefrontal
cortex is specialized for the expression of positive approach emotions such as
joy and interest, whereas the right prefrontal cortex is specialized for the expres-
sion of negative withdrawal emotions such as distress, disgust, and fear (Coan
et al., 2006; Dawson, 1994), a clear and logical correspondence between attach-
ment and brain activity was suggested. Securely attached infants, who are happy
and interested in interacting with their mothers in the Strange Situation, show
more brain activity on the positive (left) side of their prefrontal cortex during
this kind of activity; insecurely attached infants, who withdraw from their mothers
or express anger toward them in the Strange Situation, show more activity on the
negative (right) side in these situations. And, even more recently, a longitudinal
study of low-income male participants showed that insecurity measured in infancy
predicted patterns of neural activation to reward and loss at age 20 years, assessed
during a reward-based task as part of a functional magnetic resonance imaging scan
(Quevedo et al., 2017). Findings from these studies suggest that attachment security
is reflected in neurological activity measured in attachment-evoking contexts, some-
times in apparently lasting ways.
In the future, researchers will likely increase their efforts to use brain-imaging
techniques to study attachment (Coan, 2016; Cozolino, 2014). Biological tools offer
an important perspective on the mechanisms through which early attachment expe-
riences come to be reflected in behavior.

Parents’ Role in Infants’ Attachment Development

Attachment, it should be clear, is a relationship, developing out of interactions
between two people. The infant’s attachment to the parent is not an infant trait like
weight or intelligence. It is a product of both the infant’s and the parent’s predis-
positions and behavior. In this section, we discuss the parents’ input into infants’
attachment development.

Biological preparation Even before a baby is born, parents are getting ready to
provide the type of care that is necessary for their infant’s attachment development.
First, estrogen levels in young women of childbearing age make them responsive to
cuteness in infants (Sprengelmeyer et al., 2009). Second, mothers undergo hormo-
nal changes during pregnancy and childbirth that make them sensitive to infants’
cries and primed for the tasks of motherhood (Barrett & Fleming, 2011). Third,
oxytocin released during breastfeeding is related to more synchronous and sensi-
tive patterns of maternal behavior (Feldman, 2019; Feldman & Eidelman, 2007;
MacDonald & MacDonald, 2010). Fathers also undergo hormonal changes (Storey &
Walsh, 2013). For many men, testosterone levels drop after the baby’s birth when
they first interact with their infant. These men with lower testosterone levels report
feeling more sympathy, are more responsive to infant cues such as crying, and are
likely to hold a baby doll longer than men whose testosterone levels do not decrease
(Fleming et al., 2002; Kuzawa et al., 2009). Hormonal shifts are especially marked for
142  Chapter 4 Attachment

men who are closely involved with their wives during pregnancy, which suggests that
intimate ties between partners during pregnancy can stimulate hormonal changes.

I am usually a competitive person but after Emma was born, I just felt the competiveness
wash away. Instead I felt compassion and empathy as soon as I saw my new adorable little
daughter. I really felt like a different and more sensitive person after I became a dad.

Experience with infants matters too. Fathers who spend 3 or more hours in daily
child care have lower testosterone levels than fathers who are not involved in care
(Gettler et al., 2011), and fathers who have more than one child and therefore more
experience with babies have even lower testosterone levels than first-time fathers
(Corter & Fleming, 2002) or childless men (Gray et al., 2006). In brief, hormones
prepare and continue to support mothers’ and fathers’ parenting of their infants.
The mother’s brain may be prepared for developing an attachment to her baby,
too. Brain imaging studies using fMRI techniques have shown that regions of the
mother’s brain, such as the amygdala, respond more to the smiles of her own infant
than the smiles of an unfamiliar infant (Strathearn et al., 2008).

Link between caregiving and attachment After the baby is born, the develop-
ment of a secure attachment depends on the caregiving the baby receives.
Babies need close contact with their parents (or other primary caregivers). A study con-
ducted in Israel demonstrates this clearly. In that country, some families live in kib-
butzim, or communal villages, and their children spend the day together in a group
care center. In some of these kibbutzim, infants also stay in the center at night; in
other kibbutzim, they spend the night with their families. Avi Sagi-Schwartz and
his colleagues studied the effects of these different arrangements on the children’s
attachment relationships (Sagi et al., 1994). Infants who spent the night at home
with their families were more likely to develop secure attachments than infants who
stayed in the center (60 percent vs. 26 percent). Presumably, this was because their
parents had more opportunities for close interactions with them; the researchers
had equated the two groups for other factors, including early life events, the quality
of mother–infant play, and the quality of the care centers.
Babies need sensitive and responsive caregiving from their parents. Developing a
secure attachment also depends on specific aspects of parents’ behavior. Ainsworth
identified four features of mothers’ behavior that were associated with their infants’
attachments (Ainsworth et al., 1978). First, mothers of securely attached infants
were sensitive to their baby’s signals, interpreted them accurately, and responded to
them promptly and appropriately. Second, mothers of secure infants were responsive
to the baby’s state, mood, and interests and did not interrupt or interfere with the
baby’s activity. Third, secure infants’ mothers were accepting of their baby, and their
acceptance overrode any frustrations, irritations, or limitations they felt, so they were
never rejecting of the baby. Fourth, mothers of secure infants were physically and
psychologically available; they were aware of the baby, they were alert to the baby’s
signals, and actively acknowledged and responded to them; they did not ignore
the baby. It is understandable that an infant who experiences this kind of sensitive
and accepting care would have positive expectations of the mother’s availability and
responsiveness and develop a secure attachment relationship with her. More recent
studies have supported Ainsworth’s early findings, consistently showing that a sensi-
tive and responsive style of caregiving is associated with the development of secure
attachments, although the size of this association appears to be notably weaker in
magnitude than in the earliest, smaller sample studies. This is documented in meta-
analyses of correlational studies (Atkinson et al., 2000; Van IJzendoorn et al., 2004)
 The Nature and Quality of Attachment  143

and intervention studies (Bakermans-Kranenburg et al., 2003), and well as subse-

quent research on mothers (Fearon & Belsky, 2016) and fathers (Brown et al., 2012;
Lucassen et al., 2011).
Babies need parents with insight. The development of a secure attachment also
depends on the parents’ insightfulness. Parents who are more insightful appreci-
ate their infant’s feelings, make accurate and empathic interpretations of the baby’s
signals, and adjust their responses to suit the baby’s needs. Insightfulness prevents
them from focusing too much attention on the child’s behavior and gives them the
flexibility to consider the child’s particular motives and intentions rather than fol-
lowing some preset notion of what an infant should need or want. To assess mothers’
insightfulness, researchers have shown them videotapes of their own interactions
with their babies (playing, diapering, being distracted) and asked them: “What do
you think was going through your child’s head? What did she/he think, feel?” (Koren-
Karie et al., 2002). Mothers who provided more insightful answers to these questions
were more sensitive to their infants, and their infants were more securely attached.
Interventions aimed at improving maternal insightful have resulted in increases in
maternal emotional availability of a strong correlate of attachment (Ziv et al., 2016).
Good caregiving continues to be important as children get older. These parenting
characteristics continue to be important as children get older. When the mother
is supportive and attuned to the child’s needs in adolescence and the two are able
to maintain their relationship in spite of disagreements, their attachment relation-
ship is more likely to be secure (J. P. Allen et al., 2003; Allen & Tan, 2016). A similar
pattern is evident for fathers: When the father is not harsh during conflicts with the
child and the two can maintain a positive relationship in the midst of disagreements,
the adolescent–father attachment is more likely to be secure (Allen et al., 2007).
Babies suffer from intrusive and irritable caregiving. There is some evidence that
children are more likely to develop insecure–avoidant attachments to parents who are
intrusive or rejecting—who fail to respond to the infant’s signals, rarely have close
bodily contact, and often act angry and irritable when they are together (­Cassidy &
Berlin, 1994; Fearon & Belsky, 2016). In fact, these parents have even been observed
to feel angry in response to a videotape of a crying baby before their own infant
is born (Leerkes et al., 2011). It is reasonable that these infants would keep their
attention directed to toys and avoid seeking contact with their parent in the Strange
Situation if this is the behavior they have come to expect.
Babies suffer from unaffectionate and inconsistent caregiving. Likewise, there is some
evidence that children are more likely to develop insecure–ambivalent attachments
to parents who are unaffectionate and inconsistent—who sometimes respond
and other times ignore their baby’s needs (Fearon & Belsky, 2016; Isabella, 1993).
These infants are preoccupied with the parent’s availability in the Strange Situation
because they don’t know whether to expect a kind word or a cold glance, and this
preoccupation prevents them from leaving the parent’s side to explore the room.
The mothers of insecure–ambivalent toddlers were observed to feel anxious in
response to the videotaped crying baby (Leerkes et al., 2011).

Jason and his mother were never really in sync with each other. Jason was often irritable
and stubborn even in infancy and his mother often did not respond to his signals or
react to his upset in effective ways. As a result, Jason and his mother developed an inse-
cure avoidant attachment relationship.

Babies suffer from neglectful and abusive caregiving. Infants who form insecure–­
disorganized attachments to their parents have in many studies been shown to have
experienced the worst caregiving. Though there are likely many reasons why infants
144  Chapter 4 Attachment

might show disorganized behaviors during the Strange Situation, there is evidence
that the experience of neglect or physical abuse by a primary caregiver is one cor-
relate (Granqvist et al., 2017). For example, in one study, researchers found that
82 percent of abused infants developed insecure–disorganized attachments to their
parents, compared with only 19 percent of infants who were not mistreated (­Carlson
et al., 1989). The disorganized approach–avoidance behavior these maltreated
infants display in the Strange Situation might actually be an adaptive response
because these babies do not know what to expect but realize that it could be very bad
(Solomon & George, 2016). Children in an intervention targeting nurturing care
among parents at risk for neglecting their children had significantly lower rates of
disorganized attachment—32 percent—than children whose parents did not receive
the intervention—57 percent (Bernard et al., 2012).
Another source of neglectful caregiving is maternal depression. Babies of depressed
mothers also exhibit more approach-avoidance behavior and sadness during reun-
ions in the Strange Situation and are more likely to be classified as having insecure–­
disorganized attachments. When depressed mothers are observed with their babies,
they display on average less eye contact and responsiveness; instead, they tend to avert
their gaze (Greenberg, 1999). Mothers who are frightened or frightening are also
more likely to have infants with insecure–disorganized attachments (Lyons-Ruth &
Jacobvitz, 2016; True et al., 2001). These mothers are a source of both comfort and
fear, which can contribute to the infant’s disorganized behavior.
Finally, being reared in an institution without a consistent caregiver is also associ-
ated with to insecure–disorganized attachment (Nelson et al., 2014). In one study of
1- to 2½-year-olds in an orphanage in Bucharest, researchers found that caregivers’
interactions with the children were characterized by lack of eye contact, mechani-
cal interaction patterns, little talking, slow responsiveness to distress, and ineffec-
tive soothing (Zeanah et al., 2005). As you see in Table 4.5, only 19 percent of the
children had formed a secure attachment to a caregiver; 65 percent were classified
as disorganized. Some of the children from the orphanage were randomly selected
and placed in foster care (Smyke et al., 2010). When attachment was assessed at
age 3½ years, 49 percent of these children had formed a secure attachment to their
foster mother; only 18 percent of the children who were still in the orphanage had
a secure attachment to a caregiver.

Attachment in family and community contexts Attachment relationships

between infants and parents do not develop in a vacuum. They are embedded in
family and community contexts, which can influence attachment development. One

TABLE 4.5

Distribution of Attachment Types in Institutionalized Children

Strange Situation Institution Group Home-Reared Group
Classification (N = 95) (percent) (N = 50) (percent)
Secure 19 74
Avoidant 3 4
Ambivalent 0 0
Disorganized 65 22
Unclassifiable 13 0

Source: Zeanah et al., 2005.

 The Nature and Quality of Attachment  145

esearch Up Close: Early Experience, Hormones,

and Attachment
Two hormones are necessary for mothers (playing, touching, whispering, tick-
the development of healthy ling), their level of oxytocin did not increase as it
secure attachments in animals did for the children reared by their biological
and humans (Carter, 2014). parents. The hormone that did increase was the
One hormone is oxytocin, known as the “cuddle stress-related hormone cortisol, indicating that
hormone” or “love hormone.” Levels of this these children continued to experience interac-
hormone increase when an infant experiences tions with their adoptive mothers as stressful and
warm physical contact with a familiar person. The were unable to control their emotional arousal
second hormone is vasopressin. Higher levels of (Wismer Fries et al., 2008). The previously institu-
this hormone are related to the infant’s recogni- tionalized children also had lower levels of
tion of familiar people. Animal studies have vasopressin than the home-reared children when
shown that treatment with oxytocin increases they interacted with a stranger, and, related to
infants’ social behaviors and the development of this deficiency, they were poorer at identifying
specific attachments (Carter, 2014; Carter & facial expressions of emotion and matching
Keverne, 2002). Even in adulthood, exposure to facial expressions to happy, sad, and fearful
oxytocin via a nasal spray increases a person’s scenarios (Camras, Perlman, et al., 2006; Wismer
trust of other players in a game (Kosfeld et al., Fries & Pollak, 2004).
2005; see Van IJzendoorn & Bakermans-
Kranenburg, 2012, for a meta-analysis). When we brought Melissa home from
But does early social deprivation in institutions ­Romania as a 2-year-old, it was clear from
alter the levels of these social hormones? To find the start that she was different from our
out, researchers measured these hormones in other children. She resisted our efforts to hug
4-year-olds who had lived in Russian or and kiss her and often did not make eye
Romanian orphanages before being adopted by contact. She was pleasant but just not very
U.S. families (Wismer Fries et al., 2005). Although sociable with me or the other children.
these children had been living in stable, caring
families for 3 years, they showed deficits in both Whether or not these children will be able to
social behaviors and social hormones when develop healthy relationships in later life and
compared with U.S. children raised by their overcome the effects of their early deprivation is
biological parents. The adopted children from the unclear. What is clear is that early experience
orphanages were less socially responsive and can alter hormones that affect the brain, that this
more likely to have insecure–disorganized affects infants’ capacity for social interaction,
attachments to their adoptive parents, and when and that this, in turn, is likely to lead to less-than-
they interacted physically with their adoptive optimal attachment patterns.

context that affects the child’s attachment to parents is the relationship between
the mother and the father. A secure attachment is more likely when parents have a
happy marriage (Belsky & Fearon, 2008; Fearon & Belsky, 2016; Thompson, 2016).
Socioeconomic status is another contextual factor that influences the quality
of children’s attachments. In low-income families, attachment relationships are
more likely to be insecure. Economic and emotional risks associated with poverty—
including not having enough food, living in a rough neighborhood, experiencing
domestic violence, and using alcohol and drugs—reduce maternal sensitivity and
in turn increase the likelihood that infants will develop insecure attachments
(Raikes & Thompson, 2005). The more risks there are, the more likely this outcome.
146  Chapter 4 Attachment

For example, researchers have found that in very poor families, when mothers were
less sensitive toward their children and the children were undernourished as well,
93 percent of the children developed insecure attachments compared with only
50 percent of adequately nourished children from low-income families (Valenzuela,
1997).
These links between poverty and insecure attachment are not inevitable, how-
ever; social support in the community can alleviate problems in the family. Secure
infant–mother attachments are more likely in very poor families that have a social
safety net composed of supportive and helpful neighbors and kin. This allows the
mother to develop and maintain a sensitive and responsive pattern of interac-
tion with her infant, which in turn promotes a secure infant–mother attachment.
Researchers have documented a relatively high likelihood of secure attachments
in poor communities in South Africa, for example, where infants and young chil-
dren are considered to belong to the community and the responsibility for their
safety and well-being is a collective one (Tomlinson et al., 2005). Finding links
between children’s attachments and community characteristics is consistent with
­Bronfenbrenner’s ecological-systems theory (Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 2006) and
reminds us that attachment is not simply a dyadic issue but is influenced by family
circumstances and community support as well.

Continuity in attachment from parent to child The type of care that the par-
ents received when they were young children provides another context for chil-
dren’s attachment development. Children form what Bowlby referred to as internal
working models or attachment representations that reflect their parents’ styles of
interaction with them (Bretherton & Munholland, 2016). These working models
are modified as children grow into adulthood and reconstruct and reinterpret
their early experiences. When they become parents, mothers and fathers tend to
re-create relationships with their children that replicate their working models of
their own relationships in childhood.
A number of techniques have been used to measure internal working models of
attachment in children. In the narrative story method, children are given dolls rep-
resenting family members and the interviewer begins a story about an attachment-
related event, such as “Your mother is late coming to pick you up one day . . .” (Emde
et al., 2003). The interviewer then encourages the child to complete the story. The
story the child tells is assumed to reflect the child’s internal working model of his or
her attachment relationship with the mother. Other assessments rely on children’s
abilities to understand and describe their experiences with their parents. Research-
ers have found that securely attached 3-year-olds describe positive social events with
their parents more accurately than do insecurely attached children, a finding that
is consistent with the view that working models are mental schemas that organize
and guide the types of social information children notice and remember (Dykas &
Cassidy, 2011; Waters & Waters, 2006).
Researchers have also developed techniques to measure internal working models
of attachment in adults. One technique they use is the Adult Attachment Inter-
view (AAI) developed by Mary Main and her colleagues (Hesse, 2016; Main et al.,
1985). In this interview, adults are questioned about their childhood relationships
with their parents, and based on the coherence of their narratives, are classified
into one of three groups (see Table 4.6). Autonomous adults reveal in their inter-
views that although they value close relationships with their parents and others,
they talk in an internally consistent and seemingly objective manner about these
childhood relationships. They tend not to idealize their own parents but have a
clear understanding of their relationships with them and are able to describe both
 The Nature and Quality of Attachment  147

TABLE 4.6

Relations between Mothers’ and Children’s Attachment Types

Attachment Category

Child Mother Description

Secure Autonomous Mother is not dealing with unresolved concerns about
her own experience and thus is able to be sensitive to
her child’s communications.
Insecure– Dismissing Mother is reluctant to acknowledge her own attachment
avoidant needs and thus is insensitive and unresponsive to her
child’s needs.
Insecure–­ Preoccupied Mother is confused about her attachment history and
ambivalent thus is inconsistent in her interactions with her child.

Source: Main et al., 1985.

their positive and negative traits. Dismissing adults dismiss and devalue attachment
and often claim that they cannot recall incidents from their childhoods. When they
do remember anything, it is often a recollection of an idealized parent: “I had the
world’s greatest mom!” Adults in the third group are preoccupied with earlier family
attachments. They recall many conflict-ridden incidents from their childhoods and
cannot organize them into a coherent pattern.
Researchers using the AAI initially found strong support for the prediction that
the coherence of parents’ discourse about their childhood experiences with primary
caregivers would be related to their children’s attachments to them, an association
that was documented to be large in magnitude in an early meta-analysis of mostly
lower-risk samples (Van IJzendoorn, 1995). In Main’s research, for example, infants
of autonomous mothers were likely to have secure attachments to them, infants with
dismissing mothers were likely to have avoidant attachments, and infants of preoccu-
pied mothers were often insecure ambivalent (Main et al., 1985). Further evidence
of intergenerational continuity in attachment from parent to child comes from a
study in which researchers interviewed pregnant women about their attachment his-
tories and then measured their infants’ attachments at 1 year of age (Fonagy et al.,
1991). This research design enabled the investigators to rule out the possibility that
the mothers’ experiences with their babies had influenced their memories of their
own childhoods. Like Main, these researchers also found significant links between
mothers’ recollections of their childhood relationships and children’s attachment
relationships with them.
Likewise, studies in foster families showed a high level of concordance between
foster mothers’ recollections of their childhood relationships with parents and their
foster children’s attachment quality (Dozier et al., 2001; Dozier & Rutter, 2016).
This suggests that the intergenerational transmission of attachment is the result
of parents’ attachment-fostering behaviors, not a genetic link between parent and
child. That said, more recent quantitative reviews by Verhage and her colleagues
(2016, 2018) suggest that the intergenerational transmission of attachment is sig-
nificantly weaker in higher-risk samples in comparison to lower risk samples. These
recent findings have been interpreted as evidence consistent with the “ecological
constraints” hypothesis, which states that difficult early contextual experiences tend
to “swamp” effects of adults’ attachment states of mind for predicting their own
infant’s attachment.
148  Chapter 4 Attachment

Attachment of children in child care Psychologists have been concerned about

attachment development in children who are in child care and separated from their
mothers every day. These children do form close relationships with their parents
(Burchinal et al., 2015; Clarke-Stewart & Allhusen, 2002, 2005; Lamb & Ahnert,
2006).

“I have worked since Abby was 4 months old, when I enrolled her in a really terrific
day care center. She loved being with the other kids and loved her caregivers but to my
relief, she never stopped loving me. She was always happy to see me when I picked her
up after work. It was like she had lots of people who loved her and she, in turn, cared
about them too. But she always knew that I was her mom!”

But are these children’s attachments as secure as those formed by infants who
spend their time at home with their mothers? Researchers first examined this ques-
tion by comparing infants’ behavior in the Strange Situation. On average, infants in
full-time child care were somewhat more likely to be classified as insecurely attached
compared with infants not in full-time care (36 percent versus 29 percent; Clarke-
Stewart, 1989). These results appeared to suggest that child care could hinder the
development of a secure attachment. However, perhaps factors other than child
care explained the difference. One factor might be the Strange Situation. Infants
are judged insecure in the Strange Situation if they do not run to their mothers
after a brief separation. But infants who experience daily separations from their
mothers might be less disturbed by the separations in the Strange Situation and
therefore seek less proximity. A second factor might be the mother: Perhaps moth-
ers who value independence in themselves and their children are more likely to be
employed whereas mothers who emphasize closeness with their children are more
likely to stay home. A third factor might be the stress of handling both a baby and a
job, which could interfere with the mother’s ability to provide the sensitive and sup-
portive care that fosters development of a secure attachment. Finding that insecure
attachment was more common for infants in child care did not, by itself, prove that
child care was harmful.
To get a more definitive answer to the question of whether child care interfered
with infants’ attachment development, the U.S. government funded the NICHD
Study of Early Child Care and Youth Development, a large study in 10 sites around
the country. More than 1,300 infants were randomly selected from hospitals at
birth and tracked through age 15. Their development was assessed repeatedly. The
results showed that when factors such as parents’ education, income, and attitudes
were statistically controlled for, infants in child care were no more likely to be inse-
curely attached to their mothers than infants not in care. However, when they were
placed in poor-quality child care in which the caregivers were not very sensitive and
responsive to their needs and their mothers were not very sensitive to their needs
at home, infants were less likely to develop secure attachments than if they were in
good-quality care and their mothers were sensitive and responsive (Belsky et al.,
2007; NICHD Early Child Care Research Network, 1997b, 2005, 2006). Apparently
poor-quality care worsens a risky situation at home and increases the likelihood that
infants will have problems forming secure attachments to their parents.
Research also shows that good-quality child care can compensate for poor care
at home by giving children an opportunity to form secure attachments outside the
family. Children with an insecure attachment to their mother but a secure attach-
ment to a child care provider are more socially competent than insecurely attached
children who have not formed a positive relationship outside the family (Howes &
Spieker, 2016; Mesman et al., 2016). Having a child care provider who stays with the
 The Nature and Quality of Attachment  149

eal-World Application: Attachment When Mother

(or Father) Goes to Prison
In the United States, more than An insecure attachment to the incarcerated
5,000,000 children, or 7 percent mother can lead to adverse outcomes for the
of all U.S. children, have experi- children. About 70 percent of young children with
enced a co-resident parent incarcerated mothers have internalizing prob-
leaving to spend time in jail or prison (Dallaire, lems, such as anxiety, depression, shame, and
2019; Murphey & Cooper, 2015). These children guilt (Bloom & Steinhart, 1993; Dallaire, 2019;
are likely to have attachment problems. Some of Dressel et al., 1992), and many exhibit external-
them are not even allowed to form an attach- izing behaviors, such as anger, aggression, and
ment to their mother. Some women (6 percent of hostility (Murray et al., 2012; Parke & Clarke-
those in prison) are pregnant at the time of their Stewart, 2003b). Here is how Cheyenne, a 13-year-
arrest, but few prisons permit them to keep their old, reacted to her mom’s imprisonment, which
infants with them (Gabel & Girard, 1995). In most had led to moving around a lot and living with
cases, they are permitted only a few days of different relatives (Anderson, 2012, p.1):
contact before they must relinquish the infant
and return to their cells. As a result, the mother “I really miss her. Some days I have my
has little opportunity to bond with her baby or for depressing days and I really break down.
the baby to form an attachment to the mother. In I normally get quite emotional when I get
France, in contrast, children can stay with their letters from my mom. I recognise the enve-
mothers in prison up to the age of 18 months. lopes. She decorates the envelopes and I
This allows them time to form a mutual know her handwriting. Every year she always
attachment. sends a Valentine’s Day card. She always
Even if an attachment has already developed writes ‘Mommy’ at the end. Never ‘Mom.’
before the mother goes to prison, incarceration is Always ‘Mommy.’ ”
likely to adversely affect its quality. In one study,
researchers examined attachment representa- Children adjust to their mothers’ incarceration
tions in 54 children whose mothers were in prison better if their grandmother takes over their care
(Poehlmann, 2005). The children were read four rather than if they are placed in foster care
story stems: a child spills juice at dinner, a parent (Bloom & Steinhart, 1993; Mumola, 2000). A
comforts a child who falls off a rock and hurts his grandmother can provide more continuity and
or her knee, a child thinks he or she has seen a familiarity and facilitate more frequent and
monster and calls the parent, and a child is consistent contact with the incarcerated mother
separated from a parent leaving on a trip. Nearly (Poehlmann-Tynan, 2014). Children who experi-
two thirds of the children told narratives that ence more regular contact with their incarcerated
included intense ambivalence, disorganization, mother adjust better. However, correctional
violence, or detachment. Although less is known policies make it difficult for mothers and children
about the effects of paternal incarceration on to stay in touch. Prisons are typically located in
children’s attachment to their fathers, paternal remote areas, often long distances from where the
imprisonment is linked with poorer caregiver children live, making visitation extremely difficult for
(mother)–child attachment especially if the child families with limited resources (Poehlmann-Tynan,
is exposed to either their fathers’ crime or the 2014). This problem is more acute for women than
arrest of their father. However, if the maternal for men because there are fewer prisons for them.
caregiver was sensitive and provided a stimulat- In fact, those in more distant state or federal
ing home environment, the levels of insecure prisons, rather than in local jails, are less likely to
attachment between the child and the non-­ experience regular visitation (Poehlmann et al.,
incarcerated caregiver were reduced 2010). According to one estimate, incarcerated
(Poehlmann-Tynan et al., 2017). women are, on average, 160 miles farther from
150  Chapter 4 Attachment

their families than are incarcerated men with her child. This is difficult because children are
(Coughenour, 1995). Visits to mothers are also rare likely to have established new relationships while
because children are not always eligible to visit, the incarcerated mother was absent, for exam-
few visitors are allowed at one time, visits allow no ple, with a grandmother or foster care parent.
privacy, visiting rooms are not child friendly, and Moreover, the experiences that the incarcerated
children are anxious about making visits mother has suffered in prison affect her ability to
(Poehlmann-Tynan, 2014). About half of incarcer- reintegrate into the family and provide supportive
ated parents do not receive any visits from their care for her child.
children (Snell, 1994), and even when children do
visit, it is not often. A U.S. Department of Justice “After her mother returned home, Cheyenne,
study found that only 8 percent of incarcerated then age 15, had difficulty re-adjusting to
mothers saw their children as often as once a life with her mom: ‘It’s like she’s come back
week (Mumola, 2000), although a majority had and wants to be in control straight away. I
mail or phone contact with their children. don’t like it one bit. She’s got to realise I am
Incarcerated fathers receive even fewer visits than not a little girl like I was when she went away.
mothers. This is unfortunate since more visitation I was all excited when she came out but
and mail contact during incarceration was linked now I don’t know what I want’ (Anderson,
with more father–child contact and better father– 2012, p. 2).”
child relationships and child outcomes in the post
incarceration period (LaVigne et al., 2005) as well To lessen the negative effects of a parent’s
as lower recidivism rates for inmates (Bales & incarceration, prison policies should minimize the
Mears, 2008). length of separation, minimize disruption in the
After the mother’s prison term is over, she must children’s lives, and allow parents and children to
begin the task of reestablishing her relationship maintain contact.

child over a period of time is particularly important. Children more frequently seek
caregivers who have been on the child care staff longer, and these caregivers are
able to soothe the children more effectively than caregivers with unstable employ-
ment records (Barnas & Cummings, 1994). Clearly, minimizing staff turnover in
child care can help children’s attachment development (Burchinal et al., 2015).
Staff training to improve caregivers’ sensitivity is also important (Galinsky et al.,
1995). The more training that child care staff members have, the more likely it is
that children will develop secure attachment relationships with them (Burchinal
et al., 2015; Clarke-Stewart & Allhusen, 2002).

Effects of Infant Characteristics on Attachment

As we discussed in Chapter 3 “Biological Foundations,” some babies are more dif-
ficult to care for than others. Could this affect the quality of their attachment? Some
researchers have found a link between infants’ temperament characteristics and
attachment relationships. Irritable newborns who have trouble orienting to peo-
ple have been found in some studies to be more likely to develop insecure attach-
ments (Spangler & Grossmann, 1993; Susman-Stillman et al., 1996). However, with
the exception of a well-established association between difficult temperament and
insecure-resistant attachments specifically, many studies do not document this link
(Vaughn & Bost, 2016). Indeed, a recent meta-analysis of the large (N = 11,440)
literature on attachment insecurity and difficult temperament in early child-
hood revealed a trivially small association between these variables, equivalent to a
 Stability and Consequences of Attachment  151

correlation of only .07 (Groh et al., 2017). Similarly, evidence from behavior-genetic
twin studies (Fearon et al., 2006; Roisman & Fraley, 2008) and molecular-genetic
studies (Luijk et al., 2011; Roisman et al., 2013) provide scant evidence for additive
genetic contributions to infant attachment.
It seems that if infant temperament does affect development of attachment,
other factors moderate its influence. A difficult infant isn’t necessarily destined
to have a poor relationship with the mother. If parents receive help and support
from other family members and friends, they can usually cope with a difficult
baby, and when adequate social support is available, irritable infants are no more
likely than easy ones to become insecurely attached (Crockenberg, 1981). Profes-
sional intervention can also help. In a study in the Netherlands, irritable infants
whose mothers were taught how to behave more sensitively and responsively devel-
oped better attachment relationships than did irritable infants in a control group
(van den Boom, 1994). Of the infants whose mothers received training, 68 percent
were classified as securely attached at 1 year, whereas only 28 percent of the infants in
the control group were securely attached. However, if the mother is socially isolated
or has poor relationships with other adults, she is more likely to have problems foster-
ing a secure attachment with a difficult infant (Levitt et al., 1986). Thus, the effects
of temperament on attachment cannot be separated from the influence of the total
social context in which the baby is developing (Sroufe, 1996; Vaughn & Bost, 2016).

Stability and Consequences

of Attachment
Does a secure attachment to Mom or Dad continue through childhood? Does a
child who has a secure relationship with parents develop secure relationships with
other adults later on or form closer relationships with peers? In this section, we
discuss the stability and consequences of attachment for children’s development.

Stability and Change in Attachment Over Time

Initially, a number of smaller scale longitudinal studies were conducted to track
children’s attachments over time. In a study in Germany, for example, attachment
classifications at age 1 year predicted 90 percent of secure attachments and 75 per-
cent of insecure classifications at age 6 (Wartner et al., 1994). Even across longer
intervals, stability of attachment has been observed. Waters and his colleagues
(2000) found that 72 percent of the children in their sample who were classified as
secure in infancy were secure 20 years later—an impressive level of stability across a
long period. And indeed an early meta-analysis of attachment stability from infancy
to adulthood yielded a moderately high association equivalent to a correlation of
about +0.40 (Fraley, 2002). Recently, however, evidence from larger studies has sug-
gested, in both higher-risk and normative-risks samples, that infant attachment on
its own is only weakly associated with attachment in early adulthood—though these
same studies show that the observed quality of early maternal and paternal caregiv-
ing is a relatively robust predictor of security in adulthood, as expected by attach-
ment theory (Groh et al., 2014; Haydon et al., 2014; Raby et al., 2013).
Clearly, change in the quality of parent–child relationships is possible (Waters
et al., 2000). Substantial numbers of children with insecure attachments as infants
do manage to develop better relationships with their parents by school age. In one
 152  Chapter 4 Attachment

study, 42 percent of the children who were insecure at 1 year became secure by
5 years (Lounds et al., 2005); in another study, 57 percent of infants with disorgan-
ized attachments at 1 year were secure at 4 years (Fish, 2004). Change can go either
way, but it is more common for insecure children to become secure. Perhaps this
is because mothers who are not entirely successful with infants find that as their
children become older, they can read their signals more easily. Perhaps it is because
family circumstances change. A change from insecure to secure attachment is par-
ticularly likely if the child comes from an upwardly mobile low-income family. As the
family gains financial resources, the parents begin to experience less stress in their
lives; they become more available to the child and interact in ways that are more
responsive to the child’s needs (Thompson et al., 1982).
Although it is more unusual, secure attachment relationships may become inse-
cure if the family’s life circumstances deteriorate as a result of job loss, illness, death,
or divorce. In the photo, a girl’s face reflects the pain experienced by children
whose parents divorce. As her world turns upside down, her secure attachments to
her parents may well be undermined. In one study, researchers found that when the
quality of mother–child communication declined and hostility and conflict or expo-
sure to a traumatic family event such as death of the child’s grandparent increased,
preschool children shifted from secure to insecure attachments (Moss et al., 2005).
In short, attachment relationships appear responsive to changes in parents’ behav-
ior and circumstances (Thompson, 2016; Waters et al., 2000).
One special, and fortunately rare case of attachment disruption is the death of a
primary caregiver or another close loved one during childhood. Importantly, only a
small percentage of children in the United States (about 5 percent) experience the
loss of a parent during childhood and, when this occurs, it is much more likely to be a
death of a father than a mother. Nonetheless, Bowlby was keenly interested in the loss
of attachment figures, both during childhood and adulthood, and in fact devoted one
of his three major volumes on attachment theory to this and related topics (Bowlby,
1980). As emphasized by Fraley and Shaver (2016), one of Bowlby’s key insights about
the death of a primary caregiver is that “...seemingly irrational or “immature” reac-
tions to loss, such as disbelief, anger, searching, and sensing the continued presence
of a lost attachment figure, are understandable when viewed from an ethological
or evolutionary perspective.” We have learned much in the ensuing decades about
both children’s understanding of death (Talwar, Harris, & Schleifer, 2015) as well as
the personal implications of parental loss for children. Not surprisingly, the death of
a parent is a significant risk factor for children across many important domains of
adjustment. For example, children who experi-
ence the death of a primary caregiver may suffer
withdrawal or in older children depression and
are more likely to have academic and behavio-
ral problems at school. However, what seems to
matter a lot for children in terms of their adjust-
ment after such a loss is the toll the death of a
spouse has on the quality of caregiving the sur-
Fizkes/iStock/Getty Images Plus

viving parent is able to provide a grieving child

in the wake of the loss. For that reason, research-
ers such as Irwin Sandler and his colleagues
have developed interventions for parental loss
that specifically target both p­ arentally-bereaved
children and adolescents as well as their remain-
ing caregivers, an approach that appears to be
effective (Ayers et al., 2013, 2014).
 Stability and Consequences of Attachment  153

Attachments in Older Children

Attachment relationships with parents continue to develop through childhood and
adolescence as children mature and their social worlds expand. In the later preschool
years, opportunities to explore outside the home create a major shift in how children
use their parents as a secure base and how their parents supervise and support the
children’s exploration. To maintain a secure relationship, children and parents must
develop clearer and more elaborate expectations about each other’s behavior and
goals, and parents must support and facilitate the children’s exploration while con-
tinuing to provide a sense of protection and security. Parents serve as an important
source of knowledge for their children at this age, and the nature of the attachment
relationship colors the degree to which children trust the information the parents
provide. Researchers have found that securely attached 4- and 5-year-olds believe their
mother or a stranger more depending on available perceptual cues, but insecure–
avoidant children display less reliance on their mother, irrespective of available cues
(Corriveau et al., 2009; Harris, 2012). In other words, as preschoolers, secure chil-
dren trust what their mothers say just as they trusted her to be there when they were
younger. As children get older, they and their parents communicate over longer
distances. Although the specific forms of communication change as a result of this
increased distance, parent–child relationships continue to involve exploration and
approach on the child’s side and secure-base support from the parents. When chil-
dren reach middle childhood, they can also develop attachment relationships with
close friends and, in adolescence, with romantic partners (Furman & Rose, 2015;
Kerns & Brumariu, 2016). These relationships coexist with the attachments already
formed to parents; they do not replace them (Allen & Tan, 2016). The children’s
goal is to achieve a balance between maintaining close ties with family while gaining
autonomy to expand their social network to include close attachment ties with peers.

Consequences of Attachment
As children develop, the quality of their attachments to their parents has conse-
quences for other relationships and cognitive, social, and emotional skills.

Associations with exploration and cognitive development Compared with

infants who have insecure attachments to their parents, infants with secure attach-
ments exhibit more complex exploratory behavior (Main, 1973). When they are
given a problem to solve, they are more interested, persistent, and effective than
insecurely attached children (Matas et al., 1978). They display less frustration and
less crying and whining. They also engage in more symbolic and pretend play—for
example, transforming a block of wood into an imaginary car or a stick into a witch’s
broom. Securely attached infants are especially exploratory as toddlers if they were
not highly irritable as newborns (Stupica et al., 2011). Securely attached infants do
better on IQ tests, too. In research in the Netherlands and Israel, for example, the
security of children’s attachments to their mothers, fathers, and other caregivers
predicted intelligence scores at age 5 years (Mesman et al., 2016). Attachment secu-
rity in adopted children also was related to advanced cognitive abilities at age 7 in
another study in the Netherlands (Stams et al., 2002). In a third study, children in
Reykjavik, Iceland, who were securely attached to their parents at age 7 were more
attentive in the classroom and had higher grades at ages 9, 12, and 15 than chil-
dren whose attachment representations were avoidant, ambivalent, or disorganized
(Jacobsen & Hofmann, 1997).
154  Chapter 4 Attachment

Even at older ages, adolescents whose attachment representations in the AAI

before they entered college were classified as autonomous became better students
at college because they prepared more for exams and had more effective work hab-
its than students whose attachment representations were dismissing or preoccupied
(Larose et al., 2005). Children with secure attachment relationships are likely to
succeed in situations that require cognitive ability and effort both because their
emotional security facilitates exploration and mastery of the physical environment
and because their parents’ sensitive and responsive care promotes cognitive devel-
opment as well as attachment security.

Implications for social development Secure attachment relationships can also

facilitate children’s later social development. The most dramatic evidence of this
comes from studies of socially isolated primates who failed to develop normal attach-
ments as infants. When Harlow isolated monkeys from all social contact for their
first year, they were seriously disturbed. When they were visited by normal monkeys,
they withdrew to a corner, huddling or rocking. As adults, they were unable to have
normal sexual relations. When some of the females did have babies through artifi-
cial insemination, they ignored them, and when the infants became distressed, they
physically abused and sometimes even killed them (Harlow, 1964; Harlow & Suomi,
1971; Suomi, 2016).
Early attachment is related to later social competence. Of course, we cannot dupli-
cate Harlow’s experiment with human infants. However, many studies suggest that
the quality of an infant’s attachment to parents is relevant for later social devel-
opment (Thompson, 2016). A particularly important longitudinal study by Alan
Sroufe and his colleagues in Minnesota in which children were followed from
infancy to adulthood demonstrates the importance of early attachments for later
social behavior (Carlson et al., 2004; Sroufe et al., 2005). Securely and insecurely
attached infants had very different social trajectories. When they were 4 to 5 years
of age, children who had been securely attached to their mothers in infancy were
rated by their teachers as more emotionally positive, more empathic, and more
socially competent than children who had been insecurely attached. They whined
less, were less aggressive, and displayed fewer negative reactions when other chil-
dren approached them. They had more friends and their classmates considered
them more popular. The securely attached children continued to be rated as more
socially competent when they were 8 and 12 years old (Simpson et al., 2007; Sroufe
et al., 2005). Moreover, they were more likely to develop close friendships with peers
and to form friendships with other securely attached children. They construed their
friendships as closer, more emotionally connected, and more skilled in conflict res-
olution than children who had been insecurely attached in infancy. At age 19, the
adolescents who had a history of secure attachment were more likely to have close
family relationships, long-term friendships, high self-confidence, and determina-
tion regarding personal goals.
Similar findings were reported in the NICHD Study of Early Child Care and Youth
Development. Compared with children who were insecurely attached to their moth-
ers in infancy, children who were securely attached were rated as being more socially
competent and having fewer externalizing and internalizing behavior problems in
preschool and first grade (NICHD Early Child Care Research Network, 1997b), and
children who were securely attached to their mothers at age 2 or 3 had better social
problem-solving skills, were less lonely, and had better friendships between ages 4
and 10 (Lucas-Thompson & Clarke-Stewart, 2007; McElwain et al., 2008, 2011; Raikes
& Thompson, 2008). Other researchers have found similar links between the quality
 Stability and Consequences of Attachment  155

of early attachment and later school-age peer competence and friendship patterns
(Contreras et al., 2000; Schneider et al., 2001). They have also found that security of
attachment as assessed with the AAI is related to better relationships with peers and
fewer internalizing and externalizing problems in adolescence (Allen, 2008; Allen
et al., 2007). A recent series of meta-analyses of the now large literature on early
attachment (in)security has confirmed these links, with early security being associ-
ated with greater social competence (r = .20; Groh et al., 2014), fewer externalizing
problems (r = −.15; Fearon et al., 2010), and to a lesser extent, fewer internalizing
problems (r = −.08; Groh et al., 2012). Though these associations are modest in size,
they also do not seem to fade over childhood across studies, suggesting the possibility
of enduring effects (Roisman, Fraley, & Haltigan, 2013).
Working models and emotions link early attachment and later social competence.
Just as Bowlby argued, the links between early attachment and social outcomes are
mediated by children’s internal working models. Sroufe and his colleagues (2005)
in the Minnesota study assessed children’s internal working models of relationships
at various times throughout childhood. For example, in the preschool years, they
evaluated children’s relationship expectations, attitudes, and feelings. Securely
attached children’s relationship models were characterized by expectations of
empathy between partners, a high expectation of sharing during play, and construc-
tive approaches to conflict resolution (e.g., taking turns, seeking adult assistance, or
getting another toy). The investigators found that children’s working models and
social behavior mutually influenced each other over time. Working models of rela-
tionships in the preschool period predicted social behavior in middle childhood;
working models of relationships in middle childhood predicted social behavior at
12 and 19 years; social behavior in middle childhood predicted working models of
relationships in early adolescence. You can see this pattern of cross-time relations
between working models and social behavior in Figure 4.1.
Emotions also create a bridge between attachment and social behavior. The
security of attachment affects the way children process emotional information and
understand and regulate emotions. Preschoolers who are securely attached to their
mothers are better than insecurely attached children at understanding emotions

Infancy/Toddler Early childhood Middle childhood Early adolescence Adolescence

12–24 months 4–5 years 8 years 12 years 19 years

Attachment Relationship Relationship Relationship Socioemotional

quality representation representation representation functioning

Early Adolescent
experience social functioning

Toddler Social Social Social Social support

experience behavior behavior behavior

FIGURE 4.1 A model of cross-time relations between working models of relationships and social behavior. Working mod-
els were inferred from the child’s representations of relationships with peers and family based on an interview in early
childhood, drawings in middle childhood, and narratives in early adolescence; social behavior was inferred from teacher
ratings of the child’s peer competence and emotional health at all three ages.
Source: Carlson, E. A., Sroufe, L. A., & Egeland, B. (2004). The construction of experience: A longitudinal study of representation and
behavior. Child Development, 75, 66–83. This material is reproduced with permission of John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
156  Chapter 4 Attachment

(Laible & Thompson, 1998; Ontai & Thompson, 2002). This difference in emotional
understanding results, in part, from the elaboration of emotion themes in mother–
child conversations in families of securely attached children (Raikes & Thompson,
2008). For example, in a study of 5-year-olds, secure child–mother attachment
status was linked with appropriate/responsive mother–child emotion talk, which
predicted child emotion understanding, which in turn was related to fewer child
conduct problems (Farrant et al., 2013). At age 7 years, securely attached children
are more knowledgeable about emotion-regulation strategies (Colle & Del Giudice,
2011). At older ages, securely attached children and adolescents are also better at
regulating their emotions in challenging situations (Contreras et al., 2000; Zimmer-
Gembeck et al., 2015). This probably contributes to the high quality of their peer
relationships in childhood and adolescence.
In summary, secure attachments to parents facilitate children’s mastery of the
social world. They increase the child’s trust in other social relationships and facil-
itate the development of mature affectional relationships with peers. Longitudi-
nal studies aimed at defining the links between early parent–infant interaction
and later relationships in adolescence and adulthood demonstrate the long-term
stability of the social effects of early attachment (Groh et al., 2014; Thompson,
2016). The long-term consequences of attachment security are evident not just
in biologically related families but also in families of adopted children (Stams
et al., 2002).

Consequences for self-esteem Children’s attachment security is also related

to self-esteem (Thompson, 2016). In one study, researchers assessed the attach-
ments and self-concepts of 6-year-old children (Cassidy, 1988). Children who were
securely attached viewed themselves more positively, although they were able to
acknowledge their less-than-perfect qualities. Insecure–avoidant children tended
to view themselves as perfect. Insecure–ambivalent children showed no clear pat-
tern. A group of children classified as insecure–controlling (similar to the insecure–­
disorganized classification) had negative self-concepts. Later studies confirmed the
link between attachment and self-esteem: Securely attached preschoolers viewed
themselves more positively and their self-concepts were more stable over time than
insecure children’s (Goodvin et al., 2008). Similar links between secure attachment
and self-esteem are found in young adulthood as well (Wu, 2009). In brief, research
suggests that the quality of early attachment is related to the degree to which chil-
dren view themselves positively and realistically—both important capacities for
social development.

Attachments to both mother and father are related to later develop-

ment Children can develop different kinds of attachment relationships with their
mothers and fathers. In one study, researchers classified 1-year-olds according to
whether they were securely attached to both parents, securely attached to their
mother but not their father, securely attached to their father but not their mother,
or securely attached to neither parent (Main & Weston, 1981). They then observed
the infants’ reactions to a friendly clown. The infants who were securely attached
to both parents were more responsive to the clown than those who were securely
attached to only one parent, and the infants who were securely attached to neither
parent were the least responsive of all. These results suggest that if you want to know
about an infant’s emotional security, it is important to view the child as part of a
family system and assess attachment relationships with both parents (Cowan et al.,
2005; Parke & Buriel, 2006). If other adults—grandparents, nannies, child care
 Stability and Consequences of Attachment  157

providers—are also a significant part of the child’s world, they should be included
in assessments of attachment in order to get the most complete and accurate pre-
diction of children’s development (Howes & Spieker, 2016; Mesman et al., 2016).

Attachment or parenting: which is critical for later development? It is clear

that attachment quality is an important predictor and precursor of later cognitive,
social, and emotional development. However, are the effects on later development
due to the attachment relationship itself or to the care and family circumstances
that support it? A number of explanations for the link between attachment quality
and later development have been offered (Lewis, 1999; Lewis et al., 2000). First, an
“extreme early effects” explanation suggests that early attachment protects children
from later traumas and experiences. Second, a “mediating experiences” explana-
tion suggests that continuity across time is due to the stability of parents’ behavior
and environmental conditions rather than the nature of earlier attachment pat-
terns. Children who are securely attached at 12 months are likely to be receiving
sensitive, responsive mothering at that age and to continue to receive this kind of
mothering as they mature. Their mothers are likely to respect their autonomy and
support their efforts to cope independently with new experiences while standing
ready to give direct help when needed. Therefore, the well-adjusted social behav-
ior of these children at later ages might reflect the current healthy state of their
relationship with their parents rather than being an outcome of the relationship
that existed years earlier. As noted earlier, when children’s environments change,
their attachments are likely to change as well. Improvements in life circumstances
increase security; increased family adversity decreases security (Thompson, 2016).
According to this explanation, it is not the child’s early attachment pattern that
accounts for later social behavior but the continuity or discontinuity of the child’s
experiences and relationships with parents. A third explanation suggests that
attachment is a dynamic interaction process. In this view, children’s attachment his-
tories modify how they perceive and react to changes in their family environment.
Securely attached children may be able to weather declines in parents’ responsive-
ness better than insecurely attached children.
To test these three possible explanations, researchers in the NICHD Study of
Early Child Care and Youth Development examined relations between early attach-
ment to mother and social competence during preschool and early elementary
school under conditions of declining, stable, or improving maternal care (NICHD
Early Child Care Research Network, 1997b). They found that links between attach-
ment and later outcomes were mediated by the quality of parenting, supporting
the “mediating experiences” explanation. When parenting quality improved over
time, children’s outcomes were better; when parenting quality declined, children
had poorer outcomes. The researchers also found support for the “dynamic inter-
active process” explanation: Children who had insecure attachments in infancy did
better (had fewer externalizing problems) when parenting quality improved over
time and did worse (had more externalizing problems) when parenting quality
declined. However, securely attached children were protected from changes in par-
enting quality: Their social outcomes were not altered by declines or improvements
in parenting. Changes in family relationships and experiences clearly mattered for
some children in this study, but the nature of children’s prior attachments was an
important modifier of how they reacted to fluctuations in their social worlds. The
message is clear: Both early attachment history and contemporary social conditions
must be considered in order to understand the long-term consequences of attach-
ment security.
158  Chapter 4 Attachment

nto Adulthood: From Early Attachment to Later

Romantic Relationships
Many researchers have been ­ hildhood and to the adults’ work activities,
c
curious about whether there are which the researchers suggested were function-
links between early attachment ally equivalent to exploratory activities in child-
relationships and intimate hood. Securely attached adults had work and
relationships in adulthood (Zeifman & Hazan, love in balance. They had higher overall satisfac-
2016). Cindy Hazan and Phillip Shaver (1987, tion and confidence in their work than the other
1990) looked at this issue by translating adults, but they also placed a higher value on
Ainsworth’s three attachment types into a relationships than on work and said that, if
questionnaire to assess how adults approach forced, they would choose relationship success
intimate relationships. According to the question- over work success. Adults with ambivalent
naire, adults with secure intimate relationships attachments emphasized love over work. They felt
enjoyed closeness and found intimacy easy to insecure about their jobs and were most likely to
establish. They agreed with the following state- claim that love concerns interfered with their
ments: “I find it relatively easy to get close to other work. They had difficulty focusing on work tasks
people. I am comfortable depending on other except when they perceived them as an oppor-
people and having them depend on me. I don’t tunity to gain love and respect. They reported the
usually worry about being abandoned or about lowest average income of the three groups,
having someone get too close to me.” Adults with presumably because their insecure attachments
avoidant relationships were uncomfortable with actually interfered with their job performance
closeness and found it difficult to trust their and productivity. Avoidant adults emphasized
partners. They agreed with the statements: “I am the importance of work over love. They preferred
somewhat uncomfortable being close to others. I to work alone, used work to avoid having friends
feel nervous when people start to get too close. or a social life, and did not take enjoyable
Often, I feel like people want me to be more vacations from work. Hazan and Shaver’s
intimate than I feel comfortable being. I find it research demonstrated parallels between
difficult to allow myself to depend on other attachment types in infancy and adulthood. But
people. I find it difficult to trust people com- it did not establish whether there are longitudinal
pletely.” Adults with anxious relationships worried continuities from attachment in infancy to
constantly about being abandoned. They relationships in adulthood (Fraley et al., 2013;
agreed with the statements: “I find that other Zeifman & Hazan, 2016).
people are reluctant to get as close as I would Researchers in the Minnesota longitudinal
like. I often worry that someone I am close to study found that attachments to parents in
doesn’t really love me or won’t want to stay with infancy were linked to romantic relationships in
me. I want to merge completely with another adulthood. Young adults who experienced a
person and this sometimes scares people away.” secure relationship with their mother as assessed
Hazan and Shaver found that the percent- in the Strange Situation in infancy were more
ages of these three types in adult samples were likely to produce coherent discourse describing
similar to those found in studies of infants. Just their romantic relationship and to experience
over 50 percent of the adults endorsed the better relations with their romantic partner in
secure attachment type, just under 33 percent conflict and collaboration tasks (Roisman et al.,
were avoidant, and the rest were ambivalent. 2005). Similarly, in a longitudinal study in
Hazan and Shaver also found that these attach- Germany, researchers found significant links
ment types were related to the adults’ memories between attachment security to the mother
of their relationships with their parents in (assessed in infancy and at age 6 years) and
 Stability and Consequences of Attachment  159

more secure romantic relationships at age 22 early relationships (Berlin et al., 2008; Bretherton
(Grossmann et al., 2002, 2008). & Munholland, 2016). But if children start out with
There is no direct leap from mother’s lap to secure attachments to their parents—or if they
love and romance. It’s more complicated than work through their childhood issues in therapy
that. As we have noted, changes in family and “earn” relationship security—they have a
circumstances can affect children’s internal better chance of ending up happy in love
working models and disrupt the influence of (Roisman et al., 2002).

earning from Living Leaders: Michael E. Lamb

edition, Lamb put the father back into the family
as a major parenting partner. Lamb credits his
childhood experience in another culture where
infants interacted with dozens of people for his
goal to broaden the cast of characters that are
important in children’s lives to include fathers. In
Courtesy of Michael E. Lamb

fact, Lamb saw the father as only one of a

number of social influences on children’s devel-
opment, and he went on to study siblings, peers,
and nonparental childcare providers as well. He
also studied how social relationships vary across
cultures from Sweden and Israel to African
hunter-gatherers. His proudest accomplishment is
that his work has made a difference in children’s
Michael Lamb is a Professor of Psychology in the lives. It has been used by courts making deci-
Social Sciences at the University of Cambridge, sions about child custody and as a basis for
England. A native of Zambia, Lamb moved to the shaping child care policies. The American
United States after his undergraduate work in Psychological Association honored Lamb with a
South Africa. Although he aspired to become a Young Scientist Award early in his career and
leader of a free South Africa, the reality of later the Association for Psychological Science
apartheid forced him to rethink his plans and recognized him with an award for Lifetime
pursue a psychology career instead. He was Achievement. He offers this positive message to
particularly excited by John Bowlby’s integration students, “These are exciting times: We have
of psychoanalytic thought, ethological theory, many more investigative tools at our disposal
and control systems theory and was able to than ever before, and there are so many interest-
follow this interest in his graduate work with Mary ing questions still unanswered. Look carefully at
Ainsworth. The topic of his dissertation at Yale how we have tried to answer them in the past,
University—infant–mother and infant–father and note how we’ve often had to change the
attachment—set his career path and for many question subtly to make it more answerable. How
years Lamb was “the father guy” championing would you like to address the REAL questions?”
the father’s role as an attachment figure and a
forgotten contributor to child development. In an Further Reading
influential series of books, including The Role of Shwalb, D. W., Shwalb, B. J., & Lamb, M. E. (Eds.) (2013).
the Father in Child Development, now in its fifth Fathers in cultural context. New York: Routledge.
160  Chapter 4 Attachment

Seth Pollak Psychological Association’s Distinguished Early

Career Award and the Chancellor’s Distinguished
Teaching Award from the University of Wisconsin.
Pollak is a fellow of the American Association for
the Advancement of Science and the Associa-
tion for Psychological Science. Pollak hopes that
the next generation of scholars in the field will be
motivated not only by the excitement of discover-
ing what makes us human, but also the desire

Courtesy of Seth Pollak

to promote scientifically-informed policies and
programs that promote the well-being of children
globally. Scientific knowledge is crucial for ensur-
ing that more and more children worldwide not
only survive but also thrive.

Further Reading
Seth Pollak is the Letters and Science Distin-
Wismer Fries, A. B., & Pollak, S. D. (2016). The role of learn-
guished Professor of Psychology and also a Pro- ing in social development: Illustrations from neglected
fessor of Pediatrics, Anthropology, Neuroscience, children. Developmental Science, 20(2), 1–11.
and Public Affairs at the University of Wisconsin–
Madison. After earning dual PhDs in Brain and
L. Alan Sroufe
Cognitive Sciences and in Child Clinical Psychol-
ogy at the University of Rochester, where Pollak
worked with graduate advisors Dante Cicchetti
and Rafael Klorman, he completed an internship
in pediatric neuropsychology at the University of
Toronto, before beginning his academic career
at Wisconsin. Pollak’s research asks how the
brain is shaped and refined by children’s early
social experiences. This is a fundamental social

Courtesy of L. Alan Sroufe

developmental question that he has been study-
ing by focusing on children who have endured
social environments that are not expected for
our species. Pollak has studied children who
have been physically abused by their parents,
children who have been neglected, children
who have been raised in institutional rather than
family settings, children whose families are liv- Alan Sroufe is Professor Emeritus of Child Psy-
ing in extreme poverty, children with high levels chology at the Institute of Child Development,
of anxiety and depression, and children who University of Minnesota. He knew that he wanted
have encountered extremely high levels of stress to be a psychologist when he was in high school,
exposure early in their lives. Understanding the so he pursued (and received) a Ph.D. in clini-
ways in which these environments affect brain cal psychology from the University of Wisconsin.
and behavioral development holds promise for Although his relatives wondered why he was in
improving the health and well-being of children. school so long, his parents were supportive of his
Pollak has received well-deserved recognition for education, which clearly paid off.
his work, including the Boyd McCandless Award, While he was in graduate school, Sroufe
which recognizes young scientists who have became interested in early development as a
made distinguished contributions to develop- way to understand pathology, and, with the help
mental psychology, along with the American of his graduate students like Everett Waters, he
 Chapter Summary  161

found his way to Bowlby’s and Ainsworth’s work Sroufe has contributed ideas and data to
on attachment. From that time on, he has been attachment theory and has also drawn out
guided by three questions: Do early experiences practical applications from the theory. Sroufe
have special significance? How are their effects received the Distinguished Teacher Award from
carried forward? What accounts for continuity the University of Minnesota, the Distinguished
and change in development? To answer these Scientific Contribution to Child Development
questions, Sroufe joined his close colleague, Award from the Society for Research in Child
Byron Egeland, who launched the Minnesota Development, and an honorary doctorate from
Longitudinal Study of Risk and Adaptation in the the University of Leiden. His message for under-
mid-1970s. They assessed attachment patterns graduates is: “The questions that are of most
in infancy and then followed the course of interest to you, for example, how you became the
attachment and social development over the person you are, are scientific questions and can
next 30 years. Results of the study were pub- be addressed using the models in our field. They
lished in the book The Development of the don’t have simple answers (like ‘your genes made
Person. This book sums up Sroufe’s view that you who you are’) but they are answerable.”
development is a hierarchical construction, in
which early experience has a special place Further Reading
because it frames subsequent encounters with Sroufe, L. A. (2016). The place of attachment in develop-
the world, yet is reinterpreted in light of these ment. In J. Cassidy & P. Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of
attachment: Theory, research and clinical applications
encounters. (3rd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.

Chapter Summary
• During the second half of the first year, infants form attachments to the
important people in their lives.
Theories of Attachment
• According to the psychoanalytic view, the basis for the infant’s attachment to
the mother is oral gratification.
• According to the learning view, the mother becomes a valued attachment
object because she is associated with hunger reduction.
• According to the cognitive developmental view, before they develop an attach-
ment, infants must be able to differentiate between mother and a stranger
and must be aware that the mother continues to exist even when they cannot
see her.
• Bowlby’s ethological theory of attachment stresses the role of instinctual infant
responses that elicit the parent’s care and protection and focuses on the way
the parent acts as a secure base.
• The maternal bonding theory suggests that the attachment the mother feels to
her infant is affected by early contact between mother and newborn.
How Attachment Develops
• The first step in the development of attachment is learning to discriminate
between familiar and unfamiliar people. In the second step, babies develop
attachments to specific people. These attachments are revealed in the infants’
protests when attachment figures depart and their joyous greetings when they
are reunited.
162  Chapter 4 Attachment

• Most infants develop their first attachment to their mother and rely on her
for comfort. Later, infants develop attachments to their fathers and possibly to
their grandparents and siblings.
• As children mature, they develop new attachment relationships with peers
and romantic partners. Adolescent attachment relationships coexist with the
attachments already formed to parents and siblings.
The Nature and Quality of Attachment
• Early attachments are different in quality from one relationship to another and
from one child to the next.
• The quality of an infant’s attachment can be assessed using observations of
mother and infant at home. Ainsworth developed a laboratory assessment
called the Strange Situation in which the child’s interactions with the mother
are observed after the two have been briefly separated and reunited.
• Typically, 60 to 65 percent of infants are classified as securely attached to
their mothers in the Strange Situation: They seek contact with her after the
stress of her departure and are quickly comforted even if they were initially
quite upset.
• Securely attached infants are confident in their mother’s availability and respon-
siveness. They use the mother as a secure base, venturing away to explore the
unfamiliar environment and returning to her as a haven from time to time.
• Insecure–avoidant infants show little behavioral distress over the moth-
er’s absence in the Strange Situation and actively avoid her on her return.
Insecure–­ambivalent (resistant) children may become extremely upset when
the mother leaves them in the Strange Situation but are ambivalent to her
when she returns; they seek contact with her and then angrily push her away.
• Insecure–disorganized infants act disorganized and disoriented when they are
reunited with their mothers in the Strange Situation; they are unable to cope
with distress in a consistent and organized way even though their mother is
available.
• When parents are available, sensitive, and responsive to their infant’s needs
and the two interact in a synchronous way, the child is more likely to develop a
secure attachment. Parents are biologically prepared to form attachments just
as are infants. Contextual factors in the family and community are also related
to attachment.
• Infants reared in socially impoverished environments can have hormonal defi-
cits that alter their social responsiveness and lead to attachment problems.
Stability and Consequences of Attachment
• The quality of attachment is relatively stable across time but can change if the
environment improves or deteriorates.
• Early attachments shape a child’s later attitudes and behaviors. Children who
were securely attached as infants are more likely to be intellectually curious
and eager to explore, have good relationships with peers and others, and view
themselves positively.
• Children’s internal working models provide a mediating mechanism that
serves as a link between attachment and later outcomes.
• Parents’ internal working models of experience with their parents are likely to
influence their parenting behavior and their infant’s attachment. Mothers and
fathers classified as autonomous, dismissing, and preoccupied according to the
Adult Attachment Interview (AAI) are likely to have infants who are secure,
avoidant, and ambivalent, respectively.
 Key Terms  163

• Insecurely attached infants are more likely to become secure than the reverse.
• Support has been found for two explanations of attachment stability: The medi-
ating experiences view suggests that continuity across time may be due to the
stability of parents’ behavior and environmental conditions rather than the
nature of earlier attachment patterns. The dynamic interaction process view sug-
gests that children’s attachment histories modify how they perceive and react
to changes in their family environment.

Key Terms
attachment insecure–disorganized attachment secure base
imprinting internal working models separation distress or protest
insecure–­ambivalent attachment maternal bond Strange Situation
insecure–avoidant attachment secure attachment Procedure (SSP)

At t h e M ov i es

Many movies focus on attachment relationships between Molly’s 50th birthday, Jeff and his wife were able to locate
children and parents. Rabbit-Proof Fence (2001) is one that and reconnect with her. Jeff’s quest to reestablish contact
depicts how attachment bonds buffer children from adversity with his sister illustrates the strength of sibling bonds.
and are maintained even under difficult circumstances. As Another theme of movies involves the psychological
the result of an Australian government policy that required problems that result from growing up without a secure
aboriginal children to be “resocialized,” three children were attachment. In Good Will Hunting (1997), a young man who
separated from their families but escaped and endured an grew up in abusive foster homes and never formed such
arduous journey to be reunited with their parents. I Am Sam an attachment is helped by a psychologist to overcome his
(2001) is a movie illustrating a child’s unshaking attachment distrust of others. This film illustrates not only the early
to her father despite his mental problems. Sean Penn plays interpersonal origins of attachment-related problems but
a mentally challenged man raising his daughter by himself also the possibilities for recovery. Magnolia (1999) similarly
and eventually winning custody of her with help from a car- illustrates the ways in which a group of seemingly unrelated
ing network of friends and neighbors. As the movie vividly adults in Los Angeles are tied together by their often dark
demonstrates, the bond between Sam and his daughter is and difficult early attachment experiences. It also empha-
stronger than any disability. The strength of attachment sizes the way in which we recall our early experiences can
bonds between children and parents is also illustrated in the be distorted and misrepresented, but nonetheless that the
movie Losing Isaiah (1995). A young, crack-addicted mother stories we tell ourselves about our early experiences impact
(Halle Berry) tries to regain custody of her infant son 3 the way we live our adult lives, particularly in the context of
years after he was adopted by a middle-class white family. our close relationships. Finally, Martian Child (2008) traces
The attachment between Isaiah and his adopted mother the story of a boy who was abandoned and placed in foster
demonstrates how attachments form even in the absence care. He claims to be on a mission from Mars, stays in a large
of biological ties and poignantly illustrates the conflict bet- box all day, fears sunlight, and wears a belt of flashlight bat-
ween claims of biological and adoptive parents. Autumn’s teries so he won’t float away. He is befriended and ultimately
Eyes (2005) looks at a family in poverty from the perspective adopted by a widower, who with patience and understanding
of an observant 3-year-old girl who longs to reunite with her helps the boy develop an attachment bond and adjust to the
incarcerated mother. real world.
Attachment between siblings is the theme of Where’s If you are curious about the founders of attach-
Molly (2006). At age 6, Jeff lost his 3-year-old sister, Molly, ment theory, you can check out two documentary films.
when she was placed in an institution because of her Mary Ainsworth and the Growth of Love (2005) outlines the
mental disability. One day she was there as Jeff’s constant development of attachment in infancy and illustrates the
companion; the next day, she was gone forever. Just before twists and turns of Ainsworth’s life, including her meetings
164  Chapter 4 Attachment

with Bowlby and her design of the Strange Situation. on later development. Bowlby’s ethological theory of
The companion film John Bowlby: Attachment Theory across attachment is the emotional lynchpin in The Story of the
Generations (2010) focuses on the impact of attachment Weeping Camel (2003), a film in which a newborn camel
relationships on adult behavior and the transmission of chooses its birth mother as its primary target for food,
attachment patterns to the next generation. Bowlby’s chil- comfort, and protection, and through body movement,
dren and colleagues speak about his legacy, and a 20-year vocalizations, and eye contact, does everything possible to
study of a British boy documents the impact of attachment persuade its mother to accept it.
 CH AP TE R 5

Emotions
Thoughts about Feelings

At 6 months of age, Abby smiled widely when-

ever her mother smiled and reached down to
pick her up from her crib. At 9 months, Abby
frowned and turned away from her Aunt Susie,
whom she had not seen since she was 2 months
old. When she was 1 year old, Abby laughed
and giggled as she and her dad played peeka-
boo. When she was 2, Abby looked sad when her
Andy Cross/Getty Images Inc

mother cried. These changes in emotions and

emotional expressions and their consequences
for social development are the topics covered in
this chapter.

Children display a wide range of emotional expressions from the time they are
infants. They communicate their feelings, needs, and desires by means of these
expressions and thereby influence other people’s behavior. When the baby smiles,
the mother is almost sure to smile back; when the baby screams, a stranger will
stop approaching and back away. In this chapter, we describe why emotions are
important and present several theories that help explain emotional development.
We explore children’s earliest emotional expressions—smiling, laughing, frown-
ing, and crying—and examine other emotions such as pride, shame, guilt, and jeal-
ousy that develop later. We also discuss how infants and children learn to recognize
emotions in others, regulate their own emotions, and think about emotions. We
describe how parents, siblings, teachers, and peers socialize children’s expressions
and regulation of emotion. Finally we examine atypical emotional development,
with a focus on childhood depression.

165
166  Chapter 5 Emotions

What Are Emotions?

Emotions are complex: They involve a subjective reaction to something in the envi-
ronment, are generally accompanied by some form of physiological arousal, and
are often communicated to others by some expression or action. They are usually
experienced as either pleasant or unpleasant. Infants might react to the taste of
a new infant formula with disgust, experiencing it as unpleasant and responding
with an accelerated heart rate. Because they have not yet learned to hide their emo-
tions, they let their parents know in no uncertain terms of their displeasure: wrin-
kling up their faces, spitting up, perhaps even crying. As children progress through
childhood and adolescence, their expressions and awareness of emotions become
more refined and complex, influenced by a growing emotion lexicon and an ability
to regulate emotional arousal, manage emotional expressiveness, and process the
emotional expressions of others (Lewis, 2014; Saarni, 2007). It is useful to distin-
guish between early primary emotions and later secondary emotions. Primary emo-
tions include fear, joy, disgust, surprise, sadness, and interest; they emerge early in
life and do not require introspection or self-reflection. Secondary or self-conscious
emotions include pride, shame, guilt, jealousy, embarrassment, and empathy; they
emerge later and depend on a sense of self and an awareness of other people’s reac-
tions (Lewis, 2014; Saarni et al., 2006).

Why Are Emotions Important?

Emotions have a variety of functions in children’s lives. First, they are a way that chil-
dren let other people know how they feel: They are a window into children’s likes
and dislikes and communicate their general views of the world. Second, emotions
are linked to children’s social success. Being able to express and interpret emotions
is as important as being able to solve an intellectual problem. As Daniel Goleman’s
popular book Emotional Intelligence (1995) first illustrated, navigating successfully in
the world of emotions is a critical ingredient of social success. Third, emotions are
linked to children’s mental and physical health (Rieffe et al., 2008). Children who
are excessively sad and despondent are likely to develop problems such as poor
concentration and to withdraw from social interaction. In extreme cases, these
children’s self-esteem may deteriorate. Physical health suffers too when emotional
development goes awry. Children reared in environments in which positive emo-
tions are rarely experienced often have problems managing stress and anxiety. The
difficulty these children have modulating their reactions to stress is reflected in
heightened levels of cortisol (a biological marker of stress response), and this, in
turn, can lead to physical problems (Nelson et al., 2014; Reid et al., 2017). Children
can also suffer impaired physical health when they are exposed to emotional hos-
tility between their parents (Davies & Martin, 2014; Gottman et al., 1996). Clearly,
emotions play a number of critical roles in children’s development.

Perspectives on Emotional Development

What leads children to develop healthy emotions and emotional intelligence? Emo-
tional development is influenced by both nature and nurture, both biology and
environment. In this section, we examine three theoretical perspectives that are
useful in explaining aspects of children’s emotional development.
 Perspectives on Emotional Development  167

Biological Perspective
The biological perspective is useful for explaining the expression of basic emotions.
According to the structural view of emotions, first suggested by Charles Darwin
(1872), emotional expressions are innate and universal, rooted in human evolu-
tion, and based on anatomical structures. Research showing that facial expressions
of basic emotions such as happiness, sadness, surprise, fear, anger, and disgust are
the same in different cultures confirmed the claim that emotional expressions are
universal (Ekman, 1972). Research showing that blind and sighted people display
the same facial expressions of happiness when they win Olympic medals also sup-
ports this claim (Matsumoto & Willingham, 2009). Studies of emotional expres-
sions in infants supported the claim that emotional expressions are innate as well:
whether they were born prematurely or at the normal age of 40 weeks after concep-
tion, all infants began to smile at 46 weeks after conception, regardless of how long
they had been exposed to smiling faces (Dittrichova, 1969).
Research showing that each emotion is expressed by a distinct group of facial
muscles supported the claim that emotional expressions are based on anatomical
structures (Ekman, 2003). In addition, studies of the brain showed that the left
cerebral hemisphere controls the expression of the emotion of joy; the right hemi-
sphere controls the expression of fear (Alfano & Cimino, 2008; Davidson, 1994;
Fox, 1991). A biological basis for basic emotions was also evident in genetic stud-
ies showing that identical twins are more similar than fraternal twins in the age
at which they first smile, the amount they smile, the onset of their fear reactions
to strangers, and their general degree of emotional inhibition (Peleg et al., 2006;
Plutchik & ­Kellerman, 2013; Robinson et al., 1992; Rutter, 2006). Thus, across a
variety of research investigations, evidence consistently demonstrates that biology
contributes to the expression of emotions and that children’s basic emotions are
based on and constrained by biological features and processes including anatomy,
brain organization, and genes.

Learning Perspective
The learning perspective is useful for explaining individual differences in emotional
expression. The frequency with which children smile and laugh is related to their
caregivers’ behavior (Denham et al., 2007). When parents respond with enthusiasm
to their infant’s smiles, it encourages the infant to smile more; this has been verified
in studies showing that when adults respond to a baby’s smiles with positive stimula-
tion, the baby’s rate of smiling increases (Rovee-Collier, 1999; Rovee-Collier et al.,
2001). Learning experiences can also reinforce children’s fear responses (Denham
et al., 2007). Children can become classically conditioned to fear the doctor who
gives a painful shot during their office visit. They can also acquire fear through
operant conditioning, for example, when an adverse consequence, such as a pain-
ful fall, follows climbing up a high ladder. Children learn still other fears simply
by observing other people’s reactions (Bandura, 1986). For example, if they see
their mother jump and scream when she spies a spider, they may fear spiders. In all
of these cases, the frequency and circumstances of children’s expressions of posi-
tive and negative emotions have been modified by the environment. In addition,
­parents can help their children learn to manage their emotional expressions by
rewarding certain emotional displays, or they can interfere with their children’s
emotional development by being punitive and dismissing the children’s emotional
expressions (Nelson et al., 2009; Shaffer et al., 2012).
168  Chapter 5 Emotions

Functional Perspective
According to the functional (or functionalist) perspective (Saarni et al., 2006; S
­ hiota
et al., 2014; Uchiyama & Campos, 2014), the purpose of emotions is to help people
achieve their social and survival goals, such as making a new friend or staying out
of danger. These goals arouse emotions: joy and hope arise in the anticipation of
forming a new friendship; fear arises when circumstances are threatening. In both
instances, the emotions help the person reach the goal. The emotion of hope leads
children to initiate interaction with the would-be friend; the emotion of fear leads
them to flee the dangerous situation. Thus, one way emotions function is that they
impel children toward their goals.
A second way emotions function is that emotional signals provide feedback that
guides other people’s behavior. The way the potential friend reacts when the child
makes a social overture is a critical determinant of how the child feels and acts. If
the would-be friend responds positively, the child feels happy and pursues the inter-
action; if the would-be friend frowns, the child withdraws and perhaps tries to make
friends with someone else. Similarly, if the child smiles at a caregiver, that person is
more likely to come close and begin a conversation. In adulthood, too, emotional
expressions affect other people’s behavior. Researchers have found, for example,
that if men or women display positive emotions during a contract negotiation, they
are more successful in getting the contract signed and the deal closed (Kopelman
et al., 2006), and if restaurant servers express positive emotions by smiling, telling
a joke, giving a compliment, forecasting good weather, or drawing a smiley face on
the bill, they get larger tips (Guéguen, 2002; Lynn, 2004; Seiter, 2007).
A third way emotions function is that memories of past emotions shape how peo-
ple respond to new situations. Children who have been routinely rebuffed by poten-
tial friends become more wary; children who have been successful in their social
overtures become more confident. In both instances, emotional memories affect
children’s behavior and help them adapt to their environments. Thus, emotions
help children achieve their goals, establish and maintain social relationships, and
adapt to their environments (Saarni et al., 2006).
No single theoretical perspective explains all aspects of emotional development.
Each of these three perspectives—biological, learning, and functional—is useful for
answering specific questions about how emotional development progresses.

Development of Emotions
Most parents watching their baby smile, frown, laugh, and cry will agree that infants
are able to express a wide range of emotions at a very early age. In one study,
99 ­percent of mothers reported that their 1-month-old infant clearly displayed inter-
est; 95 percent observed joy; 85 percent, anger; 74 percent, surprise; 58 ­percent,
fear; and 34 percent, sadness (Johnson et al., 1982). These women based their judg-
ments not only on their babies’ facial expressions, vocalizations, and body move-
ments but also on the situations in which these behaviors occurred. For example,
a mother who watched her baby staring intently at the mobile above her crib was
likely to label the infant’s emotion “interest” and to label the emotion expressed by
gurgling and smiling when the mobile bounced up and down “joy.”
But relying on mothers’ judgments might not be the best way to find out about
infants’ emotions. Researchers distinguish among infants’ expressions of emotions
by means of detailed coding systems that document changes in facial expressions
 Development of Emotions  169

and movements. These systems assign finely differentiated scores to different parts
of the face and its underlying musculature (e.g., lips, eyelids, forehead) and to spe-
cific infant movement patterns. Researchers then use these scores to judge whether
an infant has displayed a particular emotion. One elaborate coding system for
infant emotional expressions is the Maximally Discriminative Facial Movement, or
Max (Izard et al., 1983); see Figure 5.1. This coding scheme has been used to code
expressions of emotions of interest, joy, surprise, sadness, anger, fear, and disgust
in infants from birth to 2 years and is used by many researchers studying infant
­emotions.
See Table 5.1 for a brief chronology of the milestones of emotional develop-
ment in a typical child. With this general overview of early emotional development
as a guide, in the next section we discuss the development of specific important
emotions. More recently, new methods for measuring emotions in real time using
computer automation techniques have been developed that allow researchers to
track changes in the intensity of emotions as they change across a period of interac-
tion (Messinger et al., 2014). This approach suggests that emotions such as joy vary
across a continuum of emotional intensity that allows us to explore variations within
an emotion category with greater accuracy.

Primary Emotions
Beginning at an early age, babies experience the primary emotions of joy, fear, dis-
tress, anger, surprise, sadness, interest, and disgust. These emotions are directly
related to the events that caused them. Fear is a direct response to a visible threat;
distress is a direct result of pain; and joy often results from interacting with a pri-
mary caregiver.

FIGURE 5.1 Maximally Discriminative Facial Movement

(A) (C) (Max) Coding System. To identify facial expressions of
emotion, observers code movement in three regions
of the face: brows; eyes, nose, and cheeks; mouth, lips,
and chin. This example shows an infant’s expression
of anger. In drawing A, brows are lowered and drawn
together (Max code 25). In drawing B, eyes are narrowed
or squinted (Max code 33). In drawing C, the mouth is
angular or squarish (Max code 54). In drawing D, we see
the full expression of anger (Max code 25/33/54).
Source: Izard, C. E., & Dougherty, L. M. (1982). Two comple-
mentary systems for measuring facial expressions in infants and
children. In C. E. Izard (Ed.), Measuring emotions in infants and
children (pp. 97–126). New York: Cambridge University Press.
(B) (D) With permission from Cambridge University Press.
170  Chapter 5 Emotions

TABLE 5.1

Emotional Expressions and Understanding in Infancy and Early Childhood

Age Emotional Expression and Understanding
<1 month Shows distress by crying
1 month Exhibits generalized distress; may be irritable by late afternoon
2 months Shows pleasure; mildly aroused by sight of a toy; makes a social smile
3 months Displays excitement and boredom; smiles broadly and often; cries when bored; may show wariness and
frustration
4 months Laughs, especially at certain sounds; cries less; gurgles with pleasure; shows beginnings of anger;
begins to recognize positive emotions in others, such as joy
5 months Is usually gleeful and pleased but sometimes frustrated; turns head from disliked food; smiles at own
image in mirror; may begin to show wariness of strangers
6 months Matches emotions to others, e.g., smiles and laughs when mother does; may show fear and anger
7 months Expresses fear and anger, defiance, affection, shyness
8 months Displays more individuality in emotional expression
9 months Shows negative emotions when restrained; frowns when annoyed; actively seeks others’ comfort when
tired; nighttime crying may reappear; most display real fear of strangers
10 months Exhibits intense positive and negative emotions; occasionally is irritable
11 months Has more variability in emotions; individual temperament is more evident
12 months Becomes distressed when others are distressed; cries when something is not to liking; may show early
signs of jealousy; laughs often at own cleverness; struts/preens when walking
15 months Shows more mood swings; is more caring to age mates; is annoyed by dirty hands; strongly prefers
certain clothing; may fret or cry often but usually briefly
18 months Can be restless and stubborn; may sometimes have tantrums; sometimes is shy; uses objects such as a
blanket or a favorite stuffed animal to soothe self; is jealous of siblings
21 months Makes some efforts to control negative emotions; can be finicky and exacting; makes more efforts to
control situations
2 years Can be contrary but also appropriately contrite; responds to others’ moods; can be very intense; may
be overwhelmed by changes; can be upset by dreams; begins to understand rules for emotional dis-
plays; shows nonverbal signs of guilt
2½ years Shows shame, embarrassment, and clearer expressions of guilt; can label emotional expressions
3 years Shows wide range of secondary emotions such as pride, shame, embarrassment, jealousy;
recognizes primary emotions such as happiness, sadness, fear, and anger on the basis of facial
expressions
4 years Shows increased understanding and use of rules for emotional displays
5 years Identifies external causes of emotions
6 years Begins to understand how two or more emotions can occur simultaneously
7 years Understands the influence of beliefs on emotions
9 years Understands that a person can have multiple, mixed, or even contradictory and ambivalent emotions

Note: This developmental timetable represents overall trends identified in research. Individual children vary in the ages at which they exhibit these
behaviors. Sources: LaFreniere, 2000, 2010; Kopp, 1994; Lewis, 2014; Pons et al., 2004; Saarni et al., 2006; Sroufe, 1996.
 Development of Emotions  171

Joy Joy is reflected in infants’ smiling and laughter. If you watch closely, you can
see smiles even in newborn infants. These reflex smiles are usually spontaneous
and appear to depend on the infant’s internal state (Fogel, 2014; Fogel et al., 2006).
Most caregivers interpret them as signs of pleasure, however, and this gives the car-
egivers pleasure and encourages them to cuddle and talk to the baby. In this sense,
these smiles have adaptive value for the infant by ensuring caregiver attention and
stimulation. Smiling helps keep caregivers nearby and thus becomes a means of
communication and an aid to survival (Saarni et al., 2006).
Between 3 and 8 weeks of age, infants begin to smile in response to external
stimuli including faces, voices, light touches, and gentle bouncing, as well as to
internal states (Sroufe, 1996). They are particularly interested in people, and a
high-pitched human voice or a combination of voice and face reliably elicits social
smiles in babies between 2 and 6 months.

Aiden grinned when I came into his room to pick him up after his nap, and he grinned
when he saw me first thing in the morning. He grinned when he saw his father, or his
rice cereal, or the brightly colored horses on the side of his bassinet. He grinned when
he was changed, and he grinned when he was sung to. We were so in love with those
grins of his that his father at one point said, “That kid’s got us trained like seals.”

By the time they are about 3 months old, babies smile more at familiar faces
than unfamiliar ones (Camras et al., 1991). This suggests that smiling has begun to
signal pleasure, not just emotional arousal. Additional research evidence shows that
3-month-olds smile more when their mothers reinforce their smiles with reciprocal
smiles and vocalizations than when equally responsive women who are strangers
reinforce their smiles (Wahler, 1967). These findings are consistent with the learn-
ing and functional views of emotional development and suggest that infants’ smil-
ing becomes more discriminating as babies mature. A baby’s pleasure at watching a
familiar face is revealed in other ways as well. For instance, researchers have found
that 10-month-old infants generally reserve a special kind of smile for their mothers,
rarely offering it to strangers (Fox & Davidson, 1988). These special smiles, called
Duchenne smiles, involve not just an upturned mouth but wrinkles around the eyes
as well, making the whole face seem to light up with pleasure.
Of course, not all babies smile equally often. Consistent with the learning per-
spective, how much infants smile depends on the social responsiveness of their envi-
ronment. This was demonstrated in an Israeli study showing that infants who were
reared in family environments where they received a lot of attention smiled more
than infants who were raised either in a communal living arrangement in a kibbutz
or in an institution where the level of social responsiveness was low (Gewirtz, 1967).
Differences in smiling are also related to the infant’s gender. A meta-analysis of gen-
der differences in emotional expressions confirmed that girls show more positive
emotions than boys although the differences are small (Chaplin & Aldao, 2013).
From the time they are born, girls smile more than boys (Korner, 1974), and this
difference continues into adulthood (LaFrance et al., 2003). It has been suggested,
consistent with the biological perspective, that this difference is genetic. However,
separating genetic factors from environmental influences is difficult because par-
ents expect and elicit more smiles from girls than from boys. The interplay of envi-
ronmental and biological factors is also demonstrated in research comparing the
frequency of smiling in different countries and ethnic groups. This research shows
that European American males and females differ more in their smiling rates than
172  Chapter 5 Emotions

African American males and females, consistent with the finding that African Amer-
ican parents treat their sons and daughters more alike than do European American
parents (LaFrance et al., 2003).
Infants express their joy in giggles and gales of laughter as well as by smiling, and
these expressions of emotion also change with age. Researchers have studied what
makes babies of different ages laugh by showing them various stimuli or engaging
them in different activities. Sroufe and his colleagues exposed 4- to 12-month-old
infants to auditory stimuli, such as lip-popping, whispering, or whinnying sounds;
tactile stimuli including bouncing the baby; visual stimuli including a human mask;
and social stimuli, such as playing peekaboo (Sroufe, 1996). Auditory stimuli elic-
ited few laughs at any age. Tactile stimuli elicited a substantial amount of laughter,
but only at 7 to 9 months. Visual and social stimuli elicited more laughter over-
all, and the likelihood of this laughter increased with age. When the researchers
studied 12- to 24-month-olds, they found that the babies particularly enjoyed activi-
ties in which they could participate, such as covering and uncovering the mother’s
face with a cloth or playing tug-of-war with a blanket. Other research showed that
laughing continued to increase in frequency and become more social as children
matured (LaFreniere, 2010; Saarni et al., 2006).

et You Thought That. . .: A Smile Is a Smile Is a Smile

Many people think that children’s

In R. V. Kail (Ed.), Advances in child development and

smiles are all the same. But even
infants use different smiles to

The interactive development of social smiling.

express different positive emo-

CA: Reproduced with permission of Elsevier

behavior (Vol. 35, pp. 327–366). San Diego,
tions. Some smiles are coy, others
gleeful, and others riotous

Messinger, D. S., & Fogel, A. (2007).

Simple smile Duchenne smile
(Messinger & Fogel, 2007). Figure 5.2 illustrates (eye constriction)
several different types of infant smiles.
More than a century ago a French physician,
Guillaume Duchenne (1862), discovered that not
all smiles are equal. He noted that smiles involv-
ing not just an upturned mouth but wrinkles
around the eyes as well are qualitatively different Play smile Duplay smile
from smiles with an upturned mouth but no eye (mouth opening) (eye constriction &
constriction. What we now call Duchenne smiles mouth opening)
are those with the crinkly eyes. In adults, these FIGURE 5.2 Examples of different types of infant smiles.
smiles are genuine expressions of joy, whereas ­ imple smiles are elicited by internal states and by social
S
smiles that do not involve the eyes are merely and nonsocial stimuli. Duchenne smiles reflect genuine
efforts to be polite or courteous. Martin Seligman, pleasure. Play smiles signal playful excitement and arousal.
author of Authentic Happiness (2002), labeled Duplay smiles signal a shared excited positive engagement
with a partner.
these inauthentic smiles Pan American smiles
because they are the expressions that Pan
American World Airways stewardesses plastered and store clerks, as well as flight attendants, often
on their faces in television ads and often used dispense polite but inauthentic smiles because
when they were providing in-flight service. Waiters genuine Duchenne smiles are difficult to fake.
 Development of Emotions  173

The facial muscles involved in the Duchenne a wide-open mouth. This play smile is associated
smile are difficult to voluntarily control. If you don’t with rapid breathing, vocalization, and laughter.
feel it, you can’t easily produce a “real” smile. It signals excitement and arousal (Bolzani-
Even babies display these different types of Dinehart et al., 2003, 2005) and is seen when
smiles (Messinger & Fogel, 2007). In one study, excitement has built up in later phases of tickle
10-month-olds produced Duchenne smiles when games and peekaboo (Fogel et al., 2006). A
their smiling mothers approached them but were relaxed open-mouth display in nonhuman
more likely to produce smiles without eye constric- primates is similar to this open-mouth smiling in
tion when they were approached by an impas- human infants and is thought to be evolutionar-
sive stranger (Fox & Davidson, 1988). In other ily linked to human laughter (Waller & Dunbar,
studies, even younger babies displayed genuine 2005). It is seen most often when two animals
smiles more when they were interacting with are playing together, and their play bouts tend
smiling caregivers than when they were alone. to last longer, indicating that the interaction is
These Duchenne smiles lasted longer than mutually enjoyable.
non-Duchenne smiles (Messinger et al., 1999, A fourth type of smile seen in infants is a
2001) and were more intense smiles (Mattson combination of a Duchenne smile and a play
et al., 2013). During Duchenne smiles, infants also smile. This Duplay smile involves both eye con-
babble more than when they are smiling without striction and mouth opening. It is seen in young
eye constriction, suggesting that they are experi- infants at the beginning of a face-to-face play
encing genuine pleasure and engagement with bout with a caregiver, especially a smiling mother
their partners (Hsu et al., 2001). Duchenne smiling (Adamson & Frick, 2003; Delgado et al., 2002;
is a way to express shared joy (Messinger & Fogel, Messinger et al., 2001). When the mother is
2007). Different parts of the brain are involved in unresponsive and displays a still face, the smile
the different types of smiles as well. EEG record- disappears (Acosta et al., 2004). Among 6- to
ings revealed that the 10-month-olds’ Duchenne 12-month-old infants, Duplay smiles occur during
smiles were associated with relatively more physical play with parents and at the climax of a
activation of the left frontal cerebral hemisphere. tickle game (Dickson et al., 1997). This type of
Similar patterns of brain activation are found in smile apparently signals a shared excited
adults (Murphy et al., 2003). positive engagement with a partner (Messinger
The frequency of Duchenne smiling varies & Fogel, 2007).
among individuals, and this difference is related As children grow older, they acquire even
to overall emotional well-being. In one study, more smiles. According to emotions expert Paul
researchers found that in college yearbook Ekman (Ekman, 2004), at least 17 types of
photographs about half of the students dis- smiles are exhibited in adulthood. Each smile
played Duchenne smiles and the other half serves a different social function, sends a
displayed Pan Am smiles (Harker & Keltner, 2001). different social message, involves different facial
When they were contacted at ages 27, 43, and muscles, and may even activate different parts
57, the Duchenne smilers were more likely to be of the brain. For example, smiles to reward
married and satisfied with their lives than the someone else are symmetrical and accompa-
merely polite yearbook smilers. Of course, this nied by eyebrow raising, affiliative smiles involve
does not mean that smiling leads to social lip pressing, and dominance smiles are asym-
success, but it does indicate that genuine smiling metrical and contain nose wrinkling and
and social well-being are related. upper-lip raising (Rychlowska et al., 2017). In
Babies show a third kind of smile when they short, a smile is not just a smile; smiling has
play, a combination of the Duchenne smile and many faces.
174  Chapter 5 Emotions

Andy Cross/Getty Images Inc

Poor Aiden! I took him to sit on Santa Claus’s lap
when he was 9 months old. I put him on Santa’s
red flannel knee, and when Aiden turned to look
at that long white beard and bushy eyebrows,
he froze in shock. When Santa went “Ho! Ho!
Ho!” Aiden’s shock turned to terror, and he let
out a piercing scream that must have carried
for blocks.

Fear A second primary emotion that appears in infancy is fear. Researchers have
identified two phases in the emergence of this emotion (Sroufe, 1996). In the first
phase, from 3 to 7 months of age, infants develop wariness, which they exhibit when
they encounter events they do not understand. At first, in this phase, infants are
not afraid when they are confronted by an unfamiliar person. In fact, they are quite
interested. Often, they look longer at the stranger than at a familiar person, and if
the mother is present when the stranger appears, they might look back and forth
between her face and the stranger’s, as if comparing them. At about 5 months of
age, interest starts to be replaced with a sober stare. By 6 months, infants react to
strangers with a sober expression and perhaps a little distress. This is clear evidence
of wariness. Over the next month or so, infants’ distress increases and by 7 to 9
months, the second phase of fear development begins: Infants show true fear. They
have an immediate negative reaction to an event or person they don’t recognize
and don’t like. When they see a stranger standing nearby and watching them, they
are likely to stare, whimper, turn away, and begin to cry. Just as we saw in the case of
positive emotions not all smiles are alike, so not all fear responses are equivalent.
In fact, when infants experience intense negative emotions such as cry faces (in
response to a vaccination) they show the same kinds of constrictions around the
eyes that we saw in the case of the Duchenne smiles. This suggests the existence of
an infant Duchenne distress expression that is displayed to communicate intense
negative emotions and perhaps signal an intense need for comfort (Mattson et al.,
2013). When infants are unhappy or even mildly distressed they may pout or whim-
per but without the accompanying eye constrictions that are present when extreme
distress is evident. Figure 5.3 shows a summary of the progression over the first year
of life from interest in strangers (compares faces) to stranger wariness (looks sober)
to stranger distress or fear of strangers (Emde et al., 1976).
Fear of strangers was once believed to be a developmental milestone that was
both inevitable and universal. Researchers now know it is neither (LaFreniere, 2010;
Saarni et al., 2006). Stranger distress does emerge in a majority of infants between
7 and 9 months in European American and some other cultures including Hopi
Indians (Dennis, 1940) and in Uganda (Ainsworth, 1963). However, in cultures that
emphasize shared caregiving among relatives, such as the Efe in Africa, babies show
little fear of strangers (Tronick et al., 1992). In contrast, in cultures in the Mid-
dle East where parents are wary of strangers because of their history of terrorism,
 Development of Emotions  175

14

12

10
Number of children

6
Compares faces
FIGURE 5.3 Onset of stranger distress. At 8 months of age,
4 Looks sober
half of the 14 children in this longitudinal study showed
Shows distress distress at the appearance of a stranger in a labora-
2 tory, and within a month or so, this distress reaction was
clearly dominant.
0 Source: Emde, R. N., Gaensbauer, T. J., & Harmon, R. J. (1976).
2 4 6 8 10 12
Emotional expression in infancy: A biobehavioral study. Psychological
Age (in months) Issues, 10 (37).

infants react to strangers with intense fear (Sagi et al., 1985). Moreover, even within
the European American culture, babies do not all react to strangers with the same
level of fear. For some infants, greeting and smiling continue to be the most com-
mon reactions (Rheingold & Eckerman, 1973), especially when a stranger is atten-
tive and inviting rather than nonresponsive (Devouche et al., 2012). Whether a baby
is fearful of a stranger depends on a host of variables including who the stranger is,
how he or she behaves, the setting in which the encounter occurs, and the child’s
experiences with strangers in the past (Table 5.2; Saarni et al., 2006).

“When Matt was 9 months old, he stayed with his grandparents one afternoon. They
couldn’t understand why he cried so hard when the teenage girl from next door stopped
by for a few minutes. He probably thought she was a babysitter, and he got scared that
his grandparents were going to leave him alone with her. After all, most of the teenage
girls he’d seen had been babysitters.”

TABLE 5.2

Factors Influencing Infants’ Fear of Strangers

Factor More Fear Less Fear
Setting Unfamiliar setting (e.g., lab) Familiar setting (e.g., home)
Parent’s availability Distant from parent Close to parent
Parent’s behavior Parent reacts to stranger in sober or Parent reacts to stranger in positive
negative way or encouraging way
Characteristics of stranger Adult size and features Child size and features
Behavior of stranger Passive, sober, threatening Active, smiling, friendly
Predictability of event Unpredictable Predictable
Infant’s control over event Low control High control
Cultural norms about strangers Cultural wariness of strangers Cultural acceptance of strangers
Infant’s experience with strangers Negative experiences (e.g., doctor Positive experiences (e.g., visitors
gives inoculation) bring gifts)
176  Chapter 5 Emotions

When babies meet strangers in their own homes, they are less afraid than when
they meet them in an unfamiliar setting, such as a research laboratory (Sroufe et al.,
1974). Similarly, if the infants are sitting on their mother’s or father’s lap—a famil-
iar and comforting context—when the stranger approaches, they rarely show fear
(Bohlin & Hagekull, 1993; Morgan & Ricciuti, 1969).
A baby’s reaction also depends on how the parent reacts to the stranger. When
infants see their mother interacting positively with the stranger, they are likely to
smile, approach the stranger, and offer toys (Feinman & Lewis, 1983). Conversely,
when the mother looks worried, the baby is apt to cry more and to smile less at the
stranger (Boccia & Campos, 1989; Mumme et al., 1996). Infants use the parent as a
social reference point when they find themselves in unfamiliar or uncertain situa-
tions. Infants rely on parents’ facial expressions and their voice, and a combination
is more effective than either voice or expressions alone. If only one mode of commu-
nication is available, voice is better than just emotional expressions (Vaish & Striana,
2004). They use the mother’s emotional cues to guide their own reactions (Saarni
et al., 2006). This social referencing undergoes clear changes as infants develop.
Younger infants are likely to act first and look later; older infants are more likely
to check with the parent before they act. Between 6 and 9 months of age, infants
look at the mother but do not study her face; by 14 months, they stare intently at
her face, apparently aware that this is the best source of emotional information
(Walden, 1991). Moreover, by the end of the first year, infants’ social referencing is
remarkably selective. Infants seem to take into account the expertise of the adult in
the given context (i.e., an expert in operating a toy rather than a more familiar but
less expert person) (Schmitow & Stenberg, 2013; Stenberg, 2012). They pay more
attention to someone who is more rather than less responsive (Striano et al., 2006).
“In an ambiguous situation it makes sense to actively turn toward another person
who is attentive to me, who knows the situation better than I do (and better than
other people who may also be present), and who is willing to communicate his or
her evaluation of the situation to me. By the end of the first year, infants already
take into account all of these factors when turning toward other people in novel and
ambiguous situations” (Hoehl, 2013, pp. 202–203).
Another contextual factor that affects infants’ responses to strangers is the
degree to which the situation allows the infant some control over the stranger’s
behavior (Mangelsdorf et al., 1991). Babies are less fearful if they can control the
stranger’s approach, for example, so that the stranger stops coming when the infant
frowns, frets, or turns away. The characteristics and behavior of the stranger matter,
too. Infants are less afraid of child strangers than adult strangers, because they are
smaller and have more childish features. They are less afraid of active, friendly stran-
gers who talk, gesture, smile, imitate the baby, and offer toys than of passive, silent,
sober strangers (Devouche et al., 2012; Mumme et al., 1996; Saarni et al., 2006).

Emma has always been shy with most people outside family. But one of our friends won
her over the first time they met. She said “hello” and smiled at Emma when she came
in, but she never pushed. When Emma went near her, she told her softly how pretty
she looked and offered her a toy. In half an hour Emma was hanging on the side of her
chair. When our friend saw that, she started making animals with her fingers and recit-
ing silly rhymes.

Other fears may be more universal across cultures and contexts. One common
fear in infancy is associated with being separated from mother or other familiar
caregiver, as we discussed in Chapter 4, “Attachment.” This fear, referred to as
 Development of Emotions  177

separation anxiety and reflected in separation distress or separation protest, tends

to peak at about 15 months in U.S. and Canadian babies and displays a similar
timetable in such diverse cultures as Guatemala and Botswana. Fear of heights is
common as well and begins at about 6 months. Experience walking and perhaps
falling contributes to the onset of this fear (Campos et al., 2000). This kind of fear
serves a clear evolutionary function by protecting infants from serious falls down
steep inclines.
All fear reactions change as children’s understanding increases (Lagattuta, 2007).
In general, fears become less about physical events and are more influenced by cog-
nitive interpretations (Sayfan & Lagattuta, 2009). With age, children become less
fearful of separations and strangers and more fearful of social evaluation, rejection,
and failure (see Table 5.3). Children also explain fears more in terms of cognitive
interpretations as they become older (Muris et al., 2008). Children at 3 to 5 years
old explain people’s fears in terms of their physical attributes (the baby is afraid
because she is tiny) or the physical characteristics of the feared stimulus (the boy is
afraid because the bee can sting him). Older children (and adults) explain fears in
terms of mental states (the baby is afraid because she is too young to realize what the
bee is) or in terms of the feared stimulus and the person simultaneously (the boy
is not afraid because he knows that if he stands still the bee won’t sting him). Thus,
with age, children learn that it is not a stimulus per se that induces fear but that fear
reactions are driven by the person’s thoughts, beliefs, and knowledge. Children’s
ability to understand the difference between real and imaginary events, which also
increases with age, helps them manage their fears: 7-year-olds are able to reduce
their fears better than 4-year-olds by reminding themselves that ghosts, witches, and
monsters are just imaginary (Sayfan & Lagattuta, 2009).

Anger Anger is another primary emotion. According to Carroll Izard, a pioneer

in the study of infant emotions, newborns’ first negative expressions are not anger,
per se, but startle (e.g., in response to a loud noise), disgust (e.g., in response
to a bitter taste), and distress (e.g., in response to pain). Not until they are 2 to

TABLE 5.3

Children’s Fears
Age Stimuli Causing Fear
0–1 year Loss of support; loud noises; unexpected, looming objects; strangers; heights
1–2 years Separation from parent; injury; strangers; baths (down the drain with the water)
2–3 years Separation from parent; animals, especially large dogs; insects; darkness
3–6 years Separation from parent; animals; darkness; strangers; bodily harm; imaginary beings such as monsters
and ghosts; nightmares
6–10 years Snakes; injury; darkness; being alone; burglars; new situations such as starting school
10–12 years Negative evaluations by peers; school failure; thunderstorms; ridicule and embarrassment; injury;
­burglars; death
Adolescence Peer rejection; school failure; breaking up; family issues such as divorce; war and other disasters;
the future

Sources: Gelfand & Drew, 2003; Goetz & Myers-Walls, 2006.

178  Chapter 5 Emotions

3 months old do infants reliably display facial expressions of anger (Izard 1994;
Izard et al., 1995). In one study, when researchers gently restrained their arms, few
1-month-old babies showed angry expressions, but half of the 4- to 7-month-olds
did (Stenberg & ­Campos, 1989). Not unlike adults, infants usually display anger
in response to particular external events (Saarni et al., 2006; Sroufe, 1996). For
example, at 6 months of age, babies responded to being inoculated by a physi-
cian with an expression of anger (Izard et al., 1987); at 7 months, they expressed
anger when researchers offered them a teething biscuit and then took it away just
before they could chomp down on it (Stenberg et al., 1983). It seems that babies
respond to emotional provocations in predictable ways, and anger is elicited by
pain and frustration (­Denham et al., 2007). Overall, anger reactivity increases with
age from 4 to 16 months (­Braungart-Rieker et al., 2010) but then begins to decline.
Declines in the expression of anger from 14 to 33 months are related to secure
attachment; whereas children who have insecure attachment relationships with
caregivers express higher levels of negative emotions, including anger (­Kochanska,
2001). By preschool, children express anger less frequently, but they still have rela-
tively poor control over their displays of anger and other emotions (Lemerise &
Harper, 2010). School age children continue to improve their anger regulation
skills, in part due to their goal of being accepted by their peers who tend to reject
or ignore children who are poor anger regulators (Lemerise & Dodge, 2008; Rubin
et al., 2015) (see Chapter 8, “Peers”). Finally, according to a meta-analysis, boys
express more anger than girls especially during preschool and middle childhood
(­Chaplin & Aldao, 2013).

Sadness Sadness, too, is a reaction to pain and frustration, but in infancy it occurs
less often than anger. Young infants become sad when parent–infant communica-
tion breaks down, for example, when a usually responsive caregiver stops respond-
ing to the baby’s social overtures (Tronick et al., 2005). In older infants, separation
from the mother or other familiar caregiver for some period of time can lead to
sadness. However, sadness is not simply a reaction to events such as these; it also is
a signal children can use to control their social partners. In one study, researchers
recorded 2-year-olds’ expressions of anger, fear, and sadness in threatening and frus-
trating situations: when approached by a stranger or having a toy taken away (Buss
& Kiel, 2004). They found that when the children were looking at their mother they
expressed sadness more frequently than fear or anger, an indication that they were
using this emotional display to elicit the mother’s support. Sadness is an effective
emotional signal for eliciting care and comfort from adults and therefore serves
an important evolutionary function by promoting infants’ survival. As with other
emotions, child sex is important; girls express sadness more than boys (Chaplin &
Aldao, 2013).

Secondary Emotions
In the second year of life, babies begin to experience more complex secondary
emotions including pride, shame, jealousy, guilt, and empathy. These social or self-
conscious emotions depend on children’s abilities to be aware of, talk about, and
think about themselves in relation to others (Lewis, 2014; Tracy et al., 2007). Such
emotions play important roles in social development: Pride and shame help define
children’s feelings about themselves and others; jealousy is expressed when chil-
dren assess other children who seem to have an advantage; guilt motivates children
to apologize; empathy leads children to perform prosocial acts.
 Development of Emotions  179

Pride and shame When children are pleased with their accomplishments, they
are likely to show pride; when they perceive that someone finds them wanting or
deficient, they are likely to express shame. Children express the latter by hanging
their head, lowering their eyes, covering their face, and hiding. To feel shame, they
must be able to assess their own behavior and judge whether it is acceptable in the
eyes of others. Here is an example (Denham, 1998, p. 42):

Erin wet the bathroom floor because she waited too long to get to the bathroom.
Her mother cried in exasperation, “Why did you wait so long? Now look what you’ve done.”
Erin shrank down, turned partly away and said softly, “I’m sorry, Mommy.”
She was experiencing shame.

Michael Lewis and his colleagues found that by the time children were 3 years
old, solving a problem that was not particularly difficult elicited joy, but succeeding
on a difficult task produced pride (Lewis, 1992; Lewis et al., 1992). Failing a difficult
task caused sadness, but failing an easy task led to shame. When researchers told
older children stories about people achieving something either by their own efforts
or by chance or luck, they found that 7-year-olds used the word proud to reflect good
outcomes regardless of whether the characters had succeeded through their own
efforts, but 10-year-olds realized that feeling proud could occur only when the good
outcomes were the result of a person’s own efforts (Thompson, 1989). Pride is most
evident when others are around. As Voltaire wisely noted,

“We are rarely proud when we are alone.”

Pride is most evident and can serve the function of signaling high status to oth-
ers (Martens et al., 2012) both in Western as well as other cultures such as Fiji
(Tracy et al., 2013). Finally, culture and gender matter. Japanese children express
more shame than either American or Korean children while American children
with the emphasis on individual achievement being highest in the expression of
pride (Furukawa et al., 2012). Girls tend to feel more prone to shame than boys
(Roos et al., 2014) but there are no gender differences in expressions of pride
(Else-Quest et al., 2012).

Jealousy Jealousy is a common emotion, which is experienced from early child-

hood, when a sibling gets more of a parent’s attention, to adolescence, when a
friend flirts with a teen’s new romantic partner. Indeed, jealousy can occur as early
as 1 year of age (Hart, 2015). Researchers have found that children express jealousy
when their mother directs attention away from them toward another child, a new-
born infant, or even a life-like doll (Case et al., 1988; Hart & Behrens, 2013). Even
Charles Darwin noted that “Jealousy was plainly exhibited when I fondled a small
baby doll” (Darwin, 1877, p. 289).

“Jason was really jealous when we adopted a baby brother because at least for a while
both my husband and I paid more attention to our newest member of the family than
Jason. He would say ‘Send baby away’ or ‘Ikky baby.’ Once we realized the problem and
started to spend more time with Jason, he stopped the jealous outbursts.”

Brenda Volling and her colleagues (2002) explored jealousy in pairs of siblings:
16-month-olds and their preschool brothers or sisters. When mothers or fathers
played with one child and encouraged the sibling to play alone, both younger and
older children expressed jealousy of the sibling who received the parent’s attention.
180  Chapter 5 Emotions

However, the way the children expressed their jealousy depended on their age. The
younger children showed their jealousy with expressions of distress, the older chil-
dren with anger and sadness. Children who reacted with more jealousy could not
focus on their play activities as well as children who were not so jealous. Jealous
children also had a poorer understanding of emotions. Jealousy between siblings
was less prevalent when their relationships with their parents were secure and trust-
ing and their parents had a happy marriage. These close and positive relationships
apparently served as a protective factor buffering children from sibling jealousy
(Hart, 2015). However, jealousy can occur at any age and in any type of intimate
relationship. While children may exhibit jealousy in the family context, adolescents
show jealousy in friendships (Parker et al., 2005; Rubin et al., 2015).

Guilt Children also begin to experience feelings of guilt when they are quite
young. Grazyna Kochanska and her colleagues tested children at 22, 33, 45, and 56
months of age (Kochanska et al., 2002). They presented each child with an object
that belonged to the experimenter, for example, a favorite stuffed animal that the
experimenter had kept from her childhood or a toy she had assembled herself, and
asked the child to be very careful with it. However, the objects had been rigged and
fell apart as soon as the children began to handle them. According to the research-
ers, at 22 months, children looked guilty when the mishap occurred—they frowned,
froze, or fretted. At 33 to 56 months, children expressed fewer overt negative emo-
tions, but guilt leaked out in subtler ways, such as squirming and hanging their
heads. (Right after this part of the experiment was over, the experimenter returned
with an identical object that she had “fixed” so that the children would not con-
tinue to feel guilty.) More development is necessary before children can talk about
guilt intelligently. In another study, researchers asked 6- and 9-year-old children
to describe situations in which they had felt guilty (Graham et al., 1984). Only the
9-year-olds understood the emotion and its relation to personal responsibility. The
6-year-olds described themselves as feeling guilty even when they had little control
over the outcome of a situation:

“I felt guilty when I accidentally hit my brother too hard and his nose bled.”

The 9-year-olds realized that to feel guilty, it was necessary to be responsible for
the outcome:

“I felt guilty when I didn’t turn in my homework because I was too lazy to do it.”

Other researchers have also found that younger children focus on simple outcomes
and older children understand that unless they themselves caused the outcome,
they do not need to feel guilty (Malti, 2016; Saarni et al., 2006). Finally, girls are
more prone to guilt than boys (Else-Quest et al., 2012; Roos et al., 2014).

Empathy Empathy is an emotional response to another person’s emotion, most

often distress. It involves sharing and understanding the other person’s feelings.
Often it is described as putting oneself into another’s (emotional) shoes. Evidence
of empathic responding can be seen in functional magnetic resonance imaging
(fMRI) of the brain. In one study, for example, researchers scanned the brains of
7- to 12-year-old children while they were watching short animated films depict-
ing people in painful and nonpainful situations (Decety, 2015; Decety et al., 2008).
When the children saw the people who were in pain, it activated the same neural
circuits as are activated when children experience pain firsthand.
 Development of Emotions  181

The earliest precursor of empathic responding to distress is newborns’ crying in

response to hearing other infants cry. Martin Hoffman (2000) termed this response
“rudimentary empathic responding.” Near the end of the first year, infants begin to
exhibit a second kind of response, which Hoffman labeled “egocentric empathic
distress.” By this age, infants have begun to develop a sense of themselves as separate
from others, and as a result they seek comfort for themselves in response to anoth-
er’s distress. They typically become agitated or cry in response to another child’s dis-
tress, but they make little effort to help the other child. In the second year, toddlers
begin to experience empathic concern for others; they try to comfort or console
them, not just themselves. At 13 or 14 months old, they often approach and comfort
another child in distress. This comforting, though, is quite general. When children
are about 18 months old, they not only approach a distressed person but offer spe-
cific kinds of help. For example, they might offer a toy to a child with a broken
toy or a Band-Aid to an adult with a cut finger. Hoffman labeled this level “quasi-
egocentric empathic distress” because these children are still unable to distinguish
between their own feelings and those of other people. Later in the second year,
children are capable of understanding that other people’s feelings and perspectives
are different from their own and are increasingly aware of the others’ feelings. In
this stage of “true empathic distress,” children make more appropriate responses
to another person’s distress rather than egocentric responses. Researchers have
found a developmental increase in young children’s empathic responding to their
mothers’ distress (van der Mark et al., 2002) and to their peers’ distress (Lamb &
Zakhireh, 1997). Consider this demonstration of empathy during an exchange
between a mother and her preschool child (Denham, 1998, p. 33):
Mother: I’m kind of feeling sad.
Child: Don’t feel sad. I’m your friend (patting the mother, wiping her tears away and
hugging her). Don’t cry.
As children develop, they become more aware of true distress and pseudo-distress.
Three-year-olds, showed reduced empathy toward a “crybaby” (i.e., an individual who
exaggerated their distress after being very mildly inconvenienced), than toward a
person who was distressed after being more seriously harmed (Hepach et al., 2013).
Younger children experience empathy only when the distressed person is present. As
they grow older, they also respond to stories of other people’s distress. By mid- to late
childhood, they can respond with empathy to another person’s general condition,
such as being handicapped or poor. Adolescents are able to respond to difficulties
experienced by groups of people, such as those who are politically oppressed, disease
ridden, or undernourished. Cognitive advances allow older children and adoles-
cents to understand the plight of less-fortunate groups and to respond with empathy
(Eisenberg et al., 2003, 2015). At the same time, just as we prefer our own ethnic/
racial group over other groups, empathy and neural activity was found in response
to witnessing a painful injection to be higher when a person of similar race is the
injection recipient, rather than someone of another race (Azevedo et al., 2013).
However, by prompting viewers to pay attention to the pain, rather than the race of
the participant these race-related differences in empathy can be reduced (Sheng &.
Han, 2012). So empathy responses can be modified and become more humane!

Individual Differences in Emotional Expressiveness

Clear individual differences exist in children’s emotional expressiveness beginning
in early infancy. Some babies smile more readily and laugh more heartily; others react
182  Chapter 5 Emotions

more fearfully to novel people and events or are more easily angered (LaFreniere,
2010). These differences in emotional reactions are related to the differences in
temperament that we discussed in Chapter 3, “Biological Foundations.” They are
reflected in one of Thomas and Chess’s (1986) temperament ­dimensions—mood—
and all three of Rothbart’s (2011) temperament dimensions—neg­ative affectivity
(which includes fear and sadness), effortful control (which includes pleasure from
low-intensity activities), and extraversion-surgency (which includes pleasure from
high-intensity experiences). They are also related to the behaviorally inhibited tem-
perament that characterizes children who are shy, fearful, anxious, and upset by
mildly stressful situations (Kagan & Snidman, 2004). These associations with tem-
perament suggest that biological factors play a central role in how intensely children
react to emotionally arousing situations and how well they regulate their reactions.
Individual differences in positive and negative emotionality are also related to
children’s overall adjustment. Children whose emotions are more negative experi-
ence a higher rate of developmental problems; children who are emotionally more
positive have higher self-esteem, more social competence, and better adjustment
(Buss, 2011; Eisenberg et al., 2015; Goldsmith et al., 2001; Halverson & Deal, 2001;
­Lengua, 2002; Rothbart, 2011).

Development of Emotional Understanding

To be emotionally competent, it is not enough to simply be able to express emo-
tions. It is important to understand emotions as well. Children must acquire knowl-
edge about emotions and be able to recognize them in themselves and in others.
They also need to learn the causes and consequences of emotions, the situations in
which it is appropriate to display certain ones, and how to modify them in them-
selves and others (Castro et al., 2016). Milestones in the development of emotional
knowledge are included in Table 5.1.

Recognizing Emotions in Others

In the first phase of emotional understanding, infants and children learn to recog-
nize the emotional expressions of others. It has been estimated that between the
ages of 3 and 6 months, babies are exposed to parents’ and other caregivers’ facial
expressions of emotion 32,000 times (Malatesta, 1982). During this peak period of
face-to-face interaction, parents’ facial expressions represent an effective way to com-
municate their feelings and wishes to infants who cannot yet understand language.
Learning to interpret the adults’ expressions is a formidable task for the babies, but
during these interactions, infants do learn to recognize some emotions. They rec-
ognize positive emotions more often and earlier than negative ones (Denham et al.,
2011; Hoeh, 2014; Izard et al., 1995). Even infants who are only a few days old look
longer at a happy face than at a fearful face (Farroni et al., 2007). By 3 months of
age, infants discriminate smiling faces from frowning and surprised faces (Barrera
& Maurer, 1981). Furthermore, 4- and 7-month-olds prefer to look at happy faces
over angry and neutral faces (Grossmann et al., 2007); however, some argue that the
early recognition of emotional expressions merely distinguishes between emotions
that are viewed as positive (feels good) and negative (feels bad) and only gradually
do children learn to recognize particular discrete emotions (Widen, 2013, 2016).
Consistent with the functionalist perspective, infants’ recognition of joy before anger
has functional value. Recognition of joy provides rewarding experiences for the infant.
 Development of Emotional Understanding  183

It strengthens the mother–infant bond and facilitates mutually rewarding experiences,

particularly if the baby’s recognition of joy leads to expression of joy. Anger recogni-
tion is not adaptive in the first half year of life. Threatening situations call for coping
responses that are beyond the capacity of the 6-month-old (La Barbera et al., 1976).
The joy–anger recognition sequence parallels the course of the infant’s own emotional
displays, in which smiling and laughter appear before frowning (LaFreniere, 2010).
And as they begin to crawl and walk, infants pay attention to fear expressions more
than positive emotions, in part, due to the negative emotional reactions from caregiv-
ers who are trying to keep their infants safe (Campos et al., 2000; Hoeh, 2014).
Consistent with the learning perspective, early experience affects children’s abili-
ties to recognize emotions. Most infants recognize their mother’s emotional expres-
sions earlier than they recognize those of their father or a stranger because they
have spent more time with her. Moreover, babies who spend more time interacting
with their mother are more successful at recognizing her expressions than babies
who spend less time with their mother (Montague & Walker-Andrews, 2002).
The quality of older children’s interactions with their parents also makes a dif-
ference in their ability to recognize emotions. Abused children who experience
high levels of threat and hostility are able to identify anger expressions better than
nonabused children (Cicchetti & Ng, 2014), but they are less capable of detecting
expressions of sadness (Pollak & Sinha, 2002). Abused children also interpret posi-
tive, negative, and equivocal events as equally plausible causes of sadness and anger,
presumably because of their inconsistent emotional experiences (Perlman, Kalish,
et al., 2008). Children who are neglected rather than abused also show deficits in
emotional understanding (Sullivan et al., 2008), as do children reared in group
institutions such as understaffed orphanages (Fries & Pollak, 2004; Nelson et al.,
2013). The environment clearly affects children’s ability to recognize emotions.
By the time they are 3 or 4 years old, children who have not been abused,
neglected, or institutionalized can recognize and correctly label other people’s
expressions of happiness, sadness, anger, and fear (Denham et al., 2011).

At her second birthday party, Abby noticed one of the guests laughing loudly. She asked
her, “Anne happy? Abby happy, too.”
As a 2-year-old Matt would read the facial expressions of the characters in his story-
books. If he didn’t recognize an expression, he asked about it. The people on cereal
boxes, syrup bottles, you name it, and Matt had to talk about whether “Him happy?” or
“Dem scared?” or “Her laughing?” Even now if the slightest frown crosses my face, he
asks anxiously “You mad, Mommy?”

Children from different cultures follow a similar developmental timetable for

recognizing basic emotions. For example, U.S. and Japanese preschool children are
able to verbally label emotions at about the same age (Bassett et al., 2008; Fujioka,
2008). Abilities to recognize emotions continue to improve as children grow up
(Widen & Russell, 2010). They also learn to discriminate among subtle facial expres-
sions. By age 9, children can quite reliably discriminate between Duchenne smiles
and non-Duchenne smiles, which they could not do at age 6 (Gosselin et al., 2002).
This discrimination ability continues to improve during middle childhood and ado-
lescence (Del Giudice & Colle, 2007), probably contributing to children’s increased
abilities to participate successfully in peer-group activities and to sustain social inter-
actions (Denham et al., 2011; Saarni et al., 2006). In the case of some emotions,
such as disgust, production which can occur early in infancy lags behind recogni-
tion. Only gradually do children “recognize” disgust specifically from the “disgust
face.” Improvement is gradual, with most children recognizing a disgust face only at
184  Chapter 5 Emotions

ultural Context: Expressing and Understanding

Emotions in Different Cultures
Studies of emotions in different express more positive emotions than Asian
cultures have revealed that the mothers (Camras et al., 2008). Moreover, parents
facial expressions used to convey talk about emotions in culturally scripted ways. To
basic emotions such as fear, encourage children’s emotional reserve and
anger, joy, sadness, and disgust are similar concern for others, Asian parents talk more
worldwide (Ekman, 1992; Elfenbein & Ambady, about other people’s emotions and less about
2002). Moreover, the course of development is the child’s emotions (Chan et al., 2009; Wang,
similar across cultures. As children grow, they 2001). Their focus is on teaching the child a
improve in understanding a range of emotions, lesson and instilling social norms rather than
read nonverbal expressions more accurately, discussing how the child feels (Wang &
appreciate that a person’s displayed emotion Fivush, 2005).
may be different from underlying feelings, and Variations in the ways parents socialize their
learn to regulate their own emotions (Camras & children’s emotions are not lost on the children.
Halberstadt, 2017; Tenenbaum et al., 2004). In Asian cultures, which focus on awareness of
However, culture does influence some aspects of others’ feelings, children are better at reading
emotional expression and development. other people’s facial expressions than are U.S.
Parents in different cultures vary in the extent children (Markham & Wang, 1996), but they are
to which they encourage their children’s emo- less knowledgeable about emotion terms,
tional expressions. In individualistic cultures, such presumably because they have discussed their
as that of the United States, emotional expres- own emotions less (Wang, 2003). Children in
sions are considered spontaneous manifesta- different cultures also differ in their displays of
tions of inner feelings, and so parents encourage emotions. Girls in the United States display more
them (Camras et al., 2014; Matsumoto & Juang, smiles and overall expressivity than Chinese girls,
2017; Matsumoto et al., 2008). In contrast, in just as their mothers and other adults do
collectivist societies, individual feelings are (Camras, Bakeman, et al., 2006; Lim, 2016). In
inseparable from feelings of the group, and Asian cultures in which parents teach careful
control or suppression of emotions is valued and control of emotions, endorse interpersonal
encouraged for the sake of group harmony harmony, and see anger as interfering with inner
(Masuda et al., 2008). Thus, it is not surprising that peace and social harmony, children restrain
U.S., Canadian, and European parents refer to their emotional expressions (Cole & Tan, 2015;
emotions and encourage emotional expressive- Lewis et al., 2010). In one study, researchers
ness more than Asian parents (including those compared the emotional reactions of elemen-
from China, Japan, India, and Nepal), who prefer tary school children in Asia and the United
emotional reserve, serenity, and contentment States (Cole et al., 2002). They interviewed the
above gleeful, angry, or depressed outpourings children about how they would react to a
(Cole et al., 2002; Doan & Wang, 2010; Novin difficult interpersonal situation, such as some-
et al., 2011; Wilson et al., 2012). Asian parents one spilling a drink on their homework or
react positively to children’s suppression of accusing them falsely of stealing, and asked
emotion (Zahn-Waxler et al., 1996). They try to how they would feel and whether they would
anticipate and prevent their children’s displays of want others to know their feelings. The U.S.
negative emotion, whereas U.S. parents respond children were more likely to feel angry and
to negative displays and help their children cope thought that expressing anger in a socially
with their feelings (Rothbaum et al., 2002). acceptable way was justified. The Asian children
Parents themselves also express different emo- said that they might feel shame but they would
tions in these different cultures: U.S. mothers not reveal shame or anger in response to the
 Development of Emotional Understanding  185

emotionally upsetting problem. Learning to program, looked forward to new beginnings. As

follow the emotional display rules of the one teacher reported:
culture is an important developmental accom-
plishment because competence in implement- “Zippy’s Friends trains children to express their
ing these rules is linked to good social feelings. Before, the children could only use
relationships with peers (Parke et al., 2006; basic words such as ‘happy’ and ‘unhappy.’
Valiente & Eisenberg, 2006). Mothers in different Now, they are able to tell you whether they
cultures teach their children culturally appropri- are ‘worried,’ ‘lonely,’ or ‘jealous.’ ”
ate forms of display rules. For example, in a gift
giving situation, German (Berlin) mothers Parents observed differences at home, too:
focused on maximizing the children’s positive
affect and acknowledging the gift, whereas “My 5-year-old son used to have an explo-
Indian (Delhi) mothers prompted toddlers to sive temper. Now, when he gets angry, he
acknowledge the giver more often (Kartner takes a deep breath and meditates on
et al., 2016). happy thoughts.”
Kindergarten and early primary teachers in
several Chinese cities implemented a program in Evaluation of the program have been carried
their schools to increase children’s knowledge of out in Denmark, Lithuania, Ireland, Norway, the
emotions and emotional expressions (Partnership Netherlands, and the Czech Republic, and have
for Children News, 2006, 2008). In the 6-month shown significant improvements in coping, social
program, children listened to stories about skills and emotional literacy for the children
Zippy—a stick insect—and his friends, confronted taking part in the program, when compared to
and solved problems together, coped with the children in the control groups (Partnership for
death of the fragile insect, and, at the end of the Children, 2017).

around 9 years of age and with subsequent improvement continuing gradually until
the late teens or early adulthood. Up to 8 years old, a majority of children studied
believe that the standard disgust face indicates anger (Widen & Russell, 2013).

Beyond Recognition: Knowledge of and

Understanding About Emotions
As they grow, children go beyond merely recognizing emotions to thinking more
deeply about them. Emotion knowledge consists of knowledge regarding others’
mental states, including the ability to differentiate emotional states across and within
situations and to use beliefs and desires to attribute emotions during common
emotion-eliciting situations. Emotional knowledge also refers to the management
of emotions, including the ability to differentiate and select appropriate strategies
for a given emotion-eliciting situation (Castro et al., 2016). For example, they think
about the emotions they would feel if they went to a birthday party, if a favorite pet
died, or if they heard a loud, unexpected bang. They think about whether people
can feel more than one emotion at the same time.

Matching emotions to situations: emotional scripts As they mature, children

develop a more complete understanding of the meanings of emotion terms and
the situations that evoke different types of feelings. This understanding is based on
a collection of emotional scripts that enable children to identify and predict emo-
tional reactions to specific events (Camras & Halberstadt, 2017; Saarni et al., 2006).
186  Chapter 5 Emotions

Children begin to create these emotional scripts at a young age. In one early study, a
researcher told 3- and 4-year-old children simple stories about events such as getting
lost in the woods, having a fight, or going to a party and then asked the children
to tell her the emotions they thought the characters in the stories would be likely
to feel (Borke, 1971). The children easily identified situations that would lead to
happiness, and they were reasonably good at picking out stories in which children
would feel sadness or anger. Later research showed that 3- and 4-year-old children
could also describe situations that evoked the emotions of excitement, surprise, and
fear (Cole & Tan, 2007, 2015; Levine, 1995). Clearly, young children know which
emotions go with which situations. As children grow older their understanding of
the external causes of emotion improves (Weimer et al., 2012). With further devel-
opment, they acquire more complex emotional scripts. By age 5, they generally
understand situations that lead to emotions with recognizable facial displays (e.g.,
anger displayed in frowning) or that lead to a particular kind of behavior (e.g., sad-
ness displayed in crying or moping). By age 7, they can describe situations that elicit
emotions with no obvious facial or behavioral expressions, such as pride, jealousy,
worry, and guilt. By age 10, children can describe situations that elicit relief or disap-
pointment (Harris et al., 1987). In this middle childhood period, they begin to show
an advanced knowledge of emotions that are embedded in unique relationships.
For example, to understand that one’s behaviors may disappoint another person
(such as in the case of stealing a cookie prior to eating dinner, despite parental
rules), a child must predict how the other person will feel and react by differen-
tiating his/her emotions from the emotions of the other person as well as using
knowledge about the situation to attribute emotion. Both of these processes are
interpersonally relevant; for example, a child must care about the parent’s apprais-
als in order to correctly differentiate and attribute emotion in the stolen cookie
context (Castro et al., 2016).
This developmental sequence has been observed in a number of countries
including Great Britain, the United States, the Netherlands, and Nepal (Harris,
1989, 1995). But there are differences in specific emotional scripts in these different
countries. For example, in the United States, children typically react to a parent’s
request to stop playing and go to bed with anger because it interrupts their play,
but children in Nepal are happy because they know they will be sleeping with their
parents, not all alone (Cole & Tamang, 1998).

Multiple emotions, Multiple causes Another aspect of emotional understand-

ing is the awareness that a person can have more than one feeling at a time and can
even experience conflicting feelings. Although infants show signs of experiencing
conflicting feelings, such as being fascinated by a toy robot but wary or even fright-
ened at the same time, the capacity to understand and describe mixed emotions
develops slowly. As one young child responded when asked if a person could feel
mixed emotions (Harter & Buddin, 1987, p. 398):

“You’d have to be two different people to have two feelings at the same time.”

In a study of children between the ages of 4 and 12 years, Susan Harter asked chil-
dren to describe situations that would make them feel two same-valence emotions,
such as happy and excited, or two opposite-valence emotions, such as happy and
sad. Most 6- and 7-year-olds could describe situations that would elicit two emo-
tions of the same valence, but only older children were able to describe situations
that would make them feel two opposite-valence mixed emotions. Not until they
were 10 to 12 years old were children able to conceive of opposite feelings existing
 Development of Emotional Understanding  187

TABLE 5.4

Children’s Understanding of Multiple and Conflicting Emotions

Approximate Age Children’s Understanding
4 to 6 years Conceive of only one emotion at a time: “You can’t have two feelings at the same time.”
6 to 8 years Conceive of two emotions of the same type occurring simultaneously: “I was both happy and
proud that I hit a home run.” “I was upset and I was mad when my sister messed up my things.”
8 to 9 years Conceive of two distinct emotions in response to different situations at the same time: “I was
bored because there was nothing to do and mad because my mom punished me.”
10 years Conceive of two opposing feelings when the events are different or there are different aspects of
the same situation: “I was sitting in school worrying about the next soccer game but happy
that I got an A in math.” “I was mad at my brother for hitting me but glad my dad let me hit
him back.”
11 to 12 years Conceive of the same event causing opposing feelings: “I was happy that I got a present but
­disappointed that it wasn’t what I wanted.”

Source: Harter & Buddin, 1987.

simultaneously. Table 5.4 summarizes the developmental progression in children’s

ability to understand multiple and conflicting feelings (Harter & Buddin, 1987).
In another study of children’s ability to understand mixed emotions, researchers
showed 5- to 12-year-olds an excerpt from the animated film The Little Mermaid, cul-
minating with King Triton and daughter Ariel’s bittersweet separation and farewell
(Larsen et al., 2007). When the children were interviewed about what they had seen,
the older ones (8 years or older) were more likely than the younger ones to report
that King Triton experienced mixed emotions in the emotionally complex situation—
and that they too had experienced mixed emotions as they watched the film clip.
In a study of children 3 to 11 years of age, researchers identified three periods
in children’s thinking about emotions (Pons et al., 2004). In the first period chil-
dren began to understand important external aspects of emotions. In this period, the
majority of 3-year-olds were able to recognize primary emotions such as happiness,
sadness, fear, and anger on the basis of external (facial) expressions, and the majority
of 5-year-olds were able to identify external causes of emotions. Children of this age
could anticipate the sadness a child feels at the loss of a favorite toy or the happiness
when receiving a gift, and they understood that two characters in the same situation
could feel different emotions because they had different desires. In the second period
children began to understand the psychological nature of emotions. From age 7 on, the
majority of children understood that emotional expressions are produced by inner
states, not solely by situations, that beliefs determine a person’s emotional reaction to
a situation, and that a discrepancy can exist between the outward expression of emo-
tion and the actual emotion the person feels. In the third period in the development
of thinking about emotions children understood that a person can reflect on a given
situation from various perspectives and therefore experience different feelings, either
concurrently or successively. From age 9 years on, the majority of children understood
that a character could have multiple, mixed, and even contradictory and ambivalent
emotions. These three periods were hierarchically organized, with earlier understand-
ing being a necessary condition for the emergence of later understanding.
These researchers also constructed the Test of Emotion Comprehension based on
their research. It consisted of nine items, including recognizing facial expressions of
emotion, understanding external causes of emotion, understanding discrepancies
188  Chapter 5 Emotions

between felt and expressed emotion, and understanding mixed emotions. Research-
ers found that children improve on this test with age (Aldrich et al., 2011; Kårstad
et al., 2015) and that among children of the same age some children perform better
than others (Pons & Harris, 2005). Children who score higher on emotion compre-
hension are also more popular (Harris, 2008), more prosocial (Belacchi & Farina,
2010; Ensor et al., 2011), more empathic (Belacchi & Farina, 2012), and more socially
competent (Castro et al., 2016; Trentacosta & Fine, 2010). Finally, recent interven-
tions to improve children’s emotion comprehension have successfully increased chil-
dren’s scores on all aspects of emotion understanding (Sprung et al., 2015).

Emotion Regulation
Another important aspect of emotional development is emotion regulation (Cole
et al., 2004; Eisenberg et al., 2017; Gross, 2015; Thompson, 2011). As anyone who
has sat next to a child on a long airplane flight would surely agree, it is essential that
children learn to manage their emotions. Children need to monitor and modify
their emotional reactions and reduce the intensity and duration of their emotional
arousal and negative outbursts (Thompson, 2011). One reason this is important is
that being able to regulate emotions makes children feel better. A second reason
is that emotion regulation increases the likelihood that other people (including
the ones sitting next to them on the airplane) will respond to the children posi-
tively. Changes in abilities to regulate emotion are associated with maturation of the
brain’s prefrontal cortex (Thompson, 2011).
The origins of emotional regulation appear even before birth, when fetuses
sooth themselves by putting their thumbs in their mouths. Young infants use very
simple tactics for regulating their emotions; for example, when they confront a
stranger, they fuss or look away. As they grow older, they learn to turn away, cover
their face, soothe themselves, or distract themselves with play when they encounter
something frightening (Bridges & Grolnick, 1995; Geangu et al., 2011; Mangelsdorf
et al., 1995).
Preschoolers use emotion-regulation tactics that include self-distraction, orien-
tation of attention toward or away from a stimulus, and approach or retreat from
a situation (Denham et al., 2011). They begin to see connections between their
regulation efforts and changes in their feelings, and they become more flexible in
choosing contextually optimal means of coping. Behavioral disorganization result-
ing from strong emotion decreases dramatically in this age period. By the end of
preschool, children can control their reactions to frustration by pouting and com-
plaining rather than crying and screaming or throwing themselves or their toys on
the floor. They have also learned emotional display rules that dictate what emo-
tions to show under what circumstances, and they begin to be able to separate their
feelings from their expression of emotions. Children acquire knowledge about
display rules before they are proficient regulators of their own displays, however
(Saarni, 2007). In their earliest attempts to follow display rules, young preschoolers
typically simply exaggerate or minimize their emotional displays. Not until they are
8 to 10 years old have children learned display rules so they can smile even when
they feel unhappy, feign distress that is not really felt, and mask amusement when
they know they shouldn’t laugh (Garner & Power, 1996; Saarni et al., 2006; von
Salisch, 2008).
Over the elementary school years, children become more aware of the range
of possible regulatory strategies and their efficacy in different situations, and they
 Socialization of Emotion  189

increasingly use cognitive and behavioral coping strategies to regulate their emo-
tions (Denham et al., 2011; von Salisch, 2008). For example, when they are away
at camp, they control the misery of homesickness by seeking out someone to talk
to and help them feel better rather than crying, withdrawing, or suffering a head-
ache or stomachache (Thurber & Weisz, 1997). To some extent, culture shapes
the form of emotional regulation that children use. Western societies socialize
children to use active problem-focused regulatory strategies; Asian societies pro-
mote endurance as a way to regulate negative emotions, save face, and maintain
social harmony (Chin, 2007; Lee & Yang, 1998).
Although all children learn to regulate their emotions, some children do it better
than others. Those who do it best start with biological advantages. As we indicated in
our discussion of temperament in Chapter 3, infants and children vary in both their
emotional reactivity and their capacity to modify the intensity and duration of their
emotions by engaging in such strategies as averting their gaze, sucking their thumb,
and seeking proximity to a caregiver (Rothbart, 2011). Children who are both tem-
peramentally reactive and poor at controlling their attention (unable to focus on a
comforting object or thought) are poor emotion regulators (Denham et al., 2011;
Eisenberg et al., 2017). They are stuck in a double bind that taxes their ability to
disengage from an intense emotional experience. This double bind is reflected in
biological measures: Children who exhibit poor emotion regulation in response
to a frustrating task (waiting for a prize) have higher levels of negative affectivity
and lower cardiac vagal tone, a physiological index of heart rate that measures the
­ability to recover from emotional challenge (Santucci et al., 2008). Children’s social-
cognitive understanding is important for regulation as well. Children who under-
stand others’ emotions and emotion display rules are better at emotion regulation
than their less knowledgeable peers (Hudson & Jacque, 2014).
Emotion-regulation abilities are important predictors of children’s later adjust-
ment. Emotion regulation abilities at age 5 are related to social skills at age 7 and
both friendship quality and peer acceptance at age 10 (Blair et al., 2015). Children
who are better at regulating their anger in preschool by shifting attention away from
the frustrating situation are less aggressive and disruptive when they enter school
(Gilliom et al., 2002). Children who are more knowledgeable about display rules
and better at using them are also more socially competent and better liked by their
peers (Parke et al., 2006; Perry-Parrish & Zeman, 2011). Controlling emotional
arousal and displays not only is good for children’s well-being but also is good for
children’s interactions with the world. Being able to regulate their emotional dis-
plays helps children get the attention and approval they seek (Tronick et al., 2005).
Adults respond more positively when children smile or look sad rather than crying
or throwing things (Howes, 2000).

Socialization of Emotion
Children can learn about emotions by watching how people respond to them emo-
tionally and by observing how people respond to each other. Watching Mom and Dad
argue, siblings squabble, and Grandma smile at a sister are all ways of learning about
the world of emotions. Denham and colleagues (Denham, 1998; ­Denham et al.,
2015) have identified three ways people socialize children’s emotions (Figure 5.4).
First, they provide models of emotional expressiveness. Second, they react to chil-
dren’s emotions in ways that encourage or discourage them. Third, they act as emo-
tional coaches by talking about their own and other people’s emotional responses.
190  Chapter 5 Emotions

nto Adulthood: Controlling Negative Emotions

in Adulthood
images; for young adults, the opposite is true
(Leclerc & Kensinger, 2008).

Fancy/Veer/Corbis/Getty Images Plus

According to socioemotional selectivity theory,
as they age, people increasingly perceive time as
finite, and so they place more effort on regulating
their emotions to enhance positive experiences
and diminish negative ones (Charles &
Carstensen, 2014). They do this by redirecting their
attention and biasing their memory to more
positive aspects of their environment, and also by
disengaging from negative social events. For
example, they get less angry in response to
Childhood is not the only time people can interpersonal conflicts than younger adults do
improve their strategies for dealing with negative (Charles & Carstensen, 2008) although not all
emotions. They can also do it in adulthood. One negative emotions show age related differences.
effective coping strategy that older adults use is Unlike anger, sadness is similar across older and
to direct their attention to positive thoughts younger samples (Kunzmann & Thomas, 2014).
(Charles et al., 2003; Mather, 2012). Younger They are more likely to avoid interpersonal conflict
adults often have a negativity bias, where they than do younger individuals (Luong et al., 2011).
attend to and remember more negative events They also are more selective about their social
than positive events, but this bias fades with age partners and they are more likely to restrict their
(Carstensen & DeLiema, 2018). For example, social network to loved ones (Carstensen et al.,
when looking at pictures of faces portraying 1997). Older folk tend to be more reciprocal and
sadness, anger, fear, and happiness, college more forgiving in their social interactions than their
students stared longest at fearful faces, but older younger counterparts (Luong et al., 2011). Older
adults spent the most time looking at happy adults also have more positive memories than
faces (Isaacowitz et al., 2006). They had appar- younger adults, because they distort them to be
ently taken to heart the lyricists’ suggestions to more emotionally gratifying (Mather & Carstensen,
“accentuate the positive, eliminate the negative, 2005). They remember positive faces better than
latch on to the affirmative,” and “always look on negative faces, whereas younger adults do not
the bright side of life.” The older couple in the exhibit this bias (Mather & Carstensen, 2003). Even
photo are clearly enjoying looking through their in their initial attention to stimuli, older adults focus
photo album and remembering good times. This on the positive, and when looking at positive
positivity effect with aging influence attention to images activates their ventromedial prefrontal
memory, such that older adults distort their cortex—the region of the brain associated with
memories to be more emotionally gratifying emotion regulation—more than looking at
(Mather & Carstensen, 2005). They remember negative images; for young adults, the opposite is
positive faces better than negative faces true (Leclerc & Kensinger, 2008).
whereas younger adults do not exhibit this bias Older adults report that they are better at
(Mather & Carstensen, 2003). Even in their initial regulating their emotions than they were when
attention to stimuli, older adults focus on the they were younger (Charles & Carstensen,
positive, and when they look at positive images, it 2014), that they experience fewer negative
activates their ventromedial prefrontal cortex— emotions (Gross et al., 1997; Lawton et al., 1993),
the region of the brain associated with emotion and that their negative emotional episodes are
regulation—more than looking at negative less enduring (Charles & Piazza, 2009).
 Socialization of Emotion  191

According to the theoretical model of Strength more so than do younger adults (Kliegel et al.,
And Vulnerability Integration (SAVI), learning 2007; Scott et al., 2017). It is helpful that more
how to navigate their lives to reduce negative often older adults avoid situations that lead to
experiences is a strengthens with age (Charles negative emotions, however, because if they
& Luong, 2013). To avoid negative arousal, for ruminate on rather than ignore past negative
example, older adults say that they regulate events, they have a harder time recovering from
their anger by redirecting their thoughts and stressors (as indexed by blood pressure) than
behaviors away from the situation and attempt- younger adults (Robinette & Charles, 2016).
ing not to feel or show an emotional reaction. Older adults have generally better emotional
They do not confront the emotion, ruminate well-being than younger adults, an improved
about it, or express anger to the person seen as management of their negative emotions is an
the cause of the problem (Blanchard-Fields & important reason. Finally, being positive has
Coats, 2008; Coats & Blanchard-Fields, 2008). important implications: emotional experience
When older adults cannot avoid negative predicted mortality. Individuals who experience
events, however, they are more vulnerable to the relatively more positive than negative emotions
physical effects of strong emotional reactions. At in everyday life were more likely to have sur-
the time when they do encounter negative vived over a 13-year period (Carstensen
situations, older adults react as strongly if not et al., 2011).

Socialization
of emotion:
Modeling
Understanding of
emotions
FIGURE 5.4 A model of emotional
Socialization Social competence socialization. Socialization practices lead
of emotion: and to changes in understanding and expres-
Reactions emotion regulation
sion of emotions, which, in turn, lead to
Expression of changes in social competence and the
emotions ability to regulate emotions.
Socialization Source: Emotional Development in Young Chil-
of emotion: dren (Paper) by Susanne A. Denham. Copyright
Coaching 1998 by Guilford Publications, Inc. Reproduced
with permission of Guilford Publications, Inc.
in the format textbook via Copyright Clear-
ance Center.

Socialization by Parents
Children learn a great deal about expressing emotions by watching their parents.
Some parents are subdued and restrained in their emotional reactions; others are
demonstrative and intense. Many studies have shown that children’s emotions
reflect those of their parents; they are similar in levels of emotional expressiveness
and the types of emotions they display. Children who grow up with parents who
exude positive emotions are more likely to express positive emotions; children
whose parents respond sensitively to distress are more empathic; children with par-
ents who often display hostility and conflict show more negative emotions (Ayoub
et al., 2006; ­Denham et al., 2007; Halberstadt et al., 2002; Newland & Crnic, 2011).
192  Chapter 5 Emotions

And fathers as well as mothers play an important socializing role. When fathers are
clear in their expression of emotions, their grade school children are more likely
to be better at recognizing emotional expressions (Dunsmore et al., 2009). These
links between parents’ and children’s emotions do not end in childhood; recipro-
cal patterns of emotional exchanges are observed between adolescents and their
parents as well (Kim et al., 2001).
Children also learn emotion regulation from their parents. If mothers refocus
preschool children’s attention to shift it away from a distressing stimulus—for exam-
ple, asking the child to look at the stickers on a bag that a prize came in, rather
than talking about the disappointing prize—or reframe it so that it is no longer
negative—for example, suggesting that baby socks can be given to a baby the family
knows or can be used as hand puppets—the strategy lowers the intensity of children’s
expressed anger and sadness (Morris et al., 2011). If parents are positive when they
interact with preschool children and provide comfort when the children are angry
or distressed, the children develop more constructive reactions to anger, regulate
their emotions better, and know how emotions should be displayed (Eisenberg &
Fabes, 1994). When parents scold or punish their children for expressing emotions,
especially negative ones, children have difficulty regulating their emotions (Parke
et al., 2006; Valiente & Eisenberg, 2006). Abused children are especially poor at
emotional regulation (Cicchetti & Toth, 2015; Pollak & Sinha, 2002; Shipman et al.,
2007). Parents who belittle or invalidate their children’s emotions—“There’s no
reason for you to be sad”—or show little interest in how the child is feeling—“Don’t
worry about it; go watch TV”—are not teaching children how to regulate their emo-
tions either. Adolescents who experience this type of emotional invalidation show
higher levels of emotional dysregulation and more internalizing and externalizing
problems (Buckholdt et al., 2014). Parents who fight in front of their children are
also failing to provide help with emotion regulation. Children exposed to high lev-
els of domestic violence have more trouble regulating their emotions (Katz et al,
2007); however, if parents can constructively settle their disputes, children are less
likely to have problems regulating their emotions (Cummings & Davies, 2010).
Parents can actively coach their children and give them lessons that help them
understand and regulate their emotions. According to psychologist John Gottman,
even concerned, warm, and involved parents sometimes have attitudes toward their
own and their children’s emotions that get in the way of their being able to talk to their
children. These parents need to channel their caring into basic coaching skills. In his
book, The Heart of Parenting: Raising an Emotionally Intelligent Child, Gottman identified
five aspects of parenting that constitute emotion coaching (Gottman & DeClaire, 1997):
1. Being aware of the child’s emotions.
One morning when 5-year-old Aiden and Emma had been playing together,
Emma’s mother said that it was time for Emma to think about getting her coat
on to go home.

“I don’t want to,” Emma complained.

“You go home now,” Aiden said, tired of sharing his toys.
“Aiden, we don’t say things like that to people,” his mother corrected. “It hurts
their feelings. I know that you’re tired of sharing your toys with Emma but she is
your friend and it hurts her feelings when you say that.”

2. Recognizing emotional expression as an opportunity for intimacy and teaching.

Abby couldn’t decide whether to get in or out of the new wading pool and finally
had an emotional meltdown. Her mother told her she couldn’t act like that.
She let Abby cry for a while and then consoled her and talked about what had
 Socialization of Emotion  193

happened. Abby learned that some emotional expressions are not acceptable
and that talking about rather than venting feelings can have a positive outcome
because everyone went back to the pool and had a good time.

3. Listening empathically and validating the child’s feelings.

Matt and his mother were looking at a picture book about a scary story:
“They were frightened. They grabbed the dog and brought it to safety. See the
worried looks?” said his mother.
“They look so scared,” Matt agreed. And they continued with the story.

4. Labeling emotions in words children can understand.

Emma’s mother, looking at a picture book with her, chose these appro-
priate words:
“The boy was surprised and a little scared when the jack-in-the box popped up,”
rather than:
“The boy was sure was discombobulated wasn’t he?”

5. Helping children come up with an appropriate way to solve a problem or deal

with an upsetting situation.
When Aiden was having trouble settling down after his sister’s birthday party,
his father calmed him:

“I know you are frustrated that you can’t play with your sister’s new toy right now,
so let’s look for a toy that you can play with until it is your turn to try the new toy.”

Gottman found that children of parents who used these emotion-coaching tech-
niques were more emotionally competent than children who were not coached by
their parents. Children whose parents give them lessons such as these are better
able to manage emotional upset on their own by soothing themselves when they are
upset; they are better at understanding people, have better friendships with other
children, and are more accepted by their peers (Gottman et al., 1996; Gottman &
DeClaire, 1997; Katz et al., 2012). They are better at taking the viewpoint of another
person and at understanding their own and others’ emotions. In related research,
Judy Dunn and her colleagues found that 3-year-old children’s conversations with
their mothers about feeling states predicted the children’s abilities to understand
other people’s emotions at age 6 years (Dunn, 2015; Dunn & Hughes, 1998).
Another way that parents help their children learn about emotions is by reminiscing
with them about shared emotional experiences in the past. Children whose mothers
engage in such reminiscing are able to tell more coherent and emotionally expres-
sive autobiographical narratives and are better at regulating their emotions (Fivush,
2007, 2013). In general, children whose mothers discuss feelings more have better
emotional understanding and regulation (Garner, 2006; LaBounty et al., 2008).
Of course, these are all correlational findings, and perhaps mothers who are
good emotion socializers have children whose temperaments facilitate their emo-
tional understanding. However, experimental work in which researchers use story
vignettes to explain to children the causes of emotional reactions also improve chil-
dren’s emotional understanding, suggesting that parents do, in fact, play a causal
role in shaping children’s emotional competence (Tenenbaum et al., 2008).
Mothers who are good at regulating their own emotions are especially good
emotion socializers for their children, offering more lessons and a better balance
between positive and negative emotions (Perlman, Camras, et al., 2008). Their
194  Chapter 5 Emotions

children know more about facial expressions and emotion situations. Similarly,
mothers with more positive emotions are better emotion socializers; they are sensi-
tive to their children’s emotional states, share positive emotions with them, and
contribute to their sense of pride and efficacy (Hoffman et al., 2006). Fortunately,
having one parent who is a good supporter of the child’s emotional learning can
compensate for having a second parent who is not (McElwain et al., 2007).

Socialization by Other Children

Peers and siblings also socialize children’s emotions. When a child displays anger,
other children are apt to respond with anger, rejection, or disapproval (Denham
et al., 2007; Fabes et al., 1996); when a child acts happy, peers are likely to approve
(Sorber, 2001). These peer reactions teach children the consequences of expressing
negative and positive emotions. Peers can help children improve their emotional
understanding and knowledge as well. In one study, kindergarten children who had
good relationships with their peers increased in emotional knowledge over the year
more than children who were socially isolated—presumably because they had more
opportunities to learn about the nuances of emotions in their interactions with
their peers (Dunsmore & Karn, 2004). Engaging in pretend play with siblings and
friends also helps children understand other people’s feelings (Dunn & Hughes,
2001). Similarly, children learn about emotions when their siblings make positive
or negative responses or alert their parents to the child’s angry outburst (Denham
et al., 2007; Kramer, 2014). Programs such as More Fun with Brothers and Sisters
teach children how to identify, monitor, evaluate, and modify their emotional reac-
tions to their siblings. These programs improve children’s emotion-regulation skills
and lead to more positive relationships between siblings (Kennedy & Kramer, 2008).

esearch Up Close: Emotional Development in a High

School Theater Program
Most work on emotional sociali- disappointment through with their friends and
zation focuses on young chil- became engaged in the roles they were given. As
dren. However, emotional they became involved in rehearsals and began to
socialization continues in adoles- master their roles, the students reported frequent
cence. Reed Larson and Jane Brown (2007) experiences of excitement, satisfaction, elation,
investigated how new emotional skills were and adrenaline rush. Often the elation spread
learned during adolescence in the process of through the group. As Marina described, it,
putting on a high school production of Les
Miserables. Using detailed qualitative interviews “Energy is very contagious when you’re on
and observations over the period from casting to stage so, like if I sing loud and I get excited
production, they identified the emotions the about it, it usually just kind of spreads and
adolescents experienced and explored how other people catch on.”
participation in the theater production altered
adolescents’ emotional development. As time progressed and demands mounted,
Disappointment was a common early emotion feelings of anger and interpersonal stress were
because many students did not receive their reported. These negative emotions, too, were
hoped-for role. But this disappointment dissipated contagious. Nearly all of the students described
within a week or two as the students talked their frustration with peers who were egotistical or
 Socialization of Emotion  195

obstructionist. Toward the end of the period, several their time. Their most frequent theme was
students suffered from bouts of anxiety as they learning to manage the interpersonal stress they
anticipated performing in front of an audience; experienced during the production. Their anger,
again group support helped settle frayed nerves particularly toward peers, created a challenge
and keep the nervous actors on track. The emo- but also appeared to be a stimulus for learning.
tional climax was the elation they all felt when they Two years later, when the students were
successfully performed Les Miserables. In the re-interviewed, several reported that learning to
interviews following the performance, several youth restrain their negative reactions to others was
reported sadness that the play was over. one of the most important lessons they learned
This theater experience offered these youth a from their theater experience. They learned to
distinct set of emotional experiences including keep their own anger in check, chill out, and
disappointment, elation, frustration, and anxiety. calm down. They also learned to compensate for
From these experiences, several types of emo- factors that increased their anger. When one
tional learning occurred. First, the students student, Jack, observed how tiredness made him
reported gaining abstract knowledge about more emotional, he said:
emotions, especially links between emotions
and personalities. They learned that some of “You kind of have to learn to recognize that
their fellow actors were more volatile and and go ‘Okay, I’ve had a long day and I
emotional than others and that differences in need to be gentler than usual’ because I
emotionality could be authentic or a matter of know I’m going to have a short fuse and
display. They increased their awareness of their it’s going to be hard for me to deal with
own emotional patterns as well. Several reported some things.”
learning through the imaginative process of
creating their characters as they stepped into Another thing the students learned about
someone else’s shoes and experienced some- emotion was to use positive emotion to enhance
one else’s emotions. In addition, the students their work. Sara described learning to use
reported gaining knowledge about the factors comedy to lighten the mood of the group and
that influence emotions, such as fatigue, stress, smooth tense situations. The students almost
criticism, and success. They also described always described the process they had gone
becoming sensitive to how emotions influenced through as one in which they and their peers
the group. When the group was happy, their work were collaborators in active learning, helping
went “a lot smoother.” Another major advance each other understand emotional episodes and
was learning how to manage anger and talking through how to handle them. They
interpersonal stress. The students reported credited the adult leaders with facilitating the
developing strategies for dealing with the process, not by trying to teach them about
disappointment of not getting a desired role, emotions in the abstract, but by creating condi-
managing anxiety, and reducing the stress tions in which they learned from the emotions
created by the demands the production put on that occurred in their work.

Socialization by Teachers
Teachers also facilitate children’s emotional development. Especially in the pre-
school years, teachers play a significant role in the development of the emotional
skills that are so important to children’s social success (Denham et al., 2015).
Teachers use physical comfort and distraction to help toddlers regulate their nega-
tive emotions. With preschoolers, they use verbal mediation and explanations to
help the children understand the causes of their anger, frustration, or sadness and
teach them constructive ways of expressing negative emotions (Ahn, 2003; Morris
et al., 2013). Although there is pressure to push academic learning in preschool to
196  Chapter 5 Emotions

prepare kids for elementary school, several investigators have recognized that emo-
tional learning is an important component of school readiness and have trained
teachers to help preschoolers improve their emotional competence (Denham &
Burton, 2003; Izard et al., 2008).

eal-World Application: Teachers as Promoters

of Emotional Competence
Let’s be honest. Four-year-olds are angry compared with children without the PATHS
lovable, but they are also self- experience. Increasing children’s emotion
centered, impulsive, and prone to knowledge and reducing their anger bias
meltdowns. Teaching them to increased the likelihood that PATHS children
understand other children’s emotional signals would be successful in social situations with
and regulate their own emotions can help them peers. In fact, teachers in the PATHS classrooms
avoid a conflict or a meltdown. The Preschool described their students as significantly more
Promoting Alternative Thinking Strategies (PATHS) cooperative, emotionally aware, and interperson-
curriculum was designed to help teachers create ally skilled than teachers in the control
an environment to promote children’s learning of classrooms.
social-emotional skills. It contains 30 lessons that Another preschool curriculum addressed both
Head Start teachers deliver once a week during reading words and reading emotions—a sensible
circle time (Domitrovich et al., 2007; Morris et al., approach because children’s academic and
2014). The primary objectives of the curriculum socioemotional skills are intertwined. Karen
were to develop children’s awareness and Bierman and her colleagues divided 44 Head
communication regarding their own and others’ Start classrooms into two groups: half followed a
emotions; to teach self-control of arousal and traditional Head Start curriculum; the other half
behavior; to promote positive self-concept and followed a program called REDI (Research Based
peer relations; to develop children’s problem- Developmentally Informed) Head Start (Bierman
solving skills by fostering integration of self-control, et al., 2008; Nix et al., 2016). This program
affect recognition, and communication skills; and included teaching children specific emotional
to create a positive classroom atmosphere that management and social problem-solving skills
supports social-emotional learning. In addition to as well as reading readiness.
the lessons, teachers promoted the concepts
through activities such as group games, art One of the stars of the program was Twig-
projects, and book reading. gle the Turtle, who followed the counsel
Children who participated in the PATHS of a wise old turtle. According to the old
program had a larger emotion vocabulary at the turtle, when Twiggle got upset, he should
end of the program. They were able to correctly go inside his shell, take a deep calming
label emotional expressions and were more breath, and say what bothered him and
accurate in identifying feelings and facial how it made him feel. Instead of the vague
expressions than children who were not exposed “Use your words” advice that preschool
to the curriculum. PATHS children also gained in teachers often offer, the teachers would tell
their ability to correctly identify situations that the preschoolers, “Cross your arms to be like
elicit different basic emotions. In addition, Twiggle in his shell. Practice what James
exposure to PATHS significantly reduced children’s should say if Suzie takes the toy he wants, or
anger attribution bias: PATHS participants were if Billy says something mean to Tommy.” “Be
less likely to misidentify emotional expressions as like Twiggle” became the thing to say. “You’d
 When Emotional Development Goes Wrong  197

see children over in the blocks center, and that the positive effects of this intervention are
someone stands up and does the turtle sustained over a 5-year period when the original
and talks, and someone else does the third-grade children were in the eighth grade
turtle and talks, and then they sit down and (Nix et al., 2016).
play again.”

By year’s end, preschoolers in the REDI

AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster/Wide World

program scored higher than children in the
regular Head Start program on tests of school
readiness—both social and academic. They
had better skills for recognizing emotions in
others and responding appropriately to situa-
tions involving a conflict. Among the REDI
children, 70 percent showed little or no disrup-
tive behavior compared with 56 percent in the

Photos
regular classes. Moreover, parents of children in
the REDI group reported fewer instances of
impulsivity, aggression, and attention problems Here a teacher demonstrates the Twiggle the Turtle conflict-
at home than did parents of children in the resolution lesson to 4-year-olds at The Bennett Family Child
traditional program. Recent evaluations suggest Care Center in University Park, Pennsylvania.

When Emotional Development

Goes Wrong
In spite of their individual differences, most children develop emotional patterns
that serve them well in dealing with normal social and emotional challenges. How-
ever some children have emotional problems including excessive anger, fear, anxi-
ety, or depression that can impair their social functioning. Excessive anger can lead
to aggression and violence, as we discuss in Chapter 12, “Aggression.” Excessive
fears can cause considerable discomfort for children and their families. Fortunately,
most of these fears disappear within a few years (Gelfand & Drew, 2003). A small
number of fears and phobias last longer, persisting across the life span, including
acrophobia (fear of heights) and fear of physical illness. Anxiety disorders charac-
terized by a general apprehensiveness and low self-confidence also can last into the
adult years (Ollendick & King, 1998).
The most common emotional problem in childhood is childhood depression.
It is diagnosed when a child has seemed depressed or has lost interest or pleasure
in nearly all activities for at least two weeks. The dominant mood may be irritability
and crankiness rather than sadness and dejection. Family members often notice that
these children are withdrawn or have stopped the activities they formerly enjoyed—
for example, a child who had enjoyed playing soccer may begin to make excuses
not to practice. Depression often interferes with appetite and eating, and parents
might note the child’s failure to make normal or expected weight gains. Another
common effect of depression is an impaired ability to think, concentrate, or focus
on a task. A precipitous drop in grades can signal depressive problems in a child or
an adolescent. Somatic complaints (e.g., headache, stomach pain) are not uncom-
mon in depressed children. Nearly twice as many girls as boys experience childhood
depression (Hilt & Nolen-Hoeksema, 2014; Thapar et al., 2012).
198  Chapter 5 Emotions

“When Julie became a teenager, she really started to change. She withdrew from us,
became anxious, worried and started to doubt herself. She lost weight and had trouble
sleeping. We were relieved when our physician told us there was treatment she could
get. She is now getting help and doing better. It was a scary time for all of us, but espe-
cially for Julie. Her younger brother, Joe sailed through adolescence without any of her
problems.”

Although the incidence of depression in childhood is low (2 percent), in part

because of the difficulty of reliably diagnosing it, it is relatively stable and similar to
depression in adults (Cole et al., 2008). It is diagnosed in a considerable number
of young people beginning at about age 13 with nearly 6 percent of adolescents
between 13 and 18 years of age reporting depression symptoms (Costello, 2006).
One unfortunate consequence of depression is an increase in suicide. For example,
depressed youth are six times more likely to make suicide attempts as compared to
nondepressed adolescents (Stewart et al., 2015). Although suicide is more common
among adolescents, even grade school children are suicide casualties. Between 1993
and 2012, a total of 657 children aged 5 to 11 years died by suicide in the United
States, with 553 (84 percent) who were boys and 104 (16 percent) who were girls.
Researchers in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that about
17 percent of high school students seriously considered suicide and 14 ­percent
made specific suicide plans (Centers for Disease Control, 2015). Suicide is the sec-
ond leading killer of adolescents and young adults (15–24 years of age), following
accidents. It is the third leading cause of death among 10- to 14-year-olds (CDC,
2017). Among high school students, 17.7 percent seriously considered suicide;
14.6 percent made a plan for suicide; 8.6 percent attempted suicide one or more
times; 2.8 percent made a suicide attempt that had to be treated by doctor or nurse.
(American Association of Suicidology, 2017; Centers for Disease Control and Pre-
vention, 2017). Females are much more likely to attempt suicide than males but
are less likely to complete suicide. This is, in part, because females are more likely
than males to use methods such as overdosing with drugs or poisons or suffocation,
whereas males tend to use methods that have faster and surer results, such as shoot-
ing or explosives. Suicide rates are higher in rural areas than in urban or suburban
areas for a variety of reasons including social isolation, prevalence of firearms, eco-
nomic hardship, and limited access to mental health and emergency health care
services (VanOrman & Jarosz, 2016).
Culture also plays a role in suicide. Suicide rates are high in countries such as
Japan, which has a long history of viewing suicide as an honorable tradition. In Mus-
lim and Catholic countries, where suicide is viewed as a violation of religious teach-
ings, rates are low. In North America, Native American and aboriginal youth have
high rates of suicide; one study found their suicide rate to be five times higher than
that of youth in the general population (Chandler et al., 2003). Many factors includ-
ing poverty, loss of traditional culture, limited educational and job opportunities, and
alcohol and drug use contribute to these elevated rates. Among inner-city African
American and Latino American gangs, suicide rates are rising (Rotherman-Borus
et al., 2000).
Although depression and suicide are often linked, this is not always the case.
Suicide is related to a general sense of overwhelming hopelessness, although it
also may result from the accumulation of adverse life events, such as family con-
flicts; loss of a family member due to illness, death, or divorce; breakups or prob-
lems in romantic relationships or friendships; school failure; being apprehended
 When Emotional Development Goes Wrong  199

in a forbidden or embarrassing act or situation; or a mental or physical illness

(Jellinek & Snyder, 1998). Many adolescents who attempt suicide feel that they have
no source of emotional support. They may be alienated from their families and
may have had disruptions or losses in intimate relations and relations with peers
that give them a sense of isolation and helplessness. In one study, adolescents with
co-occurring depression and conduct problems in sixth grade had the highest risk
for subsequent suicidal ideation, recurrent suicidal behaviors, and suicide attempts
(Vander Stoep et al., 2011).

nsights from Extremes: When Children

Commit Suicide
When Dan Kidney was 11 years pressures and disappointments that lead
old, his parents found him adolescents and adults to end their lives. In fact,
hanging with a belt around his as mentioned earlier even some preadolescents
neck from a chin-up bar in the consider suicide, although the actual rate of
doorway between his bedroom and bathroom. suicides that are completed among children is
He was a popular kid, good-looking, and growing low. Among children under 12 years of age, only
up with all the advantages of a well-educated 1.5 of 100,000 commit suicide in any given year.
family. Yet Dan’s father and mother had sus- More alarming is the fact that in the United
pected their son was troubled in ways he States, this figure has doubled since 1979 (CDC,
wouldn’t admit. He never threatened to harm 2017). The second insight is that children are as
himself, but he seemed depressed and some- capable of planning and carrying out suicide
times agitated in the months leading up to his as are adolescents and adults. Children from 6
suicide. We do not expect children as young as to 12 years old have committed suicide by
Daniel to commit suicide, but this unfortunately is jumping from heights, running in front of trains
not a unique case. An 11-year-old British boy was or cars, drowning, stabbing, scalding, burning,
bullied so badly at school and on the bus that and hanging. The most common methods used
he took his own life. His father found him with his by 10- to 14-year-olds are shooting (50 percent),
shoelaces tied around his neck and to the sides hanging (33 percent), and poisoning (12 per-
of his bunk. A 10-year-old boy in the United States cent). The third insight to be drawn from these
was found lifeless by his brother after he had tragedies is that children experience profound
overdosed on medication, cut himself, and finally emotions and act on them, just as older people
hanged himself from his bunk bed. He left a do. These tragic cases have led to efforts to
picture that he had drawn of himself hanging prevent childhood suicide by making parents
and a note saying, “Children are not meant to be and teachers more aware of early warning
ignored.” An 11-year-old girl in Shanghai jumped signs, such as mood changes, withdrawal, and
to her death from a sixth-floor window at her despondency. The National Academy of
school on the first day back from vacation. Her Sciences has called on the U.S. government to
teacher reported that the girl was unhappy with make children’s mental health a national
her mother and the two had been in conflict priority. Internationally, the World Health
over the winter break. Organization is leading efforts to aid in the
These tragedies provide three clear insights. prevention of suicide among children and
One is that children are not immune to the youth around the globe.
200  Chapter 5 Emotions

Causes of Childhood Depression

Like many human disorders, depression is caused by multiple factors. Just as
normal emotional development is multiply determined, so is atypical emotional
development.

Biological causes Several lines of research suggest that there are biological
causes of children’s depression. Behavior genetics research shows that childhood
depression is more likely in children of clinically depressed parents, and the asso-
ciation is stronger for biological children and between identical twins (Cicchetti &
Toth, 2015; Gotlib & Hammen, 2014). An inability to manage stress as indicated
by slow hormonal recovery to stress may be a contributor to depression (Harkness
et al., 2011; Stewart et al., 2013). Neuroscience research shows that depression is
associated with brain functions. For example, the amygdala region of the brain has
been found to have elevated activation when children of depressed mothers are
shown fearful faces (Monk et al., 2008). Depressed adolescents show more brain
activity (in the prefrontal cortex) in response to negative than to positive words
and to sad than happy faces while the reverse was true for their nondepressed peers
(Auerbach, Stanton et al., 2015; Auerbach, Stewart et al., 2015). Others have sug-
gested that the maturation of specific brain regions (prefrontal cortex, hippocam-
pus, amygdala, and ventral striatum) and stress exposure during adolescence makes
teens more susceptible to the development of depression (Andersen & Teicher,
2008). However, children whose mothers have recovered from depression exhibit
normal brain activity, which suggests that the mother’s behavior also plays a role in
children’s early depression (Embry & Dawson, 2002). How much family interac-
tions versus genetic influences contribute to childhood depression remains an open
question (Gotlib & Hammen, 2014; Silberg et al., 2001). However, as we noted ear-
lier (Chapter 3, “Biological Basis of Behavior”), it is likely that gene x environment
models which suggest that individual differences in susceptibility to depression in
combination with child rearing conditions offer the most useful approach to under-
standing this issue.

Social causes Studies supporting social explanations of childhood depression

show that the experiences of children with depressed mothers differ from those
with nondepressed mothers. Depressed mothers are more tense, disorganized,
resentful, and ambivalent and less sensitive, communicative, and affectionate with
their children (Gotlib & Colich, 2014). They provide less-coordinated positive
interactions with their infants (Reck et al., 2011) and more emotional maltreat-
ment toward their children (Kohl et al., 2011). Furthermore, depressed mothers
are more likely to perceive their children’s behavior negatively (Hammen, 2009).
Impaired relationships with depressed parents probably undermine children’s emo-
tional development, leading to poorer understanding of their own emotional states
and perhaps most critically poorer ability to regulate their emotions, especially
negative ones (Hoffman et al., 2006; Maughan et al., 2007). For example, children
who are neglected by their parents are more shame-prone (Bennett et al., 2010),
which in turn, can contribute to the development of depression (Cole et al., 2008;
Kovacs et al., 2008). In one study, children of depressed mothers were more likely
to develop depression themselves by the time they were 16 years old (41.5 percent
versus 12.5 percent in children of nondepressed mothers), especially if they also suf-
fered from a nonresilient temperament, an insecure attachment, and family adver-
sity (Murray et al., 2011). Moreover, even when genetic factors are controlled as in
 When Emotional Development Goes Wrong  201

the case of adopted children, depression is higher among children of biologically

unrelated but depressed mothers (Tully et al., 2008). Peers can also play a role in
children’s mental health. Elementary school children who were shy and socially
anxious and who were excluded by their peers were at higher risk for depression
than nonanxious and better-accepted classmates (Gazelle & Ladd, 2003). Children
who experience prolonged loneliness (i.e., lonely at both ages 5 and 9) report more
depression at age 13 (Qualter et al., 2010). Life stressors have also been found to
contribute to childhood depression (Hammen, 2005; Shih, 2014).

Cognitive causes Another explanation of depression invokes the concept of

learned helplessness, which results from the belief that one is helpless to control the
events in one’s world (Seligman, 1974). The learned helplessness theory of depres-
sion suggests that depressed children not only experience feelings of helplessness
but also attribute their failures in controlling the world to enduring personal short-
comings. Essentially, this cognitive theory asserts that children become depressed
when they perceive themselves as having failed to achieve desired outcomes in their
lives (Garber & Martin, 2002; Joormann & Arditte, 2014).

Treating Childhood Depression

Depressed children and adolescents can benefit from a wide range of interven-
tions. Antidepressant drugs such as fluoxetine (Prozac), escitalopram (Lexapro),
and sertraline (Zoloft) are widely prescribed and quite effective (Bridge et al.,
2007; Emslie et al., 2009; Wagner et al., 2012). Unfortunately, antidepressant drugs
are dangerous if used improperly, and an overdose can be lethal (Gelfand & Drew,
2003). In 2004, the U.S. government began to require warning labels to accom-
pany these antidepressant drugs in light of the increased risk of suicide associ-
ated with their use in a small percentage of adolescents and later extended these
warnings for individuals up to 25 years old. However, the rates of suicide showed
a sharp increase at the same time as the use of antidepressants among adolescents
declined, which suggests that parents need to be aware of warning signs of sui-
cide whether their teens are on antidepressant drugs or not (Centers for Disease
Control, 2007).
Cognitive behavior therapy is one of the most effective approaches for treat-
ing depression in adolescents, especially mild or moderate depression (Hammen,
2005; Hollon & Dimidjian, 2014; Wagner et al., 2012). This type of therapy is typi-
cally conducted individually or in small groups of adolescents over a number of
weeks. The goals are to reduce the teenagers’ self-consciousness and feelings of
being different and to provide them with relaxation techniques and self-control
tactics to help them control their dark moods. The therapy also emphasizes posi-
tive strategies such as improving peer relations, setting realistic goals, and learn-
ing how to get more fun out of activities. Unfortunately, it is not uncommon for
adolescents treated with cognitive behavior therapy to experience a recurrence of
depression within a few years (Birmaher et al., 2000). Cognitive behavior therapy is
often used in combination with antidepression drugs as well. Prevention programs
have also been effective in alleviating or avoiding depression. Meta-analyses indi-
cate that youths who participate in depression-prevention programs experience
fewer depressive symptoms or are less likely to develop depressive disorders than
youth who do not participate (Brunwasser et al., 2009; Cuijpers et al., 2008; Stice
et al., 2009).
202  Chapter 5 Emotions

earning from Living Leaders: Ross A. Thompson

Further Reading
Thompson, R. A. (2015). Doing it with feeling: The emotion
in early socioemotional development. Emotion Review,
7(2), 121–125.

Courtesy of Ross A. Thompson

Susanne A. Denham

Courtesy of George Mason University

Ross A. Thompson is a Distinguished Professor of
Psychology at the University of California, Davis,
and is director of the Social & Emotional Develop-
ment Lab. He received his PhD from the Univer-
sity of Michigan and previously taught at the
University of Nebraska. Thompson studies early
parent–child relationships, the development of
emotion understanding and emotion regulation,
conscience development, prosocial motivation,
and the growth of self-understanding in young Susanne Denham is Professor Emerita at
children. He received the Urie Bronfenbrenner George Mason University and an expert on
Award for Lifetime Contributions to Developmen- children’s early emotional development.
tal Psychology in the Service of Science and Although she set out to be a pediatrician,
Society in recognition of his writings that bridge she became a developmental psycholo-
developmental science and policy, including gist instead after changing her major and
early childhood mental health, child poverty, completing graduate work at the University
early education, and child abuse prevention. of Maryland. She traces her interest in under-
He also received the Boyd McCandless Award standing and helping young children to an
from the American Psychological Association. early age when she was fascinated by infant
He is currently President of the Board of Directors toys, often worked as a babysitter, and suffered
of ZERO TO THREE, a national nonprofit devoted through her mother’s struggle with depression.
to the healthy development of infants, toddlers, Her work has focused on three questions:
and their families. Thompson suggests that the How do parents teach their children to express,
main challenge for our field is figuring out how regulate, and understand their emotions? How
to communicate the richness of developmental does knowing how to deal with feelings
science in a manner that creates the knowledge promote children’s competence with their
and the will to invest wisely to improve children’s peers? How can we create and improve
development, especially for those growing up measures of children’s social-emotional
in adversity. His advice to undergraduates: “You competence? Researchers and students all
do not have to know your life’s course when you over the world have used her puppet-based
graduate from university. Take time to explore Affect Knowledge Test. Her work has had
internships, research, and other learning outside applied value too: She has designed a
the classroom, and after graduation, take time to program to improve preschoolers’ emotional
consider many options and explore what direc- competence and created an assessment of
tion is right for you.” emotional competence that teachers can use.
 Chapter Summary  203

Looking to the future, she sees more integration kids! Follow your passion for understanding
of emotional development work with brain science children. Let it condense into a focus and don’t be
and psychophysiological measurement, more afraid to continue your studies.”
applications that are based on developmental
science, and a move toward findings being taken Further Reading
seriously by policy makers. She will be pursuing her Denham, S. A., Bassett, H. H., & Wyatt, T. (2015). The socializa-
new interest in the development of forgiveness in tion of emotional competence. In J. Grusec & P. Hastings
(Eds.), The handbook of socialization (2nd ed.,
children. Her advice to students: “Listen and watch pp. 590–613). New York: Guilford Press.

Chapter Summary
What Are Emotions?
• Subjective reactions to environmental event, accompanied by arousal and an
expression or action.
Why Are Emotions Important?
• Children communicate their feelings, needs, and wishes to others and regulate
other people’s behavior through emotional expressions.
Perspectives on Emotional Development
• Biological, learning, and functional theories explain different aspects of emo-
tional development.
Development of Emotions
• Babies begin expressing primary emotions of anger, joy, fear, and sadness early
in life.
• Smiling begins with the newborn’s reflex smile, which depends on the baby’s
internal state. Social smiles appear between 3 and 8 weeks. By 12 weeks, infants
smile selectively at familiar faces and voices, depending on the situation. By
4 months, infants begin to laugh. Both laughter and smiling express joy and
play a critical role in maintaining the proximity of the caregiver to the baby.
• Fear emerges gradually in the first year. Babies tend to be less fearful in a famil-
iar setting and when they feel as if they have some control over the situation.
Social referencing helps them know how to behave in unfamiliar situations.
• In the second year, children develop secondary or self-conscious emotions
such as pride, shame, guilt, jealousy, and empathy. These emotions rely on the
development of self-awareness.
Individual Differences in Emotional Expressiveness
• Differences in emotional expressiveness are rooted in biology and have impor-
tant implications for children’s later adjustment.
Development of Emotional Understanding
• In the first 6 months of life, infants begin to recognize emotional expressions
in other people. They typically recognize positive emotions before negative
ones, which has functional value because it strengthens the infants’ bond with
caregivers.
• As children mature, they develop an understanding of emotion terms and
causes. Emotional scripts help them identify the feelings that typically accom-
pany particular situations. They learn that people can experience more than
one emotion at a time and two emotions can conflict.
204  Chapter 5 Emotions

Emotion Regulation
• A major challenge for children is to learn how to modify, control, and regulate
emotions so they are less frequent and less intense.
• By the preschool years, children begin to follow emotional display rules that
dictate which emotions to show under what circumstances. Culture affects
these rules, and the display of such emotions as anger and shame may be sanc-
tioned in one culture but disapproved of in another.
Socialization of Emotion
• Parents influence children’s emotional expressions, understanding, and regu-
lation. They serve as models for emotional displays, and by reacting to the
child’s emotional expressions, they encourage or discourage such displays.
Children whose parents serve as coaches in helping them understand and man-
age their emotions are better able to handle emotional upset on their own and
are more accepted by their peers. Belittling or dismissing children’s emotions
or punishing children for their expression can prevent children from learning
how to manage their own feelings and understand other people’s emotions.
• Peers and teachers can also play a role in the socialization of children’s
­emotions.
When Emotional Development Goes Wrong
• Children sometimes experience extreme anger, fear, phobias, anxiety, or
depression.
• The prevalence of depression increases in adolescence and is higher in girls
than boys. In extreme cases, some children commit suicide.
• Biological, social, and cognitive factors are all potential contributors to the
development of depression. Medications, cognitive therapy, and prevention
programs are ways of treating child and adolescent depression.

Key Terms
childhood depression emotion regulation secondary or self-conscious emotions
cognitive behavior therapy Empathy separation anxiety
Duchenne smile learned helplessness social referencing
emotional display rules primary emotions social smiles
emotional scripts reflex smiles stranger distress or fear of strangers

At th e M ov i e s

Most movies about children’s emotions accentuate the neg- sister, consequent feelings of guilt, and attempts to atone for
ative. For example, 12 and Holding (2005) portrays the raw, her actions are central to the plot. Poignant portrayals of neg-
unguarded emotions of pain, longing, rage, and revenge in ative emotions in childhood are often found in movies about
troubled children entering adolescence and conveys how divorce. For example, in Shoot the Moon (1982), the oldest
these lonely, insecure children became so consumed by their daughter is mature enough to see what is happening when
feelings that they lost sight of ordinary social boundaries. A her parents split up but too immature to handle the after-
child’s emotions are also at the heart of the film Atonement math. She doesn’t know whether to love or hate her father for
(2007), so named because a girl’s false accusation of her older leaving the family and angrily refuses to forgive him.
 Key Terms  205

Some movies provide an opportunity for teaching and sadness when her parents announce their divorce. The
children how to deal with negative emotions. These include Transporters (2007) teaches autistic children how to rec-
blockbusters such as The Incredible Hulk (2008), which graph- ognize emotions such as anger and sadness through the
ically illustrates what happens when a man (who happens to exploits of vehicles including a train, a ferry, and a cable car.
have been exposed to gamma rays) is under emotional stress This film is the brainchild of Simon Baron-Cohen, director
and fills with rage—he turns into a destructive, murderous, of the Autism Research Centre at Cambridge University. He
giant green monster. The movie also shows how the Hulk and his colleagues have shown that when autistic children
learned to control his emotions through meditation and between the ages of 4 and 7 years watch the video for at least
love. A Monster Calls (2017) explores how a 12-year-old deals 15 minutes a day for 1 month, they catch up with normal
with a common but devastating emotion: the grief—and children in their ability to identify emotions. Some movies
attendant rage and fear—that comes with losing a parent. teach the importance of expressing your positive as well as
In addition to popular movies, numerous educational films your negative feelings. Inside Out (2015) is an animated film
focus on children’s emotions, such as Larryboy—The Angry that offers important messages about needing to feel—and
Eyebrows (2002), in which the lesson of letting go of anger is express—all of your emotions, whether happy or sad, told
conveyed by the superhero alter ego of Larry the Cucumber from perspective of an 11-year-old who is dealing with a
from VeggieTales; Live & Learn—Dealing with Anger (2008), move to a new city with her family. Five different emotions
in which children learn different approaches to handling (joy, sadness, fear, anger, and digust) are clearly identified
their anger when their expectations aren’t met; Dragon and the basic functions of our brains are well presented.
Tales—Whenever I’m Afraid (2004), in which stories about This story helps kids to understand how our perceptions
overcoming fear offer help for anxious children; and Trevor affect the emotions we feel toward particular events in our
Romain—Taking the “Duh” Out of Divorce (2008), in which an lives. Some critics view this as the best movie about emotions
animated character is helped to work through anger, fear, since Disney’s Bambi.
 C H APT E R 6

Self and Other

Getting to Know Me, Getting
to Know You

Plus/iStockphoto

I’m 3 years old and I live in a big house with my mother and father and my brother Jason and my sis-
ter Lisa. I have blue eyes and a kitty that is orange and a television in my own room. I know all my ABCs.
Listen. A, B, C, D, F, G, I, K. I am really strong. I can lift this chair.
I am 6 and in first grade. I can do lots of stuff real good. Lots! I can run fast, climb high, and I’m good
at schoolwork. If you are good at things you can’t be bad at things at least not at the same time. I know
some kids who are bad at things but not me.
I’m 9 years old and in fourth grade and I’m pretty popular, at least with girls. That’s because I’m nice
to people and helpful and can keep secrets. Mostly I am nice to my friends although if I get into a
bad mood I sometimes say something that can be a little mean. At school I feel pretty smart in certain
subjects like language arts and social studies. But I feel pretty dumb in math and science. Even though
I’m not doing well in these subjects, I still like myself as a person because math and science aren’t as
important to me as how I look and how popular I am.

206
 The Sense of Self  207

I just turned 13 and I’m talkative, pretty rowdy, and funny with my friends. I like myself a lot when I am
around my friends. With my parents I’m more likely to be depressed. I feel sad, mad, and hopeless about
ever pleasing them. What they think about me is still really important, so when they are on my case it
makes me dislike myself as a person. At school I get better grades than most but I don’t brag about it
because that’s not cool. I’m shy, uncomfortable, and nervous around people I don’t know well.
I’m 15 and what am I like as a person? I’m complicated! With my really close friends, I am very toler-
ant, understanding, and caring. With a group of friends, I’m rowdier but usually friendly and cheerful,
but I can be pretty obnoxious if I don’t like how they are acting. At school I’m serious, even studious but
a goof-off too, because if you’re too studious, you’re not popular. So, I go back and forth which means
my grades aren’t great. But that causes problems at home, where I am pretty anxious around my par-
ents. I don’t understand how I can switch so fast from being cheerful with my friends then coming home
and feeling anxious and getting frustrated and sarcastic with my parents. I think a lot about who is the
real me, but I can’t resolve it. There are days when I wish I could just become immune to myself.
I am 18 and a high-school senior and I am a pretty conscientious person particularly when it comes
to homework. I want to go to law school even though my parents would rather I go into teaching. Every
now and then I get a little lackadaisical, but that’s normal. You can’t be a total “grind.” I’ve become
more religious as I have gotten older but I’m not a saint or anything. Religion gives me a sense of pur-
pose and a guide to what kind of adult I’d like to be. I’m not as popular as a lot of other kids, but I don’t
care what other kids think anymore. I try to believe that what I think is what counts. I’m looking forward
to leaving home and going to college, where I can be more independent, although I’m a little ambiva-
lent. I’ll always be a little dependent on my parents, but I’m looking forward to being on my own.

These children’s responses to the question “What are you like as a person?” (Harter,
2006, pp. 513–546) illustrate one of the main topics of this chapter, how the notion
of the self changes with age. The sense of self, or the awareness of the self as dif-
ferentiated from other people, is crucial for children’s development. We exam-
ine how children develop their sense of self. We also discuss how children feel
about themselves—their self-esteem—and think about themselves—their identity.
As knowledge about self increases, children also acquire knowledge about other
people. They also learn to communicate with these other people. These three
areas of development—(1) understanding the self, (2) understanding others, and
(3) communicating with others—have major implications for children’s social
adjustment and their ability to successfully navigate in the social world.

The Sense of Self

The individual self refers to aspects of the self that make a person unique. For
example, a person may see himself or herself as hard working, physically fit, and
confident—all characteristics of the individual. Other types of selves are also pos-
sible (Sedikides & Brewer, 2001). The relational self refers to aspects of the self
that involve connections to other people and develops out of social interactions
(Chen et al., 2011). The internal working model of attachment that we discussed
in Chapter 4 is an example of a relational self. It represents the child in relation to
other people, such as parents or siblings, and involves a conception of the self as
a social partner. The collective self refers to the person’s concept of self within a
group, such as a group based on race, ethnicity, or gender (Sedikides et al., 2013).
In a discussion about race, for example, the collective self of an African American
student might be salient. We discuss the collective self later in this chapter when we
explore the issue of racial and ethnic identity.
208  Chapter 6 Self and Other

As technology advances, new ways of expressing the self are broadening the scope
of possible selves. The online self is one relatively recent form of self-representation.
In the electronic universe of Internet forums and multiplayer games, participants
assume online identities or selves, which may or may not map onto their real-life self
in terms of gender, race, occupation, and education. These selves act as a means of
impression management or an opportunity to try out new identities (Greenfield,
2019; Greenfield, Gross, et al., 2006). Another opportunity for a new self comes
from the technology of personal genomics. It is now possible to purchase an individ-
ualized profile of your genomic self, which contains information about your biological
and psychological traits. Whether this technology yields information that is reliable
or helpful remains to be seen.

Developmental Origins of Self-Concept

Research on children’s awareness of their individual selves has focused on a process
that has its roots in early infancy. Babies as young as 18 weeks of age happily gaze at
their reflections in a mirror—but they do not realize that they are looking at them-
selves. To study the development of children’s self-recognition, researchers have
shown children their reflections, turned them away from the mirror and put a red
spot on their nose or a sticker on their forehead, and then turned them back to the
mirror to see how they react (Brooks-Gunn & Lewis, 1984). The researchers assume
that if children know they are looking at their own reflection, they will touch their
face to see what is on it. Using this simple method, investigators have found that
children under 1 year of age act as if some other child is behind the mirror; they
stare at the mirror and don’t touch their own face. Sometime during the second
year of life, children begin to recognize their own image, and by the time they are 2,
Plus/iStockphoto

This baby might think she’s found a friend in the mirror. It will be a few more months before she realizes
that the “friend” is herself.
 The Sense of Self  209

almost all children giggle, show embarrassment, or act silly at the sight of their own
red nose or stickered forehead. They are clearly exhibiting self-recognition. At this
age, however, the sense of self-recognition is restricted to the here and now. When
researchers delay the time between putting a sticker on the child’s face and showing
the child a videotape of the sticker being put on his or her face, 2- and 3-year-olds
do not demonstrate self-recognition by reaching up and touching or removing the
sticker, and they might describe the sticker in the videotape as being on “his” or
“her” face rather than saying it is on “my” face (Miyazaki & Hiraki, 2006; Povinelli
et al., 1996). Children have trouble representing and remembering past self-images
until they are about 4 years old.
Children’s views and descriptions of themselves become more detailed, specific,
and psychological as they grow up (Harter, 2012). Susan Harter identified three
stages in the development of self-descriptions in childhood and another three in
adolescence. The opener to this chapter illustrates these six stages by quoting self-
descriptions given by children at six different ages.
When they are 3 or 4 years old, children describe themselves in terms of observa-
ble physical features (“I have blue eyes”), preferences (“I like pizza,” “I like to swim,”
“I watch TV”), possessions (“I have an orange kitty”), and social characteristics
(“I have a brother, Jason”). Particular skills are touted (“I can count,” “I run fast”),
even though their self-assessments are often inaccurate—they might not be able to
count past 3 or run faster than their peers. There is a disjointed lack of coherence
in their self-descriptions because children of this age cannot integrate their com-
partmentalized representations.
When they are 5 to 7 years old, children describe themselves in terms of their
competencies, “I am good at running, jumping, and school work.” They are begin-
ning to coordinate compartmentalized concepts but not concepts that are opposites
such as good and bad, smart and dumb. They are still very positive in their self-
descriptions and overestimate their abilities.
By age 8 to 10, children are more aware of their private selves and their unique
feelings and thoughts, and they begin to describe themselves in more complex
terms. They use labels that focus on abilities (“I am smart”) and interpersonal attrib-
utes (“I am popular, nice, and helpful”). They integrate success in different areas
(“I am smart in language and social studies but dumb in math and science”). In
addition, their self-constructs become increasingly aligned with the values, roles,
and preferences of their cultural community.
In early adolescence, beginning at age 11, children describe themselves in terms
of social relationships, personality traits, and other general, stable psychological
characteristics. Their self-descriptions focus on interpersonal attributes and social
skills (“I am good-looking, friendly, and talkative”) competencies (“I am intelli-
gent”), and emotions (“I am cheerful,” or “I am depressed”). Children recognize
that they have different selves in different social contexts, with their father, their
mother, their friends, their teachers, and their teammates. They begin to describe
themselves in abstract terms, such as intelligence, but their abstractions are still
compartmentalized.
In middle adolescence, young people are introspective and preoccupied with
what others think of them. What were formerly unquestioned self-truths become
problematic self-hypotheses. Multiple “me’s” crowd the self-landscape as the ado-
lescent acquires new roles. The growing ability to think in the abstract allows the
adolescent to create a more integrated view of the self. For example, an adolescent
might conceive of herself or himself as intelligent by combining the qualities of
being smart and creative but at the same time think of herself or himself as an
“airhead” or “misfit” because she or he feels socially out of sync with others. At this
210  Chapter 6 Self and Other

age, adolescents have trouble integrating self-representations to resolve apparent

contradictions. They don’t understand how they can be different in different roles,
and they experience conflict over opposing self-attributes.
In late adolescence, self-descriptions emphasize personal beliefs, values, and
moral standards. Adolescents think about future and possible selves. They integrate
potentially contradictory attributes and develop a coherent theory of the self. For
example, the older adolescent can reconceptualize the opposing notions of “cheer-
ful” and “depressed” as “moody,” thus resolving apparent contradictions in his or
her sense of self (Harter, 2012, 2016).

ultural Context: How Culture Shapes

Self-Representations
To appreciate how culture memberships (“I’m a girl”), and interpersonal
shapes children’s self-­ relations (“I love my mommy,” “My cousins and I
descriptions, consider these two do lots of things together”).
6-year-olds describing themselves: Culture leaves its imprint on other dimensions
of the self-concept, as well, such as the level of
“I am a wonderful and very smart person. A positivity and pride expressed in self-descriptions.
funny and hilarious person. A kind and car- Western cultures encourage children to embrace
ing person. A good-grades person.” positive self-views; Asian cultures value self-­
criticism and humility because they facilitate
“I’m a human being. I’m a child. I’m my group solidarity and harmony. Not surprisingly, in
mom and dad’s child, my grandma Wang’s research, European American children
and grandpa’s grandson. I’m a hard-­ were more likely to describe themselves in
working child.” positive terms (“I am beautiful, “I am smart”),
whereas Chinese children used nonevaluative
It should not surprise you to find out that the first descriptors (“I play games,” “I go to school”).
child is European American and the second is How do children learn these cultural ways of
Chinese. These self-descriptions echo the values representing themselves? Wang observed
of Western and Asian cultures. Westerners and Chinese and American mothers sharing memo-
Europeans emphasize an autonomous self that ries about their family with their 3-year-olds
can be described in terms of unique personal (Wang & Ross, 2007). American mothers focused
traits; Asians emphasize an interdependent self attention on the child and what the child had
that can be described in terms of social roles accomplished, acknowledged the child’s
and responsibilities in a network of relationships. expressions of individuality, and socialized the
Qi Wang (2001, 2004b, 2013) explored self-­ child to remember personal experiences high-
representations in the United States and China lighting individual uniqueness and autonomy.
by asking adults and children to describe
Mother: Do you remember when we were at
themselves so that the researchers “could write a
Nana’s on vacation, and we went down
story about them.” European American children’s
to the dock at Grandmommy’s? You
descriptions were more “personal”—referring to
went swimming?
personal attributes (“I’m cute”), preferences
Child: Um-hum.
(“I love playing piano”), possessions (“I have a
Mother: What did you do that was really neat?
teddy bear”), and behaviors unrelated to other
Child: Jump off the dock.
people (“I’m happy”). Chinese children’s descrip-
Mother: Yeah. That was the first time you’ve ever
tions were more “social”—referring to group
done that.
 The Sense of Self  211

Child: That was like a diving board. little discussion of the child’s individual or
Mother: You’re right, it was. And where did unique qualities.
Mommy have to stand?
Mother: That day, Mom took you to take a big
Child: In the sandy spot.
bus and go skiing in the park. What did
Mother: In the sandy spot, right. Mommy said,
you play at the place of skiing? What
“Wait, wait, wait! Don’t jump ’til I get into
did you play?
my sandy spot!”
Child: Played . . . played the . . .
Child: Why?
Mother: Sat on the ice ship, right?
Mother: ’Cause you remember how I told you all
Child: Yes. Then . . .
the leaves pile up on the bottom of the
Mother: We two rowed together, right?
lake? And it makes it a little mushy. And
Child: Then . . . then . . .
so, you jumped off the dock and then
Mother: Then we rowed and rowed, rowed round
what did you do?
a couple of times, right?
Child: Swim.
Child: Um.
Mother: To . . .
Mother: We rowed around a couple of times.
Child: Nana.
Then you said, “Stop rowing. Let’s go. Go
Mother: Yeah. All by yourself.
home.” Right?
In contrast, Chinese mothers focused on Child: Um.
group actions with the mother playing a lead- Mother: Then we took a bus to go home, right?
ing role and posing pointed questions. They Child: Um.
used the story telling opportunity to remind the
This research suggests that sharing family
child of his or her place in the social hierarchy
memories is one way children learn how to think
and the need to follow the rules to maintain
about their present and past selves in a way that
social connectedness and harmony. There was
fits their culture.

Difficulty Developing a Sense of Self: Autistic Children

Autism affects children’s ability to develop a sense of self. Some children with
autism seem not to recognize themselves as independent social beings (Dawson
et al., 1998). They exhibit delays or deficits in self-recognition. When research-
ers in one study showed autistic children (ages 3 to 13 years) their reflections
in a mirror, 31 percent failed to demonstrate recognition of their mirror image
(Spiker & Ricks, 1984). More recent studies have confirmed that children with
autism spectrum disorder (ASD) show delays in self-recognition (Nielsen et al.,
2006). Moreover, even when autistic children do recognize themselves in the mir-
ror, they demonstrate little emotional response. This is consistent with the sug-
gestion that autistic children are less proficient in understanding emotions than
are typically developing children (Harms et al., 2010; Rump et al., 2009). A dys-
functional neuron mirror system (see Chapter 3) among autistic children may
account for their difficulty processing emotions (Burrows et al., 2016; Dapretto
et al., 2006). Researchers have found that autistic children—unlike neurotypical
children—show similar neurological responses to their own face, a familiar face,
and an unfamiliar face, a further indication that they do not distinguish between
self and other (Gunji et al., 2009).
212  Chapter 6 Self and Other

Self-Perceptions
Global Self-Esteem
The development of self has an evaluative component that taps how positively
or negatively children view themselves in relation to others. Are they as good
as their friends, better than their classmates, worse than their neighbors?
Few topics have captured the attention of parents, teachers, and children them-
selves as much as this concept of self-esteem, a global evaluation of one’s worth
as a person (Harter, 2012, 2016). The numerous school programs, popular arti-
cles, and Web sites offering ways to increase children’s self-esteem illustrate this
preoccupation.
The preoccupation with elevating children’s self-esteem is based on evidence
that children who have high self-esteem view themselves as competent and capable
and are pleased with who they are, whereas children who have low self-esteem view
themselves as inadequate and inferior to others (Harter, 2012, 2016). Individuals
with high self-esteem also are happier than those with low self-esteem (Baumeister
et al., 2003). In addition, high self-esteem in childhood is linked to a variety of posi-
tive adjustment outcomes including school success, good relationships with par-
ents and peers, and lack of anxiety and depression (Harter, 2012). Moreover, high
self-esteem prospectively predicts success and well-being in adult domains such as
relationships, work, and health (Orth & Robins, 2014). However, the direction of
cause and effect in these links is not always clear. Good performance is as likely to
lead to high self-esteem as the reverse, and when variables such as the child’s com-
petence are controlled, links between self-esteem and positive social outcomes tend
to be reduced (Baumeister et al., 2003). Self-esteem can have a dark side, too. High
self-esteem does not prevent children from smoking, drinking, taking drugs, or
engaging in early sex. If anything, it fosters experimentation that can increase early
sexual activity and drinking (Baumeister et al., 2003). High self-esteem can also be
related to prejudice and antisocial behavior. In one study, aggressive adolescents
with high self-esteem were more likely than those with low self-esteem to justify
their antisocial behavior and belittling of victims (Menon et al., 2007). This find-
ing raises a warning flag: Promoting self-esteem for all children can have pitfalls.
In any event, researchers have not found that boosting children’s ­self-esteem—
by therapeutic interventions or school programs—leads to better social outcomes
(Baumeister et al., 2003).

Domain-Specific Perceptions
In addition to developing an overall global sense of self-worth, children develop
domain-specific self-perceptions in areas such as scholastics, athletics, and appear-
ance. A child can have a high self-perception of competence in schoolwork but a
poor self-perception of competence on the athletic field. Harter (1982, 2012) devel-
oped a measure for assessing both global self-esteem and specific self-perceptions.
With her assessment instrument, children rate themselves on global self-worth (“I
am a worthwhile person”) and in five domains: scholastic ability, athletic compe-
tence, physical appearance, behavioral conduct, and social acceptance (Table 6.1).
Using this measure, researchers have found meaningful distinctions between global
self-esteem and self-perceptions in specific areas and have constructed individual
profiles of self-evaluation across the five domains.
 Self-Perceptions  213

TABLE 6.1

Sample Items from the Harter Self-Perception Profile for Children

Really True for Me Sort of True for Me Really True for Me
Scholastic competence
Some kids feel like they are just as BUT Some kids aren’t so sure if
smart as other kids their age they are as smart
Athletic competence
Some kids are very good at sports BUT Some kids are not very
good at sports
Global self-worth
Some kids are often unhappy with BUT Some kids are pretty
themselves pleased with themselves

Source: Harter, 1982.

Learning Self-Appraisal
How do children develop their self-perceptions? In early childhood, self-appraisals
are not very accurate or realistic. Most children under 8 years rate themselves
positively—too positively. Even children who always strike out when they are at
bat might say they are “good at athletics,” and even the class troublemaker might
claim to be “well behaved.” For children of this age, self-perceptions might reflect
what they “want to be” rather than who they are. However, although discrepancies
between self-ratings and reality do exist, children’s self-assessments relate moder-
ately well to their teachers’ assessments, which suggests that children’s views of their
own competencies have at least some reality (Harter, 2012, 2016).
With development and a history of feedback from others, children become more
realistic in their self-appraisals. The “strike-out kid” no longer has a view of himself
or herself as a baseball star, and the class troublemaker has had enough detentions
and trips to the principal’s office to realize that he or she is not a good candidate
for a “well-behaved child” poster (Harter, 2012). Children who are rejected by their
peers accept this judgment and view themselves as low in social competence (Rubin
et al., 2015). Children also distinguish among different kinds of competence and
view themselves as better in some domains than others. They attach more impor-
tance to the domains they excel in. The “strike-out” child turns out to be a “math
whiz” and places higher value on scholastic achievement than athletic skills. The
“class troublemaker” turns out to be popular with peers and makes having friends
an important part of his or her self-appraisal.

Jason and John realized one day that they were really not great at everything. Jason
was good at baseball but was not so great at algebra. John realized that math was a
breeze for him but he was kind of shy and was never going to be the most popular kid
in the class. For both of them it was a relief to know their strengths and their limita-
tions. John decided not to run for class president and Jason planned to try out for the
baseball team.

How children evaluate themselves in different domains affects their overall sense
of self-esteem, depending on the importance they place on each domain. A student
214  Chapter 6 Self and Other

comes to college having been a star on the football field in high school but finds
that the college does not value athletics and does not even have a football team.
Athletic prowess can no longer serve as the basis for the student’s high global self-
esteem. Scholastic success is what is valued at the college, but this is not his strongest
area. His overall sense of worth as a person suffers. However, if he joins the drama
club, finds out that he is good at singing and dancing, rates himself high on artistic
competence, and regards this domain as important, he can regain a high level of
global self-esteem (Harter, 2012, 2016).
Over time, a reciprocal relation develops between children’s self-perceptions in
a domain and the interest, motivation, and effort they devote to activities in that
domain. For example, when children perceive that they are socially competent, they
are likely to approach social situations with a lot of self-confidence, which increases
their success in social interactions; success, in turn, bolsters their confidence and
their social self-perception. Support for this reciprocal link between self-appraisals
and real-life experience has been found in several domains, including academics,
athletics, and social acceptance (Harter, 2012, 2016; Marsh et al., 2007; Valentine
et al., 2004).

Gender Variations in Global Self-Esteem

Researchers studying self-esteem have asked whether differences in children’s levels
of self-esteem might be related to their gender. They have found that girls have
lower global self-esteem than boys beginning in middle childhood and that this
difference is particularly evident in adolescence (Mellanby et al., 2000; Van Houtte,
2005). In a study of 48 nations, this gender gap was largest in late adolescence and
persisted throughout early and middle adulthood before it narrowed and perhaps
even disappeared in old age (Bleidorn et al., 2016). One might think that societal
shifts toward increased gender equality would have lessened this difference between
the sexes. However, the discrepancy in global self-esteem has not changed over the
past 30 years.
Why does a gender difference in self-esteem occur? Several explanations have
been offered. First, boys are more dominant and assertive than girls, especially in
mixed-gender groups; this could contribute to a feeling of greater power and influ-
ence on the part of boys. Even in adulthood, traits that are more common among
men are positively correlated with self-esteem for both men and women, whereas
the link between traits that are more common among women and self-esteem has
been much weaker and less consistent (Gebauer et al., 2013). Opportunities to par-
ticipate in athletics also may be a factor. In spite of Title IX, a program that has
promoted more opportunities for girls to participate in sports, status and resources
still favor boys, who are still perceived as having more athletic ability than girls.
Moreover, girls don’t elect to participate in athletics as much as boys do; some
even see it as a threat to their femininity. Among both boys and girls, self-esteem is
higher for those who participate in sports than for their nonathletic peers (Harter,
2012). Nor is this gender difference restricted to North American samples. Girls in
­England, Australia, Ireland, Switzerland, Italy, Holland, China, and South Korea
also see themselves as less competent than boys in athletics (Gillen & Markey, 2014;
Harter, 2012).
Physical appearance contributes to the gender difference in self-esteem as
well. A clear link exists between children’s ratings of their appearance and their
overall self-esteem (Harter, 2012). Unfortunately, few girls can live up to the
ideals of beauty in the popular media. Movies, magazines, and TV all focus on
 Self-Perceptions  215

the importance of looks that are impossible to achieve, in part because many
of them are the result of air-brushing, digital retouching, and combining body
parts from different models. The images showcase thinness, tallness, and large
breasts. Perhaps in the future, more ads showing girls and women of all shapes
and sizes will start a trend toward more realistic images on TV and will have a
positive effect on girls’ self-esteem. Even boys are concerned about their body
image, which, in turn, may contribute to lower self esteem and mental health
(Gillen & Markey, 2014).

Social Determinants of Self-Esteem

Factors in their social environments at home and at school influence children’s
global self-esteem.

Family influences Stanley Coopersmith (1967) found that when parents were
accepting, affectionate, and involved with their children, set clear and consistent
rules, used noncoercive disciplinary tactics, and considered the child’s views in
family decisions, their children had higher self-esteem in middle childhood and
adolescence than children whose parents lacked these virtues. Later, investiga-
tors have found that adolescent girls whose mothers were more affectionate had
higher self-esteem and adolescent boys whose mothers were more psychologically
controlling, intrusive, and manipulative had lower self-esteem (Ojanen & Perry,
2007). Similarly adolescents whose parents were authoritative—affectionate but
firm—had higher self-esteem than adolescents whose parents were a­ uthoritarian—
controlling and punitive (Lamborn et al., 1991). Adolescents of supportive fathers
reported higher self-esteem (Behnke et al., 2011). Children with abusive parents
also have lower self-esteem than children with nonabusive parents (Cicchetti &
Toth, 2015). Parents’ approval seems to be particularly important for fostering
self-perceptions in the domains of scholastic competence and good conduct
(­Harter, 2012).

Influence of peers and mentors Children’s self-esteem becomes increasingly

influenced by their peers’ opinions as the children grow older. Peers are especially
important for promoting adolescents’ self-perceptions in the domains of physical
appearance, popularity, and athletic competence (Harter, 2012). Interestingly,
­support from peers in the “public domain”—that is, in classes, clubs, teams, and
work settings—is more important than support from close friends in the “private
domain” (Harter, 2012). Perhaps this is because public support is viewed as more
objective and credible than support from caring but biased friends. In fact, being
accepted by peers is important for maintaining a positive global self-esteem during
adolescence and those who perceive themselves to be more popular do have higher
self-esteem (Litwack et al., 2012). Even feedback from anonymous peer strangers
can affect children’s self-esteem. In one experiment, preadolescents were asked to
complete a personal profile describing their intelligence, agreeableness, trustwor-
thiness, sense of humor, and so on (Thomaes et al., 2010). They were told that
their personal profile and picture would be posted on the Survivor Game Web page
to be evaluated by peer judges. Children who received negative feedback from the
alleged peer judges reported declines in their self-esteem; children who received
positive feedback reported a boost in self-esteem. This study demonstrated a short-
term effect of peer opinion on children’s self-esteem. Of course, in real life, the
sustained evaluation by peers is what matters.
216  Chapter 6 Self and Other

Mentors such as coaches, teachers, and family friends are also influential
sources of support for self-esteem. In one study, for example, 6th to 8th graders
who thought they had received more support from their teachers increased in
self-esteem (Reddy et al., 2003; Rhodes & Frederikson, 2004). A meta-analysis of
73 studies of youth mentoring programs such as Big Brothers Big Sisters have a posi-
tive influence on children’s self-esteem (Rhodes et al., 2000). About 3 ­million youth
in the United States are currently in these programs, which apparently work by
increasing ­children’s scholastic confidence and improving their relationships with
their parents. However, the impact of the programs is often modest and depends
on the consistency, quality, and duration of the mentoring (Grossman et al., 2012).

Boosting self-esteem When parents lavish supposed self-esteem boosters on their

children—“You’re so smart!” “You’re the best soccer player on your team!” “Your
coloring is genius!”—does this, in fact, promote their self-esteem? A growing body
of research suggests that praising children for their talent and intelligence doesn’t
help them achieve success; it sets them up for disappointment. These children are
likely to stumble at school when faced with challenges that don’t immediately rein-
force the accolades they hear at home. They’re also more likely to avoid tasks at
which they might fail than children who are praised instead for their hard work.
Carol Dweck (2008) compared two groups of 5th graders who took an IQ test involv-
ing relatively easy puzzles. One group was praised as being intelligent and the other
for making a good effort. In subsequent testing, the children who had been praised
for being smart backed away from a difficult assignment when an easier one was
offered. They took their failure at another very difficult test as a sign they weren’t
smart at all. In a final IQ test, which was exactly the same as the first one, the chil-
dren who were tagged as intelligent did about 20 percent worse than they had the
first time. The children praised for their effort improved their scores by 30 per-
cent. By labeling a child smart or talented, parents are, in effect, “outsourcing” the
child’s self-esteem. The more children are praised, the more they look over their
shoulder, wondering: “Am I going to get praise? Do people think this is good?” It is
better to foster in children a “growth mindset” that they can develop their abilities
through effort. To do this, parents should focus on children’s efforts and how they
tackle tasks. They should praise children’s strategies and progress rather than their
intelligence. They should praise socially desirable behaviors and self-improvement
rather than abilities. Praise needs to be specific and sincere, not exaggerated and
unwarranted (Dweck, 2017). When parents focus on effort and strategies with their
1- to 3-year-olds, they are more likely to develop growth mind sets 5 years later than
by focusing on ability and intelligence (Gunderson et al., 2013). Stepping out of the
way and letting children solve problems on their own will also help them build true
self-esteem (Dweck, 2008; Young-Eisendrath, 2008).

Identity Formation
Sometimes I look in the mirror and say to myself, “Okay who are you really?” I pull
my hair back and put on makeup and look very sophisticated. That’s one me. I let my
hair fall loosely on my shoulders, put on a Shetland sweater, and that’s another me. I
write poetry and stay up late to watch the stars and planets through my telescope; that’s
another me. I get really involved in my chemistry homework and think I’ll be a doctor,
or I want to be a translator, or I want to be a foreign correspondent. There are almost
too many possibilities.
 Identity Formation  217

Forming a sense of identity involves defining oneself as a discrete, separate entity

and addressing the questions “Who am I?” and “What will I become?” in terms of
religious views, political values, gender preference, and occupational aspirations.
This process is a major challenge in adolescence (Crocetti, 2017). Erik Erikson was
one of the first psychologists to study adolescents’ identity development (see Chap-
ter 1). His fifth developmental stage focused on the search for a stable self-identity.
Failure to achieve a stable identity, Erikson claimed, results in identity confusion—a
state he illustrated with a line from Arthur Miller’s play Death of a Salesman, when Biff
says, “I just can’t take hold, Mom. I can’t take hold of some kind of life.” Although
empirical support for Erikson’s theory has been limited in part because of the dif-
ficulty of testing his ideas, his work has been an important catalyst for research and
theorizing.
Following Erikson’s lead, James Marcia (1966, 1993) described a period during
which adolescents experience a crisis of decision making when alternative identities
are explored, options tried, and new ways of being are imagined. For example, an
adolescent boy thinks about pursuing various occupations, such as becoming a chef,
a doctor, or a jazz musician. He buys cookbooks and watches Top Chef, becomes a fan
of medical dramas on TV, and practices the saxophone every night. He also visits
several religious groups to experience different religious beliefs and customs. As he
goes through this examination of possible selves, four types of identity outcomes
are possible (Table 6.2). The goal for every young person is to achieve a stable and
satisfying identity, but as this table indicates, not everyone achieves the desired state
of commitment to an identity. The fortunate ones actively engage in identity explo-
ration and, in the end, commit themselves to a satisfactory and acceptable identity.
Identity achievement—the most developmentally advanced identity outcome—is
associated with several positive outcomes, including high self-esteem, cognitive flex-
ibility, mature moral reasoning, clear goal setting, and better academic achievement
(Meeus, 2011; Moshman, 2005). This person’s cognitive flexibility is reflected in a
nuanced approach to religious identity; he or she is able to entertain some element
of doubt about religious identity rather than a closed mindedness about religious
beliefs (Puffer et al., 2008). Adolescents who have achieved a sense of identity are
able to develop close intimate relationships with others such as parents, siblings,
and romantic partners more readily than youth who have still not achieved a stable
and mature sense of self (Crocetti, 2017).
Some adolescents—the foreclosed group—remain committed to their childhood
values and beliefs and do not use adolescence as a period to explore other potential
identities. Compared with other adolescents, they express less doubt and uncertainty

TABLE 6.2

Four Identity Outcomes

Type Outcome
Identity diffusion Person has experienced neither identity crisis nor identity commitment.
Identity foreclosure Person has made a commitment without attempting identity exploration.
Identity moratorium Person is actively involved in exploring different identities but has not made a commitment.
Identity achievement Person has gone through exploration of different identities and made a commitment to one.

Source: Marcia, 1966.

218  Chapter 6 Self and Other

about their religious identity and beliefs (Puffer et al., 2008); they are more authori-
tarian and inflexible and more susceptible to extreme ideologies and movements,
such as cults or radical political movements (Saroglou & Galand, 2004).
Another group of adolescents actively explore but fail to reach any resolution
about who they are and what they believe and value. Marcia (1966, 1993) describes
them as being in moratorium; they have reached a plateau and are still in the process
of identity formation. These adolescents tend to be anxious and intense, and they
often have strained or ambivalent relationships with their parents and other author-
ity figures (Kroger & Marcia, 2011). However, they are better adjusted than those
with a foreclosed or a diffused identity status (Berzonksy & Kuk, 2000).
Adolescents with a diffused identity neither engage in exploration nor are con-
cerned about committing themselves to a particular identity; they take life as it hap-
pens. These individuals are viewed as the least mature in their identity development.
Some are delinquents and abuse drugs; others are lonely or depressed; still others
are angry and rebellious (Kroger & Marcia, 2011). Their lack of caring attitude is
often linked with academic problems and a sense of hopelessness (Snarey & Bell,
2003).
These four identity outcomes can be viewed not as stages but as different levels
in the identity process (Kroger & Marcia, 2011). Individuals can shift from one
to another even over the course of adolescence. For example, an adolescent in a
state of moratorium might settle on and achieve an identity only to shift back to a
moratorium state some time later. These shifts are especially likely when the ado-
lescent achieves identity early in development. For adolescents in the foreclosure
and diffusion groups, cycling between states of identity is less common because they
never developed a sense of self-identity in the first place. In longitudinal studies of
identity in early to late adolescence, researchers found evidence of these back-and-
forth shifts (Meeus, 2011). However, in general, over this age period the number
of adolescents who had diffused identities or were in moratorium decreased and
the number who were committed to a foreclosed identity or an achieved identity
increased. Not all adolescents underwent identity shifts; about 60 percent remained
in the same identity level from early to late adolescence (Meuss et al., 2010).
Identity formation is clearly not over in adolescence, and according to one
meta-analysis, identity change may be more prevalent in young adulthood (Roberts
et al., 2006). Many young adults continue to struggle with identity issues, especially
now that education is an extended commitment and dependency on parents for
financial support lasts longer than in the past (Arnett, 2014). The recognition that
identity is dynamic and changes over time has led to recent work that has focused
on the processes of forming, maintaining, and revising or modifying one’s iden-
tity. According to Elisabetta Crocetti (2017), identity formation is best understood
by three processes: “(1) Commitment refers to enduring choices individuals have
made regarding various developmental domains and the self-confidence they derive
from these choices, (2) in depth exploration represents the extent to which indi-
viduals actively think about the commitments they have enacted (i.e., reflecting on
their choices, searching for additional information, talking to others about their
commitments), and (3) reconsideration of commitment involves comparing pre-
sent commitments with possible alternative commitments because the current ones
are no longer satisfactory” (2017, p. 146). According to this view, individuals engage
in these processes across time as they consider and reconsider their identities across
time and in light of new social and cognitive experiences.
A number of factors influence adolescents’ identity development. First, parents
and peers continue to play a role in identity development. Second, biological changes
contribute to the self-identity process. Puberty signals a clear break from childhood
and reminds the adolescent that adulthood is approaching. An awareness of self
 Identity Formation  219

as a sexual being emerges as well, which stimulates exploration of sexual identity

and sexual relationships. Changes in cognitive functioning also affect adolescents’
abilities to achieve an identity. Advances in cognitive development during adoles-
cence permit more abstract reasoning, which, in turn, allows adolescents to think
more deeply about themselves. As a result, they not only appreciate discrepancies
between their ideal and actual selves but also recognize that they present different
selves in different contexts. As one adolescent expressed it:

“I am an extravert with my friends. I’m more likely to be depressed with my parents.

I can be a real introvert around people I don’t know well.”

Clearly, this adolescent is aware of multiple identities that appear in different

social contexts.

nto Adulthood: Identity Formation Continues

Emerging adulthood—the age Identity formation continues after emerging
period between the late teens adulthood if it has not yet been achieved (Kroger
and the mid-20s—is a period of et al., 2010). When researchers in Finland studied
unprecedented freedom to a sample of adults at ages 27, 36, 42, and 50, they
explore identity options. “Shall I found that development along a sequence from
become a doctor? Is this really what I want?” identity diffusion to identity achievement was the
“Should I be a writer?” This freedom in a time of most frequent trajectory and that identity
high hopes and big dreams is exciting. However, achievement was related to having a prolonged
it is also a time of anxiety and uncertainty as education, making a later transition to adult
establishing an identity becomes increasingly working life, and starting a family “on time”—not
important (Arnett, 2014). College students are too early, not too late (Fadjukoff et al., 2005, 2007,
more likely to have achieved an identity if their 2016). There was great variability in identity status
parents are supportive, respect their wishes and across domains at each age level, and the
needs, and avoid intrusive and manipulative identity trajectories fluctuated from age 27 to 50.
strategies (Luyckx et al., 2007). If parents are not A study following adults in the United States
sensitive and attuned, college students are more from age 30 to 60 also showed that identity
likely to have a fragmented sense of identity. development continues during adulthood
Researchers who followed adolescents in a (Cramer, 2004). The greatest change occurred
national study into early adulthood discovered four during the period from early to middle adult-
different identity patterns depending on the young hood, when the likelihood of having an
adults’ family backgrounds and experiences achieved identity increased, and the likelihood of
(Benson & Elder, 2011): Young adults who came having identity diffusion decreased. Having an
from disadvantaged families were likely to develop achieved identity was associated with being
a “pseudo-adult” identity, young adults from Asian more intelligent, experiencing success in work,
American families had delayed autonomy and having positive marital and family relationships,
were likely to develop a late adult identity, young and participating in community and political
adults from African American families developed activities. Adults with a foreclosed identity were
an early adult identity (they had experienced likely to have strong positive relationships with
pubertal development and sexual events earlier their parents and relatives, participate in lodge
and took on more adult-like responsibilities); and activities, and become more politically conserva-
young women who had distant and conflict-ridden tive. Adults experiencing identity moratorium
relations with their parents had delayed develop- were likely to have weak relationships with their
ment of psychosocial skills and accelerated parents, participate in community and political
adoption of adult roles and identity. activities, and become more liberal.
220  Chapter 6 Self and Other

Ethnic Identity
As our society has become more heterogeneous, interest has grown in how chil-
dren learn to identify themselves in terms of their race and ethnicity. For children
who are part of the majority race and ethnic group, the issue is not a salient one,
but children who are members of a minority group face the challenge of how to
balance their sense of distinctive identity while still functioning in the broader
culture (Phinney & Ong, 2007; Worrell, 2015). Ethnic identity refers to the sense
of belonging to a certain race or ethnic group. It has several components (see
Table 6.3).

Development of ethnic identity Ethnic identity emerges gradually over child-

hood and adolescence. Even in infancy, 3-month-old babies look longer at faces
of their own race than faces of other races (Kelly et al., 2005). By 9 months, they
associate positive emotions with same race faces while linking negative emotions
with faces of other races (Xiao et al., 2017). Preschoolers have been shown to
have implicit racial biases (Banaji & Greenwald, 2006, 2013; Qian et al., 2016).
For example, when presented with a racially ambiguous face displaying positive
or negative emotion, preschoolers, like adults, categorized the face with positive
emotion as own-race, but the same face with negative emotion as other-race (Xiao
et al., 2015). Preschool children are aware of cues to race and ethnicity such as
skin color and also prefer to play with children from their own group (Rubin
et al., 2015). Minority-group children reach this awareness and preference ear-
lier than children from the majority group (Milner, 1983). Preschool children
also participate in many activities that are culture- or subculture-specific. For
example, they hit a piñata at their birthday party and enjoy tamales if they are
of Mexican heritage. But they might not recognize that these experiences are
unique to their culture.
As children develop cognitively in the preschool years they begin to recognize
which behaviors are part of the majority culture and which are unique to their own
ethnic group. They can label themselves as part of a racial/ethnic group (Brown
& Bigler, 2005). Positive feelings and preferences for ethnic-group activities also
begin to develop during this period (Xiao et al., 2015). Younger children prefer

TABLE 6.3

Faces of Ethnic Identity

Type Description
Ethnic knowledge Children know that their ethnic group has distinguishing characteristics including behav-
iors, traits, customs, styles, and language.
Ethnic self-identification Children categorize themselves as a member of a particular ethnic group.
Ethnic constancy Children understand that the distinctive features of their ethnic group are stable across
time and situation and that membership in the group does not change.
Ethnic behaviors Children enact and endorse behavior patterns that distinguish their ethnic group.
Ethnic preferences Children feel positive about belonging to their ethnic group and prefer their ethnic
group’s behavior patterns.

Source: Bernal et al., 1993.

 Identity Formation  221

activities because they are what they do with their family; in

elementary school, children realize that these activities are dis-
tinctive expressions of their ethnic background. Preschool chil-
dren have only a global understanding of their culture and use
ethnic labels in a rote fashion. “I’m Chinese American because
my family told me so.” In early elementary school they begin to
understand what ethnic labels mean (Bernal et al., 1993). At this
point, they recognize that the ancestry, pride, and heritage are
aspects of ethnicity. The term Chinese American means that their
parents (or grandparents or great grandparents) were born in
China and later migrated to the United States (Gillen-O’Neel
et al., 2015). Elementary school children also understand eth-

Guy Cali / Corbis/ Getty Images

nic group constancy. They recognize that their ethnicity is not
changeable but remains one of their permanent characteris-
tics (Quintana, 2011). They become aware that their identity
as Chinese American, African American, or Mexican American
does not change over time or context (Ocampo et al., 1997).
Interviews with elementary school children in New York
City illustrated how ethnic identity differs for different ethnic
groups (Rogers et al., 2012). When they were asked, “What
This adolescent boy, lighting Kwanzaa candles with his
does it mean to be [ethnicity]?” children of immigrants were father, is exploring his ethnic identity.
more likely to refer to their language:

“It means that when you know your own language you can speak with everyone, you can
speak to them.” (Russian American girl)
“It means to speak Chinese, but in the movies white people speak Chinese, but it’s
fake, I never saw it in real life.” (Chinese American boy)

Immigrant children were also more likely to refer to heredity:

“Because you’re born that way, if your mother is Chinese, you’ll be too.” (Chinese Amer-
ican boy)

European American and African American children were likely to refer to physi-
cal appearance when asked what it means to be “white” or “black”:

“Most of my friends are white; they will like me more if I have their skin color.” (Euro-
pean American boy)

They were also likely to refer to social position:

“You’re born being black. You’re from the ghetto. You’re cooler than the white people.
You get in more trouble. And in the police department they’re more black people in jail
than white.” (African American girl)
“Well, a lot of people are white or black, and some jobs you have to be white and
some you have to be black; so, you get those choices.” (European American girl)

Dominican American and African American children were likely to discuss pride:

“You like what you have and you’re proud of what you are.” (Dominican American girl)
“It’s very important. I was born in a black family. I’m black and proud to be.” (African
American girl)
222  Chapter 6 Self and Other

Chinese American children seldom referred to pride—perhaps because Asian

people are less likely to brag, perhaps because language and heredity were so cen-
tral to these children’s definitions of ethnic identity (accounting for 76 percent of
their responses), or perhaps because more than the other ethnic groups Chinese
American children demonstrated a collective view of ethnic identity that did not
center on pride.
Dominican American and Russian American children were more likely to make
references to positive traits:

“Dominicans are hardworking, responsible, take care of themselves.” (Dominican

American boy)
“To be smart, successful, and strong.” (Russian American boy)

Although progress in ethnic awareness is made in middle childhood, the most

active period of ethnic-identity development is adolescence, when the general pro-
cess of self-definition begins (Quintana, 2011). Adolescents recognize that discrimi-
nation, bias in group attitudes, and prejudice are part of racial/ethnic identity as
well (Ulma-Taylor et al., 2014). One researcher discovered, for example, that active
exploration of identity issues in African American children was being pursued by
one-third of 8th graders, one half of 10th graders, and increasing numbers through
college (Phinney, 1992). Other researchers have also found that African American
and Latino American children explored their ethnic identities more and became
more proud of their ethnic group during adolescence (Rivas-Drake et al., 2014).
How quickly and completely adolescents achieve a clear sense of their ethnic
identity varies for individuals. In one study, researchers found that a substantial
number of minority students had achieved an ethnic identity in 11th grade
(26 percent of Latino students, 39 percent of Asian American students, and
55 ­percent of African American students; Umana-Taylor et al., 2004, 2014). Other
students had a foreclosed identity (34 percent of Latinos, 13 percent of Asian
­Americans, and 24 ­percent of African Americans); they had settled on and adopted
an ethnic identity at an early age without much question. A third group of students
had devoted little energy and thought to ethnic identity issues and were character-
ized as adopting an unexamined or diffuse ethnic identity (23 percent of Latinos
and Asian Americans, and 8 percent of African Americans). The smallest number of
students were in a state of moratorium (9 percent of Latino Americans, 13 percent
of Asian Americans, and 8 percent of African Americans).
Having achieved a clear, positive ethnic identity is related to high self-esteem,
more optimism, and more social competence, as well as more positive feelings
toward the ethnic group (Chavous et al., 2003; Rivas-Drake et al., 2014). This is
especially true for adolescents who do not experience much ethnic discrimination,
for example, if they are in classes where the majority of students are members of
their own ethnic group (Greene et al., 2006). Youth run a risk if they don’t identify
with their ethnic group. If they identify too strongly with the dominant culture, they
are often criticized and ostracized by their ethnic group peers for being “too white.”
Labels such as “Oreo,” “banana,” and “apple”—colored on the outside but white
on the inside—are pejorative terms directed at minority African Americans, Asian
Americans, and Native Americans who identify with the values, styles, and aspira-
tions of the majority culture. These adolescents might experience rejection by their
ethnic peers and develop strategies such as hiding their grades or pretending that
they don’t care about white success (Ogbu, 2003). In a study of African American
adolescents aged 11 to 16, Margaret Spencer found that the ones who identified
 Identity Formation  223

with the majority culture exhibited lower achievement and less self-esteem than the
ones with a clear African American identity (Spencer et al., 2006). Students with
anti-white attitudes also performed poorly. It appears that minority students ben-
efit from embracing their ethnicity and forming a positive ethnic identity without
disparaging the majority culture. Minority adolescents with a strong positive ethnic
identity are better adjusted than those with a weak or negative identity (Rivas-Drake
et al., 2014). They are less likely to become delinquents (Bruce & Waelde, 2008),
do better in school (Costigan et al., 2010), experience less depression (Mandara
et al., 2009), and have more positive attitudes toward other ethnic groups (Phinney
et al., 2007), and are protected from the negative effects of racial discrimination
(Neblett et al., 2012; Tynes et al., 2012). Experiences of discrimination are linked
with poorer outcomes (Galliher et al., 2011; Jackson et al., 2012). These effects are
found across many ethnic groups (Latino, Chinese American, African American,
Native Canadian/American) in Canada and the United States as well as in Europe
and South America (Ulma-Taylor et al., 2014).

Biracial and bicultural children and youth Children who are biracial, that is,
are adopted into a family from a different race or have parents from two different
races, and this group has increased by 32 percent since 2000 (Humes, Jones, &
Ramirez, 2011). They face unique challenges in forging an ethnic identity (Umana-
Taylor et al., 2004). With a white American mother and a black African father,
U.S. President Barack Obama struggled with identity issues for many years. As he
describes in his book, Dreams from My Father, he finally settled on a black identity
but only after a childhood and adolescence in which he was unsure of his place in
the wider society. Was he black? Was he white? However, many individuals of mixed
race choose a multiracial identity which recognizes their mixed heritage. According
to Townsend et al. (2012), the middle class is more likely than the working class to
espouse a biracial identity, as are students attending majority white schools. A posi-
tive multiracial identity is linked to good psychological health including higher self-
esteem, a higher sense of efficacy, and lower stereotype vulnerability than those who
opt for a single identity (Binning et al., 2009; Shih et al., 2007). It is important to
note that racial identities are changeable and more multiracial identity individuals
switch than those who choose a single racial self (Doyle & Kao, 2007).
What about children whose parents come from two cultures or are immigrants
from a different culture? Can they develop a bicultural identity, adopting both
the norms and attitudes of the majority or new culture and the valued and cher-
ished traditions from the minority culture? Bicultural identity involves simultane-
ous adoption of the languages and practices of two cultures. Developing such an
identity would permit children and adolescents to meet the dual expectations they
encounter every day as they move between minority and majority settings. As one
adolescent from an immigrant family put it (Phinney & Rosenthal, 1992, p. 160):

“Being invited to someone’s house, I have to change my ways from how I act at home,
because of cultural differences. . . . I am used to it now, switching off between the two.
It’s not that difficult.”

The four identities that a Mexican American adolescent can form are illustrated
in Figure 6.1: a bicultural identity, in which the adolescent identifies as belonging
to both the European American majority and the Mexican American minority; a
Mexican identity, in which the adolescent identifies solely with the Mexican ethnic
group; a European American identity, in which the adolescent identifies solely with
224  Chapter 6 Self and Other

High
5

Cultural identification
European
Bicultural
American
orientation
orientation

Mexican American Cultural identification

Low 1 3 5 High

European American
FIGURE 6.1 Types of ethnic identity. When Mexican American
adolescents rate themselves on two 5-point scales—level of
European American cultural identification and level of Mexican Marginal Mexican
American cultural identification—their scores can be used to orientation orientation
place them in the four ethnic identity groups shown here.
Source: Parke, R. D., & Buriel, R. (2006). Socialization in the family:
Ethnic and ecological perspectives. In W. Damon & R. M. Lerner (Series
Eds.), & N. Eisenberg (Vol. Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 3. Social,
emotional and personality development (6th ed., pp. 429–504). Hoboken, 1
NJ: Wiley. Low

the majority culture; and a marginal identity, in which the adolescent is not strongly
identified with either majority or minority. Adolescents who adopt a marginal iden-
tity are “decultured”; they have rejected their ancestral culture and are alienated
from the majority culture (Berry, 2008). They are likely to have social and psycho-
logical problems. According to a meta-analysis, in today’s multiethnic world, ado-
lescents with a bicultural identity have the best physical and psychological health
(Nugent & Benet-Martinez, 2013). Their ability to operate in two social worlds helps
them develop interpersonal skills and high self-esteem (Buriel et al., 2006).

Factors that promote ethnic identity Parents play a major role in the develop-
ment of children’s ethnic identity by imparting knowledge about cultural traditions,
instilling pride in their ethnic heritage, and preparing children for the hardships
that can accompany minority status, such as prejudice and discrimination, espe-
cially in the case of recent immigrant families (Seaton et al., 2012; Umaña-Taylor
et al., 2013). This socialization process serves a protective function and makes chil-
dren more resilient in the face of prejudice (Neblett et al., 2012). In one study,
­eighth-grade African American children who said that they had received frequent
messages about race pride and a moderate amount of preparation for bias from
their parents had higher self-esteem when faced with discrimination than children
whose parents did not provide these forms of support (Harris-Britt et al., 2007).
In another study, a higher level of racial socialization in African American families
was associated with less aggression and acting out in adolescence (Bannon et al.,
2004). Most minority group parents do socialize their children regarding ethnic
issues and prejudice (Spencer et al., 2015), especially older children (Hughes et al.,
2006, 2009). Parents who do not socialize their children leave them vulnerable and
unprepared for discrimination (Spencer et al., 2015).
As children enter adolescence, their peers become another socializing force and
shaper of ethnic identity. In high school, most students hang out with members of
their own ethnic group. They tend not to know classmates in other ethnic groups
well because they see these students more as members of those groups than as indi-
viduals (Steinberg et al., 1992). Adolescents who have more contact and friend-
ships with others in their own ethnic group have more stable ethnic identities than
 Identity Formation  225

adolescents with few same-race friends (Yip et al., 2010). However, it is not simply
that peers choose to be with others of similar race, but across time peers influence
each other and become more similar to each other in terms of their racial identity
(Santos et al., 2017). However, there are positive effects of cross-group contact as
well. Adolescents who have more extensive contact with members of other ethnic
groups in school tend to develop more mature ethnic identities and more favorable
attitudes toward people of other ethnicities (Phinney et al., 1997) even if the contact
with other groups was only online (Tynes et al., 2008). The most effective route to
increasing positive attitudes toward members of another ethnic group, however, is by
the development of friendships with members of another group (Davies et al., 2011).
Beyond the influence of parents and peers, broader cultural forces and events
contribute to children’s and adolescents’ ethnic identity development, both posi-
tively and negatively. One source of input affecting identity development in a nega-
tive way are the stereotypes of African Americans and Asian Americans on American
television programs and reality shows (Pettigrew & Tropp, 2011; Ramasubramanian,
2011; Tyree, 2011)(see Chapter 9 for more media information). A counterbalanc-
ing effort to provide children and youth with positive images and role models and
bolster ethnic identity development is Black History Month. A specific positive event
was the election of Barack Obama to the U.S. presidency in 2008, which served as an
“encounter” experience for African American students, leading to increases in their
identity exploration and an immediate and longer-term influence on their positive
racial identity (Fuller-Rowell et al., 2011).

Religious Identity
Identity takes a variety of forms, including for many children and adolescents a
religious identity (King & Boyatzis, 2015). Anna Lopez and her colleagues (2011)
assessed religious identity in Latino, Asian American, and European American ado-
lescents in 10th, 11th, and 12th grades by asking them how much they agreed with
statements such as these:
“I have a strong sense of belonging to my own religion.”
“In general, being a member of my religion is an important part of my self-image.”
“Being a part of my religion is an important reflection of who I am.”
“I feel a strong attachment toward my own religion.”
They found that religious identity was relatively stable during these years, perhaps
because the stability of social environments in high school results in few challenges to
existing religious identities and little need for exploration. The researchers suggested
that greater change is likely at prominent points of transition, such as the transition
to adulthood, when individuals move away from home, attend college, develop more
long-term romantic relationships, and encounter new work environments.
The strength of religious identity differs by gender. Girls, especially European
American and Latina girls, on average report stronger religious identities than boys
(Lopez et al., 2011). Other researchers, similarly, have found that African American
girls have stronger religious identities than boys (Mattis et al., 2005; Taylor et al.,
2004). Girls of all ethnicities also participate in religious activities more than boys
(Lopez et al., 2011; Mattis et al., 2005). In Chapter 10, “Sex and Gender,” we dis-
cuss characteristics of girls that are compatible with these gender differences in
religiousness—such as being more emotional, prosocial, and romantic than boys.
Lopez and her colleagues also found ethnic differences in religious identity:
Latino and Asian adolescents reported stronger religious identities than European
American adolescents. Why? According to some theorists, ethnic minorities who
226  Chapter 6 Self and Other

feel discriminated against by the majority culture may place more importance on
additional social identities such as religious identity as a source of strength in the
face of social threat (Tajfel & Turner, 2001). Religious identity is also strong among
African American youth and has similarly been reported to be a protective factor
or coping strategy against discrimination for them (Mattis et al., 2005). In addi-
tion, Lopez and colleagues found that changes in religious identity were related to
changes in ethnic identity perhaps because ethnicity and religion are both part of
the adolescents’ cultural background, so exploring one domain involves exploring
the other. As one young Mexican immigrant reflected:

“It is really hard to separate being Mexican and being Catholic since they are both cen-
tral parts of how I think of who I am.”

Finally, another reason that ethnic minority adolescents may have stronger reli-
gious identities is that they are more active in religious services than majority ado-
lescents. Researchers have found that African American and Latino adolescents
participate in religious activities more than European Americans (Chatters et al.,
2009; Lopez et al., 2011; Pew Charitable Trust, 2010).
As was true for ethnic identity, religious identity is related to psychological
well-being. Adolescents with a strong religious identity have better emotional and
behavioral self-regulation, are less likely to engage in antisocial activity, report fewer
psychological problems, and are more likely to be employed in adulthood (Mattis
et al., 2005; Pope et al., 2014; Stolz et al., 2013). Because there is a close link between
religious identity and religious participation, however, some of these effects may be
due, in part, to the social support and structured activities provided by religious
institutions as well as to religious identity. For example, church-based social support
fully mediated the association between frequency of church attendance and overall
life satisfaction among African Americans (Assari, 2013).
A variety of individuals influence the development of young people’s religious
identity, including parents, especially mothers, and peers (King & Boyatzis, 2015).
For example, religious socialization by parents and peers was positively associated
with adolescents’ religious identity in a study of Korean American adolescents from
immigrant families (Seol & Lee, 2012). Religious figures such as priests, rabbis, and
other spiritual leaders play a socialization role in religious identity as well (King &
Boyatzis, 2015; Mattis et al., 2005).

eal-World Application: Sexual Orientation

and Identity
Nationwide, 88.8 percent of “I was afraid that I was gay when I was very
students identified as heterosex- young. I knew it when I was in my teens. But
ual, 2 percent identified as gay it took me until college to come out.”
or lesbian, 6.0 percent identified
as bisexual, and 3.2 percent were not sure of Many gay and lesbian adults recall that
their sexual identity (Kann et al., 2016). The even as children, they had feelings that were
recognition that they prefer a member of their different from their peers (Bailey & Zucker, 1995)
own sex as a sexual partner is usually a gradual and studies of home videos of gay and lesbian
process (Diamond & Alley, 2017). adults confirm that as children they displayed
 Identity Formation  227

more gender nonconforming behaviors (Rieger 2017; Halberstam, 2012; Schulman, 2013). They
et al., 2008). As early as fourth grade, some want a more inclusive category than “homo-
expressed doubts about their heterosexuality sexual” to define their identity, a broader spec-
(Carver et al., 2004; Egan & Perry, 2001) and trum than “lesbian–gay–bisexual–transsexual”
most knew for sure that they were lesbian, gay, (L.G.B.T). The emerging rubric is “L.G.B.T.Q.I.A.”
bisexual, or transgender by age 17 (Taylor, which stands for different things, depending on
2013). Gay men report having reached all of whom you ask. “Q” can mean “questioning” or
these coming out milestones somewhat earlier “queer”; “I” is for “intersex,” someone whose
than do lesbians and bisexuals. They anatomy is not exclusively male or female; and
responded more negatively to such questions “A” stands for “asexual,” characterized by the
as “Some boys definitely think they’ll get mar- absence of sexual attraction. It may be a
ried one day” or “Some girls definitely think that mouthful, but it’s catching on, especially on
they will be a mother one day.” They expressed liberal-arts campuses and social media sites.
less interest in activities stereotypically linked to Other terms have also been suggested, includ-
their own gender, such as babysitting for girls ing “non-cisgender” (“cisgender” denotes
and playing baseball for boys, and they were someone whose gender identity matches his or
more likely to express dissatisfaction with their her biology), “bi-gender,” “agender,” “gender-
own gender. Compared with children who queer” (a catchall term for nontraditional
were confident of their heterosexuality, they gender identities), “pansexual,” “omnisexual,”
were more likely to report an impaired “trisexual,” “agender,” “bigender,” “third gender,”
self-concept. and “transgender.”
This questioning phase was typically followed Today, about 56 percent of homosexual and
by a test-and-exploration phase in adoles- bisexual adults disclosed their sexual identity to
cence, during which time homosexual and their mothers while 39 percent told their fathers
bisexual teens were ambivalent about their (Taylor, 2013), a clear increase from a decade
same-sex preference and began to explore ago (Savin-Williams & Ream, 2003). They also
these feelings (Diamond & Alley, 2017; Savin- disclose this information at a younger age than
Williams, 2016). During the identity-acceptance they did 10 years ago, on average, at age 20
phase, they began to accept their same-sex rather than in their mid-20s (Taylor, 2013). The
orientation. “Identity integration” was the final adolescent’s declaration of a homosexual
phase in this identity process, as gay, lesbian, identity is received with more or less accept-
and bisexual individuals accepted their orienta- ance by different people in the community.
tion and acknowledged their identity to others. Fathers are less accepting of their son’s or
Greater identity integration was related to daughter’s homosexual orientation than are
less-depressive and anxious symptoms, fewer mothers, and members of conservative religious
conduct problems, and higher self-esteem groups are also less accepting (D’Augelli, 2006;
(Rosario et al., 2011). Regardless of the age at Taylor, 2013). Asian Americans and Latino
which they finally “came out”, gay, lesbian, and Americans are less tolerant than European
bisexual individuals almost always identified Americans (Taylor, 2013). Many homosexual
themselves as homosexual before they individuals (20 percent to 40 percent) experi-
engaged in any same-sex sexual activity ence discrimination, rejection, and outright
(Calzo et al., 2011). hostility (D’Augelli, 2006) and 39 percent say
For the generation dealing with sexual that at some point in their lives they were
identity and orientation issues today, the core rejected by a family member or close friend
question isn’t who to love or have sex with, but because of their sexual orientation or gender
who they themselves are (Diamond & Alley, identity (Taylor, 2013).
228  Chapter 6 Self and Other

Development of Knowledge about Others

Learning about oneself is only half of the social-development picture; children
must also learn to understand the social cues, signals, intentions, and actions of
others.

Early Understanding of Intentions and Norms

By the time they are 1 year old, infants begin to understand that people’s actions are
intentional and goal directed (Brandone, 2015; Thompson, 2015). For example,
they recognize that when people look at, reach for, or point to an object, they are
interested in that object (Woodward, 2009). After the first year, infants create joint-
attentional states with adults by looking at the same object or using their own actions
of pointing and reaching to bring the adult’s attention to the object (­Tomasello,
2014; Tomasello & Rakoczy, 2003). By 18 months of age, toddlers also begin to
recognize simple social norms. They recognize that a broken object is a violation
of how things ought to be and that rouge on your nose is not how people should
look (Lewis, 2008a). By the end of their second year, they can describe norms, or
scripts, for social routines such as bedtime rituals, family mealtimes, and what hap-
pens when children are dropped off at child care (Nelson, 1993, 2007). Knowledge
of these scripts provides the foundation for understanding a broad range of social
events, including greeting a friend, lining up for school lunches, and following rules
for games such as Monopoly or soccer. Knowing scripts conserves children’s social
energy, ensures social predictability, and helps smooth out peer interactions. Scripts
also aid in children’s development of long-term memory of life events (Bohn &
Bernsten, 2013).

Later Understanding of Mental States:

Theory of Mind
As they grow older, children also come to understand other people’s mental states—
thoughts, beliefs, and desires—and how they affect behavior (Birch et al., 2017;
Harris, 2006, 2012). This understanding has important implications for social devel-
opment because it allows children to move beyond observable actions and appear-
ances and respond to unseen states. Researchers studying children’s development
of a theory of mind have used stories to find out whether children realize how char-
acters’ actions are based on their mental states (Wellman, 2017; Wimmer & Perner,
1983). For example, they tell a story about a young boy named Maxi who puts his
candy in a cupboard in the kitchen and goes into another room to play. While Maxi
is off playing, his mother moves his candy from the cupboard to a drawer. After a
while, Maxi returns and wants his candy. The researcher then asks the child where
Maxi will look for his candy. Older preschoolers (4 to 5 years old) typically say that
Maxi will search in the cupboard because they know that Maxi will look where he
believes the candy to be, not where they themselves know the candy is. Their answer
indicates that they know that Maxi’s behavior is based on his mental state and are
able to separate what Maxi believes to be true from what they know to be true.
Younger children (3 years old) ignore Maxi’s mental state and say that he will look
for the candy in the drawer. Studies using this “false-belief” story-telling technique
suggest that children’s understanding of mental states develops during early child-
hood (Wellman, 2017; Wellman et al., 2001).
 Development of Knowledge about Others  229

esearch Up Close: The Brain Beneath Theory of Mind

Researchers have used event-
related brain potential (ERP)
Adults
studies and brain-imaging 0 V
techniques such as fMRI to
investigate the neurological
basis of theory of mind (Savvagh et al., 2009).
They have focused on the prefrontal cortex area – 4 V
of the brain because it is a likely location for Child
processing the tasks used to assess theory of passers
mind and because it undergoes rapid growth in
the late preschool period. In one study, research-
ers examined activity in the prefrontal cortex
when children were given false-belief tasks (Liu
Child
et al., 2009). Children 4 to 6 years old were shown failers
a cartoon story and asked to make judgments
about the character’s mental states (beliefs) and
reality. The structure of all trials was the same.
FIGURE 6.2 Patterns of brain activity for adults, children
They began with a cartoon character, such as who passed the false-belief task, and children who failed it.
Garfield the cat, standing next to two boxes and Maps of scalp electrical activity for each group showing mean
two animals. Then the Cartoon character put one amplitude difference for “reality” responses subtracted from
animal in one box and the other animal in the “think” responses.
other box and walked in front of the boxes so Source: Liu et al., 2009. Neural correlates of children’s theory of
that he could not see into either one. Next, one of mind. Child Development, 80, 318–326. Society for Research in Child
Development. This material is reproduced with permission of Wiley-
the animals in the boxes jumped out of the box Blackwell.
and either moved to the other box or went back
into the same box. Children were asked to make
a reality judgment (“Really, where is the ani- mind. Because this area of the brain continues to
mal?”) and a think judgment (“Where does develop in childhood, most children who fail the
Garfield think it is?”) while the researchers task can catch up. Children with autism might
continuously recorded their brain activity using a not be so fortunate. They are not neurologically
network of 128 electrodes embedded in an equipped to pass these tasks. However, if they are
elastic helmet. Children who gave correct given interventions aimed at improving their
answers to questions about the cartoon charac- social perspective-taking ability they do develop
ters’ beliefs showed the same neural pattern as neural response patterns that more closely
adults in the prefrontal cortex region. Children resemble typical developing children (Wang
who failed the task did not show this neural et al., 2006). Clearly, understanding other peo-
pattern (Figure 6.2). ple’s states of mind has a neurological basis, but
This study confirmed that the prefrontal cortex it is important to remember that the brain is
plays a role in the development of theory of modifiable by experience.

Another technique researchers have used to demonstrate children’s ability to

make mental state inferences involves having children watch someone give advice
about the location of a hidden sticker. This informant is either a helper who gives
correct advice or a tricker who gives incorrect advice. Children who were 3 years
old accepted advice from both helpers and trickers; 4-year-olds were more skepti-
cal. Five-year-olds preferred advice from helpers; they understood that informants’
230  Chapter 6 Self and Other

et You Thought That . . .: Babies Are Not Mind Readers

show the infants a scenario in which the

University of Illinois at Urbana-

woman formed a true belief or a false belief
about where the toy was hidden (belief-­

Champaign News Bureau

induction trial). To create a false belief that the
toy was hidden in the yellow box, the woman
watched the toy move from the green box to
the yellow box, and then she left the scene; in
her absence, the toy was returned to the green
box. To create a true belief that the toy was
hidden in the yellow box, the woman watched
The ability to make sense of other people’s the toy put in the yellow box and stay there.
actions requires an understanding of their Finally, in the third step of the study (the test trial),
mental states. This sounds like a pretty advanced the woman reached into either the green box or
idea. You probably think that infants would be the yellow box.
incapable of such “mind reading.” In fact, until Baillargeon predicted that if the infants
recently, scientists agreed that infants cannot expected the woman to search for the toy on the
understand other people’s mental states. Recent basis of her belief about its location rather than
research suggests otherwise, however. on the basis of the infant’s knowledge of its
Renee Baillargeon (seen in this photo) actual location, they should look reliably longer
devised a method to assess infants’ knowledge when that expectation was violated. For example,
of mental states by observing their looking if the woman had a false belief that the toy was
behavior. Specifically, she showed infants different hidden in the yellow box and she looked for it in
events and measured the amount of time they the green box, the infants would stare longer.
spent looking at each of them. Babies tend to Baillargeon found that infants did look reliably
look longer at events they find surprising. longer when the woman looked for the toy in the
Baillargeon used this method to study 15-month- box that was not consistent with her belief about
old infants’ ability to predict a woman’s behavior where it was hidden. These results supported the
on the basis of her belief about a toy’s hiding view that even infants know that other people
place in either a green box or a yellow box have beliefs that can be false and differ from the
(Baillargeon et al., 2010; Onishi & Baillargeon, child’s own beliefs and that these beliefs affect
2005). The first step in the study was to familiarize the other person’s behavior. Baillargeon had
the infants with the study materials and proce- shown that infants have some rudimentary ability
dures (familiarization trials). The infants saw a to “read minds” and the beginnings of a theory
woman play with a toy watermelon slice for a few of mind even if they are not capable of answer-
seconds, then hide it inside a box, and then ing verbal questions about other people’s
reach inside the box. The second step was to false beliefs.

prior history of deception had implications for their reliability, and they distrusted
trickers (Vanderbilt et al., 2011).
This intellectual capability exists in almost all people and to some extent in pri-
mates as well (Tomasello et al., 2005). Children with autism, however, show delays
or in some cases serious deficits in developing a theory of mind because they do
not understand that mental states can cause behavior or that other people’s men-
tal states may be different from their own (Baron-Cohen, 2000; Lillard, 2006).
Therefore, they are unable to evaluate other people’s behavior on the basis of their
 Development of Knowledge about Others  231

mental states. In one study of children with autism, researchers found that only
20 percent succeeded in a false-belief task compared with about 80 percent of non-
autistic children (Baron-Cohen et al., 1985). The inability of children with autism to
develop a complete theory of mind could, in part, account for their poor communi-
cative and social skills (Baron-Cohen, 2003). Among nonautistic children, develop-
ing a theory of mind is a critical step in the movement toward social competence
­(Carpendale & Lewis, 2006; Lagattuta et al., 2015; Tomasello et al., 2005). Without
it, social exchanges would often be misunderstood and lead to brief and ineffective
social interactions. In fact, individual differences in false-belief understanding and
other aspects of theory of mind predict children’s current and later social compe-
tence with peers and friends (Caputi et al., 2012).

Understanding Psychological Trait Labels

When and how children come to think of other people as psychological beings is
another important aspect of social understanding. In the preschool years, children
describe others in terms of their physical characteristics (“She is big, has red hair,
and lives on my street”), just as they describe themselves. Gradually, they begin to
use psychological descriptions (“She is helpful and nice”) and show signs that they
understand trait labels. When they are 4 years old, children can use trait labels to
infer how a person would react to an event such as encountering a crowd of people
(Heyman & Gelman, 2000). They say that a “shy” person would not be happy to
see lots of people but a “not shy” person might be pleased. This ability to predict
future behaviors of a peer based on trait labels such as “mean” or “nice” is evident
across cultures (American and Asian) as well (Chen et al., 2016). However, chil-
dren’s understanding of trait labels is incomplete at this age and they may rely on
their own or normative responses such as “Everyone is happy when there are lots of
people at the mall.”
When they are 5 to 7 years of age, children begin to recognize that people have
psychological or personality attributes that distinguish them from others and that
these qualities are stable enough to predict how people will act at different times
and in other situations. These have been described as an essentialist view of traits,
which suggests that traits are fixed, biologically based and stable (Gelman et al.,
2007). A “mean” peer can be counted on to steal the candy from your school lunch,
distract you in the middle of a video game, and push you down in the park. If the
“meanie” did these things last month, last week, or today, you can sadly assume that
he or she will do them, or something equally unpleasant, tomorrow (Flavell et al.,
2002). Children of this age use trait labels in evaluative ways, judging the “goodness”
or “badness” of the other person’s actions.
By age 9 or 10, children describe another person’s actions less in terms of good
or bad and more in terms of stable psychological traits such as being selfless,
generous, stingy, or selfish (Alvarez et al., 2001). They generalize across situa-
tions to use trait terms such as “smart” to describe a boy who is good at math,
science, and social studies and “friendly” to describe a girl who initiates conversa-
tions with other children, talks to adults who visit her classroom, and invites new-
comers to play at her house after school. They replace generic terms with more
specific labels, for example “mean” becomes “annoying,” “hurtful,” or “inconsid-
erate” (Yuill & Pearson, 1998). They view traits as stable (Heyman, 2013). Over
the middle school period, children also become aware that appearance and real-
ity sometimes conflict, and this leads to skepticism of other people’s claims about
232  Chapter 6 Self and Other

themselves (Heyman, 2013). In one study, researchers asked children whether

self-reports are reliable sources of information about personal traits (Heyman &
Legare, 2005). When they were asked about nonevaluative traits, such as shyness
or nervousness, both 6-year-olds and 10-year-olds accepted self-reports without
question. However, when they were asked about the trustworthiness of self-reports
for evaluative traits, such as intelligence or social skill, older children were more
skeptical than younger ones. They recognized that people sometimes distort the
truth about their own traits in order to make a good impression. Skepticism is an
important part of interpersonal relations and provides protection against being
manipulated or duped.
Adolescence heralds a more complete understanding of other people’s traits.
Adolescents realize that people are full of complexities and contradictions and have
public and private faces. They appreciate that traits persist over long spans of time
but behaviors vary depending on situations and internal states (Flavell et al., 2002;
Harter, 2012; Heyman, 2013). For example, a 16-year-old describes his younger
brother (Livesley & Bromley, 1973):

“He loves to be with people. . . . Most of the time he’s good-natured and a lot of
fun . . . but when we play soccer . . . he gets mad when he loses the ball. . . . Later I’ve
found him crying in his room.”

This developmental progression in understanding people’s psychological traits

can be framed in terms of the psychological theories embraced by children at dif-
ferent ages (Flavell et al., 2002). Before age 7 or 8, children’s descriptions resemble
those of a demographer or a behaviorist; they focus on observable characteristics
and behaviors and environmental circumstances. In middle childhood, children
become trait theorists who believe that psychological characteristics are fixed and
stable across time and situation. By adolescence, children have accepted an interac-
tionalist perspective, recognizing that personal traits interact with situational influ-
ences in determining behavior.

Perspective Taking
Perspective taking is the capacity to understand another person’s point of view
(Birch et al., 2017). One research strategy for investigating the development of
­perspective taking is to examine children’s ability to select an appropriate gift for
someone else. For example, children are presented with gift choices that are desir-
able to them (e.g., a stuffed bear), along with choices that are desirable to an adult
(e.g., a magazine). When asked to select a gift for their mother, 3-year-olds are likely
to choose a gift they would like, whereas older children are able to choose one an
adult would like. Young children find it difficult to take the mother’s perspective
and, in addition, their own strong desire for a toy makes it difficult for them to con-
sider the mother’s desire. If the children are given the desired toy themselves first,
or are told they will get it later, they are more likely to choose an age-appropriate
gift for Mom (Atance et al., 2010).
Robert Selman (2003) identified five stages most children go through in under-
standing the thoughts and perspectives of other people. These stages begin with
children’s egocentric view and proceed toward more complex social understand-
ing and social consideration, as children learn to differentiate between their own
perspectives and those of others and to understand others’ views and the relations
between these views and their own (see Table 6.4).
 Development of Knowledge about Others  233

TABLE 6.4

Developing the Ability to Take Different Perspectives

Stage Description
Stage 0: Egocentric perspective Children neither distinguish their own perspectives from those of others nor
recognize that other people might interpret experiences differently.
Stage 1: Differentiated perspective Children realize that they may have either the same or a different perspective
from another person. They cannot judge accurately what the other person’s
perspective may be.
Stage 2: Reciprocal perspective Because children can see themselves from another’s perspective and know
the other person can do the same thing, they can anticipate and consider
another’s thoughts and feelings.
Stage 3: Mutual perspective Children can view their own perspective, a peer’s perspective, and their shared
or mutual perspective, from the viewpoint of a third person.
Stage 4: Societal or in-depth perspective Children can see networks of perspectives, such as the societal, Republican, or
African American point of view.

Source: Selman & Jacquette, 1978.

Advancing Social Understanding

Not all children are equally adept in understanding other people’s intentions, men-
tal states, traits, and perspectives. What predicts these differences in social under-
standing? Multiple influences have been found to be linked with children’s social
understanding of others including parents, sibling, friends, and culture (Devine &
Hughes, 2017).

Child abilities Social understanding is embedded in children’s social tendencies

and intellectual abilities. Children who have higher levels of social understanding
also do better on standard intelligence tests and exhibit more frequent prosocial
behavior, such as helping and sharing, on the playground and in the classroom
(Eisenberg et al., 2015). As we have already mentioned, in contrast, children with
autism lack social understanding of other people’s mental states (Baron-Cohen,
et al., 2013; Lillard, 2006). They are also deficient in social perspective taking
(Gould et al., 2011; Hamilton et al., 2009; Nilsen & Fecica, 2011).

Parential influences Conversations with parents also play a role in the develop-
ment of children’s social understanding (Devine & Hughes, 2017). Researchers
have demonstrated that children in families who frequently talk about mental states
are more likely to succeed on theory-of-mind tasks than children whose parents do
not provide such scaffolding (Ensor et al., 2014; Taumoepeau & Ruffman, 2008).
Even early in infancy, mothers’ tendency to talk to their infants as separate psycho-
logical entities predicts their later theory-of-mind performance (Meins et al., 2002).
It is particularly helpful when parents’ conversations with their children include
explanations of the causes and effects of mental states, using words such as because,
how, and why: “How did she feel when the lamp broke?” “She was mad because she
thought he did it on purpose” (LaBounty et al., 2008). The reciprocal nature of the
conversation is important as well. Researchers have found that when 2- to 4-year-
old children and their mothers had more connected conversations, the children’s
234  Chapter 6 Self and Other

social understanding was advanced (Ensor & Hughes, 2008). Being tuned into each
others’ talk is apparently important for understanding another person’s point of
view; ignoring a partner’s statement or switching to a new topic is less helpful.

Siblings and friends Interactions with siblings and friends also provide opportu-
nities for children to learn about people’s thoughts and traits (Devine & Hughes,
2017). Two types of interaction may be particularly helpful: pretend play and dis-
pute resolution. These two activities involve perspective taking and role playing,
which are likely to increase children’s social understanding (Foote & Holmes-­
Lonergan, 2003; Howe et al., 2002). Interactions with siblings and friends can also
be important because they involve discussions about shared concerns, interests, and
goals. Children do not frequently have these discussions with adults; with adults,
they generally talk about their own goals, not the adult’s. In interactions with sib-
lings and friends, children often confront discrepancies between their own desires
and the desires of the other children, and exposure to such discrepancies predicts
increased understanding of false beliefs (Brown et al., 1996). In fact, children who
have siblings perform better on false-belief tasks than children without siblings
(Perner et al., 1994)—unless their sibling is their twin (Cassidy et al., 2005). Twins
may be too similar to boost each other’s social understanding. Having parents who
mediate siblings’ disagreements and guide them in resolving their disputes also
helps. Researchers have trained parents in mediation techniques, such as help-
ing children establish ground rules, identifying points of contention and common
ground, and encouraging children to discuss their feelings and goals and generate
solutions to their problems. When parents implement these techniques, their chil-
dren’s social understanding increases, and conflicts between siblings decrease; the
children become more knowledgeable about their sibling’s perspective and under-
stand that the sibling can legitimately interpret disputes differently from how they
view the situation (Smith & Ross, 2007). This experimental work provides compel-
ling evidence that learning constructive conflict resolution, not just being exposed
to conflicts, improves children’s understanding of other people.

Experiences outside the family Experiences outside the family can also pro-
mote children’s social understanding. One example comes from studies of child
­brokers—children in immigrant families who translate for their non-English-speaking
parents as they negotiate with doctors, employers, and government officials (Eksner
& Orellana, 2012). Children who serve in this brokering role have higher scores on
theory-of-mind tests than children who do not (Love & Buriel, 2007). This cultural
brokering experience may increase children’s awareness of others’ mental states
and the links between mental states and social behavior. As one teenaged Latina
girl remarked,

“Helping my parents negotiate with doctors and landlords really helped me understand
other people’s intentions and motives a lot better.”

Teachers can also instruct children in perspective-taking skills at school.

Selman (2003) developed a school-based program that uses social dilemmas faced
by a character in a novel to teach children to solve social disputes by taking the
perspective of the other person. According to a meta-analysis of school programs
aimed at improving children’s social relationships, these programs have increased
understanding of other people’s perspectives, points of view and feelings (Durlak
et al., 2011).
 Development of Knowledge about Others  235

Cultural influences Researchers have asked whether changes in children’s social

understanding are universal and occur in all cultures at the same ages (Wellman,
2017). In one study, they interviewed children from the Baka community of hunter–
gatherers in central Africa about people’s beliefs and desires (Avis & Harris, 1991).
By 5 years of age, most children were able to predict correctly what an adult would
find in a container that had been left for a moment and emptied. These results were
consistent with studies showing that 5-year-old children in other cultures also suc-
ceed on theory-of-mind tasks (Harris, 2006). However, some cultural variations in
children’s social understanding have been observed. One variation is that children’s
use of trait terms to describe other people becomes aligned with the values of their
cultural community. Between the ages of 8 and 15 years, U.S. children increasingly
use trait terms to describe someone’s helpful actions; children in India increasingly
use social-context terms (i.e., need for assistance and obligation to help) to describe
helpful acts (Miller, 1987). Another difference is that Chinese children are more
skeptical than U.S. children about the reliability of other people’s self-reports of
evaluative traits such as honesty, in part, because Chinese culture discourages dis-
closure of thoughts and feelings and encourages modesty (Heyman et al., 2007).
Thus, although all normal children acquire a theory of mind at roughly the same
age, the ways they learn to describe, evaluate, and explain others’ behavior is shaped
by cultural norms and belief systems.

Stereotyping and Prejudice

In multiethnic and multiracial societies such as the United States, Canada, Europe,
Australia, and the Middle East, children routinely encounter others who differ from
them in language, skin color, and cultural and religious customs. Two aspects of how
children deal with this diversity are particularly important: stereotyping—how chil-
dren categorize or label individuals in the other groups—and prejudice—whether
they express negative attitudes toward these individuals.

Stereotyping A stereotype is a label applied to members of a racial, ethnic, or reli-

gious group without appreciation that individuals within the group are different
from each other (Killen et al., 2006; Mulvey & Killen, 2015). Even in the preschool
years, children already exhibit some ethnic and racial stereotypes. They begin to
stereotype other groups after they recognize that those groups have ethnic or racial
constancy (Pauker et al., 2010). By just age 3, white children in the United States
implicitly endorse stereotypes that African American faces are angrier than white
faces (Dunham et al., 2013). In one study, children aged 5, 7, and 9 years were shown
a picture story about two children, a black child and a white child, and asked to
remember what each child in the story did (Davis et al., 2007). At all three ages,
children had better recall for stereotyped activities that the black child performed
(specifically, running fast, dancing well, and being aggressive and loud) than non-
stereotyped activities performed by the black child (specifically, working hard, liking
family, and being smelly and greedy). By age 10, almost all children in another study
exhibited stereotype consciousness, meaning that they knew that people hold racial
and ethnic stereotypes (McKown, 2015). They exhibited this knowledge by agreeing
with statements such as “White people think black people are not smart” (McKown &
Weinstein, 2003). Children were more aware of these broadly held stereotypes if they
themselves were from stigmatized groups—probably because of the increased sali-
ence of stereotypes in these children’s daily lives. Children with stereotype conscious-
ness used this knowledge to interpret social exchanges and were likely to explain
236  Chapter 6 Self and Other

negative interracial interactions as reflecting discrimination (McKown & Strambler,

2009). By 8 to 9 years old, children are aware of the difference between a personal
belief and a stereotype and can separate their personal views about members of a
group from the group stereotype (Augoustinos & Rosewarne, 2001).

Prejudice Children who think about other people in terms of stereotypes are more
likely to have a prejudice against those people; people who are prejudiced define
all members of a group not just as similar but also as bad (Aboud, 2008). Ethnic
prejudice, like ethnic stereotyping, is evident by the time children are 5 years old.
In one study in Australia, white children endorsed more negative adjectives (such
as “dirty,” “bad,” and “mean”) in describing drawings of black people than white
people and used more positive adjectives (such as “clean,” “good,” and “nice”) in
describing white people than black people (Augoustinos & Rosewarne, 2001). Simi-
larly, English Canadian children exhibited prejudice toward French Canadian chil-
dren (Powlishta et al., 1994), and Jewish Israeli children exhibited prejudice toward
Arabs (Teichman, 2001). A meta-analysis of 130 studies conducted worldwide indi-
cates that explicit prejudice peaks between ages 5 and 7 (Raabe & Beelmann, 2011).
Between 7 and 9 years of age, as cognitive understanding increases, children begin
to appreciate the ways in which different groups are similar, to infer that people
have internal similarities despite superficial differences in appearance, and to real-
ize that not all individuals within a group are the same—and their explicit prejudice
decreases (Aboud, 2008).
The ways in which prejudice is expressed also change as children get older. In
early childhood, prejudice is expressed by avoidance and social exclusion; in late
childhood and adolescence, it is expressed in conflict and hostility (Aboud, 2005).
However, by this age, some young people have learned the social costs of overt
expressions of prejudice, and so they hide their true feelings. Instead of display-
ing explicit or public prejudice, their prejudice is implicit—that is, unconscious
or automatic. The Implicit Association Test (IAT) measures the speed with which
children classify a series of faces as either black or white and a series of words as
either good—“joy,” “love,” “peace,” “pleasure”—or bad—“terrible,” “horrible,”
“nasty,” “awful” (Banaji & Greenwald, 2013). Implicit prejudice for white children is
measured by comparing how fast they respond to stereotyped pairings (white faces/
good words; black faces/bad words) and nonstereotyped pairings (white faces/bad
words; black faces/good words). Prejudice is inferred when response times to the

Ansgar Photography/ Corbis/Getty Images

In late childhood,
ethnic prejudice may be
implicit; minority chil-
dren may be excluded
from activities, but
ethnicity is not given as
the reason.
 Development of Knowledge about Others  237

stereotyped pairings are shorter than response times to nonstereotyped pairings.

Using this test, researchers have found that white children in fourth and fifth grades
express implicit prejudice against African Americans, and their implicit prejudice is
not related to their explicit prejudice assessed with a questionnaire (Sinclair et al.,
2005). Implicit prejudice is important because it is related to children’s behav-
ior toward members of other ethnic groups. In one study, for example, German
8th graders who scored high on implicit prejudice toward Turks, an immigrant
group in Germany, were less likely to include a Turkish player in a computer game
than were players who scored lower on implicit prejudice (Degner et al., 2009).
Clearly, implicit prejudice affects children’s behavior even though they are unaware
of it. Implicit prejudice, unlike explicit prejudice, does not decrease as children get
older. (If you are interested in determining your own level of implicit prejudice, go
to https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/education.html.)

Determinants of stereotyping and prejudice Researchers have found that

when adults are shown faces from a different race it activates neural activity in the
amygdala, a region of the brain associated with fear, anger, and sadness (­Cunningham
et al., 2004). Being primed to react with negative emotions when encountering
persons of a different race may be adaptive from an evolutionary perspective and
might suggest that prejudice has a biological basis (Hirschfeld, 2008). However,
prejudice occurs as the result of many social factors as well, including prejudiced
messages from parents, peers, schools, and media. For young children, parents are
the most important factor in promoting prejudice, and their influence begins early.
Researchers in one study found that parents’ racial socialization began by the time
their children were only 18 months old and predicted the children’s racial attitudes
at ages 3 and 4 years (Katz, 2003). Parents are especially influential if their children
closely identify with them and see them as appropriate models for their own behav-
ior (Sinclair et al., 2005). Adolescents are likely to more closely adopt their parents’
attitudes toward immigrants if they perceive their parents as supportive but there is
also evidence that the adolescent–parent influence is bidirectional with each influ-
encing the other (Miklikowska, 2016). However, children may develop prejudices
even if their parents do not express them (Aboud, 2005; Kite & Whitley, 2016). In
fact, parents are sometimes shocked to discover how prejudiced their children are.
Media depictions of minorities in negative and stereotyped ways contribute to chil-
dren’s prejudices (Calvert, 2015), and in adolescence, peers provide the norms that
govern contact with and attitudes toward members of other ethnic groups.

Promoting stereotypes and prejudice Researchers Rebecca Bigler and Lynn

Liben (2006, 2007) conducted a series of studies to investigate how children develop
prejudices. They arranged for elementary school children to wear either yellow or
blue tee shirts to school for several weeks, creating two perceptually distinct groups
of children similar to groups based on racial characteristics. Prejudice is more likely
when the groups are distinct (Bigler et al., 1997); this is why societies sometimes
increase a group’s perceptual distinctiveness, for example, by requiring Jews to wear
yellow stars in Nazi Germany. Teachers in the studies were instructed either to seg-
regate or to integrate the children wearing the yellow shirts and the blue shirts for
classroom activities and to label the children by their shirt color or not. Stereotyp-
ing increased when teachers labeled the children as the Yellows and the Blues and
when the yellow and blue groups were of unequal sizes (i.e., majority and minor-
ity). Prejudice increased when classroom activities were segregated. It is clear that
stereotypes and prejudice can be created (Bilger et al., 2016). Can they be reduced?
238  Chapter 6 Self and Other

Can stereotypes and prejudice be reduced? One approach to reducing

prejudice is to increase contact between members of groups who are or could be
prejudiced toward each other, in a positive and nonthreatening context such as a
school or camp (Pettigrew & Tropp, 2011; Raabe & Beelmann, 2011). In one classic
study, the Robbers Cave Experiment, two groups of 11-year-old boys at a summer
camp, whose prejudice against each other had been fostered by team competitions
such as a tug-of-war and a scavenger hunt, were brought together to solve a common
problem, fixing a broken water main at the camp (Sherif, 1966). After the coop-
erative experience of repairing the water problem, the campers’ attitudes toward
members of the other group improved. Contemporary researchers have also found
that reducing competiveness is an important way to decrease prejudice (Abrams &
Rutland, 2008).
A second way to reduce children’s prejudice is to have adults point out the indi-
vidual characteristics of members of the other group. When teachers were asked

nsights from Extremes: The Most Extreme

Prejudice: Genocide
Throughout history, people have younger men were especially targeted because
sometimes expressed the most they represented the future of the Tutsi minority.
extreme form of prejudice: More recently, in Darfur, Sudan, President
genocide. This term refers to the Omar al-Bashir’s forces drove about 2.5 million
mass killing or serious harming of a national, Sudanese, including substantial numbers of the
ethnic, racial, or religious group. It also includes Fur, Massalit, and Zaghawa ethnic groups, into
other methods of eliminating the group, such as camps of displaced persons. They then inflicted
preventing births or forcibly transferring children severe sexual assaults on them. A common tactic
from one group to another (Article 2 of the was for the Janjaweed militia and Sudan’s
United Nations Convention on the Prevention armed forces to gang-rape women and girls who
and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide). If came out of the camps to collect firewood, grass,
large differences exist between groups, the or water. Janjaweed babies born of the rapes
majority group may consider the minority to be were then abandoned or killed by the mother’s
less than human (Chalk & Jonassohn, 1990). It is ethnic group. In 2008, prosecutors at the
a small step for them then to believe that elimi- International Criminal Court filed three charges
nating the other group is necessary to protect of genocide against President al-Bashir, who had
their own group. “masterminded and implemented a plan to
One well-known example of genocide was the destroy in substantial part three tribal groups
Holocaust in Nazi Germany in World War II in because of their ethnicity.” The genocide in
which 6 million Jews were killed. A second Darfur has claimed more than 400,000 lives since
example of genocide was the mass murder of 2003. In 2016, according to the United Nations,
Tutsis in Rwanda in 1994. Over a period of 100 Islamic State forces (ISIS) have committed
days, an estimated 800,000 Tutsis were killed by genocide and other war crimes in a continuing
Hutus after the Rwandan president’s plane was effort to exterminate the Yazidi religious minority in
shot down, sparking a campaign of violence. The Syria and Uraq (UN Human Rights Council,
Hutu radio station broadcast inflammatory June 2016).
propaganda urging the Hutus to “kill the cock- These assaults on humanity demonstrate the
roaches.” Tutsis fled their homes in panic and negative consequences of prejudice and show
were butchered at checkpoints. Women and how ordinary people can commit extraordinarily
 Communication Between Me and You: The Role of Language  239

terrible crimes in their efforts to preserve their own teachers counter this belief by teaching their
group. They alert us to the vulnerability we all students about the genocides in Rwanda and
share that could lead us to carry out atrocities Darfur. In 2011, President Obama declared the
on behalf of our ethnic, racial, or political group. prevention of mass atrocities and genocide to
Since 1991, teaching students about the be a “core national security interest and core
Holocaust has been a required part of the moral responsibility” of the United States and
national curriculum in U.S. schools. Yet, teachers established the creation of an Atrocities
often find that students in these classes believe Prevention Board as a step toward reducing this
that genocide could not happen today. Some ongoing tragedy.

to encourage students in their classes to pay attention to individual characteristics

of their classmates rather than racial qualities, for example, prejudice in students
decreased (Aboud et al., 2012). Third, school norms which encourage students
to be inclusive of other groups successfully promoted positive outgroup attitudes,
especially when paired with an inclusive peer group norm, and when children think
teachers will hold them accountable (McGuire et al., 2015). Fourth, minimizing ste-
reotypes of racial and ethnic groups in media such as books, television, and movies is
another strategy for reducing children’s stereotyping and prejudice (Calvert, 2015).
In one study, researchers modified storybooks used in shared book-reading sessions
to feature a friendship between a majority child and a minority child (­ Cameron
et al., 2006). The British 5- to 11-year-olds who heard the stories became more posi-
tive toward minority children than did the children who had not heard the stories,
especially when the individual attributes of the story characters were emphasized. A
word of caution: while biased attitudes and behavior can be modified, it is easier to
shift attitudes than behavior and modifying either attitudes or behavior is neither
easy nor always successful (Aboud et al., 2012).

Communication Between Me and You:

The Role of Language
Effective communication between a child and parents, teachers, and peers is critical
for a child to get his and her needs met; adults also influence and socialize children
through communication. Therefore, even though language development is typi-
cally thought to be an aspect of cognitive development, it is an important aspect of
social development as well. Speech is, by its very nature, a social phenomenon. It is
critical for expressing one’s own feelings, desires, and opinions and necessary for
understanding other people, interacting with them, communicating information to
them, and controlling their actions. Children begin to communicate when they are
still infants, but progress depends on the social support provided by others in the
context of social interactions (Hoff, 2014).

Steps Toward Language Fluency

Preverbal communication Infants’ earliest communications take place during
interactions with caregivers. Parents and infants often engage in a kind of dialogue
of sounds, movements, and facial expressions. Smiles, in particular, seem important
for helping infants learn how to coordinate vocalizations and translate expressions
240  Chapter 6 Self and Other

into effective communication (Yale et al., 2003). Although these early exchanges
might seem at first to be conversations, a closer look suggests that they are really
pseudo-conversations because the parents are responsible for maintaining their flow
(Jaffe et al., 2001). Parents insert their behavior into the infant’s cycles of responsive-
ness and unresponsiveness, building what seems to be conversation out of the baby’s
burps and sneezes. For instance, a baby gurgles and the mother replies by vocal-
izing. She waits for the baby’s response, but if none is forthcoming, she prompts
the baby by changing her expression, speaking again, or gently touching. These
interactions help the infant become a communicative partner by the end of the
first year (Hoff, 2014). And this kind of parental input seems to be helpful for the
infant too. When parents are cognitively stimulating (provide toys, reads to infant,
verbally responsive) their 6-month infants engage in more infant communication,
including eye gaze following, emotion expression, and communicative bids. In
turn, this cognitive support is linked with more advanced language development at
24 months (Cates et al., 2012). In some cultures, such as the Mayans of Mexico, the
Walpiri of Australia, and some groups of African Americans in the southern United
States, parents do not regard infants as conversational partners (Hoff, 2014), and so
they do not directly address them; however, they hold the babies so they can see the
adults talking and what they are talking about (Lieven, 1994).
Infants also learn to use gestures to communicate. By the time they are 6 months
old, they respond with gestures when they are offered or shown things, and they
begin to use pointing and reaching gestures to guide others’ attention to particular
objects and just like adults they often combine these gestures with vocalizations
(Esteve-Gibert & Prieto, 2014). By pointing, they learn the names for objects that
interest them (Hoff, 2014), and they also learn that a social partner—usually the
parent—is a valuable source of information and assistance (Cochet et al., 2014).
Infants use gestures to get their parents to do something for them; for example,
they point to a teddy bear on a high shelf to have the parent get it down. Older
preverbal children use this form of communication very effectively, often checking
to make sure the listener is looking in the right direction and is able to respond to
their request (Bates et al., 1989). With age, children reduce their use of gestures
and rely increasingly on verbal skills to communicate their needs and wishes.

Babbling and other early sounds Cooing is the first kind of vocalization infants
produce—vowel-like sounds that often consist of oo sounds that resemble the coo-
ing sounds pigeons make. It starts at the end of the first month, often during social
exchanges between infant and caregiver. By the third month, mothers and infants
are imitating and repeating each other’s cooing sounds (Gratier & Devouche,
2011). Babbling—producing strings of consonant–vowel combinations—begins in
the middle of the first year. Early babbling is the same, no matter what language the
baby hears (Thevenin et al., 1985). Even the early babbling of deaf babies sounds
like the babbling of hearing babies (Crystal, 2007). Differences in babbling begin to
emerge in the middle of the second half-year. French and Japanese babies’ babbling
contains more nasal sounds than that of Swedish and English babies, just as French
and Japanese words contain more nasal sounds than Swedish and English words
(De Boysson-Bardies et al., 1992). Babies are starting to tune in to the language
they hear spoken around them. By the end of the first year, they can utter strings of
sounds made up of phonemes in their native language that sound very much like
real speech but are not. This pseudospeech attracts the attention of family mem-
bers, and in combination with nonverbal signals such as pointing and gesturing it
is a way for infants to share their discoveries and desires with the rest of the world.
 Communication Between Me and You: The Role of Language  241

Semantic Development: The Power of Words

Between 10 and 15 months of age, children usually utter their first real words (Hoff,
2014). By the age of 2 years, on average, they can say approximately 900 root words,
and by the age of 6 years, their vocabularies have increased to 8,000 words. The
number of words children can understand exceeds the number of words they can
produce (Bornstein & Hendricks, 2012).

How and why children acquire words Anyone who has spent time among
young children knows some of the common early words—“mama,” “dada,”
“book,” and “doggie!” Words are learned in the course of everyday social
exchanges with more competent language users, and children’s vocabularies
reflect the words used by their parents and in their culture (Hoff, 2014; Song
et al., 2012). The words children learn first generally represent people they
know—“Daddy,” “Mommy,” “Auntie,” objects they can act on—“shoes,” “socks,”
“toys,” and actions they can perform—“walk,” “run.” And mothers and fathers
help the word learning process. When parents use more simplified language
or parentese (brief and repeated phrases, high-pitch voice) when talking to
their babies, their toddlers produce more words by 24 months (Ramirez-Esparza
et al., 2014).

The Acquisition of Grammar: From Words

to Sentences
At first, children use these single words, often accompanied by gestures, to express
ideas that would be expressed in sentences by an adult (Hoff, 2014). For example,
they say “Teddy,” meaning “Give me my teddy bear” or “My teddy bear is under
the table.” These single words representing complete thoughts are known as
­holophrases.

Emma would place herself squarely in front of me, reach her arms over her head,
and command, “Up.” Once perched in my arms, she showed me by looking and
pointing, emitting guiding grunts, and saying something that sounded like “Mih”
what she was after.

By the time they are 2 years old, children are beginning to put words together
in what is called telegraphic speech. Their utterances of two or three words
include only the crucial words needed to convey their message—for example,
“Give Teddy,” not “Give me my teddy bear.” These utterances are called telegraphic
because, like telegrams, they exclude unimportant words. Starting in the third
year of life, children’s efforts to figure out the rules of grammar are aided by
their parents (Cleave et al., 2015; Tomasello, 2011), who provide models of sen-
tences in the correct word order (“Yay! You kicked the ball!”), extend the chil-
dren’s simple sentences (child says “Kick ball”; mother replies, “Yes, you kick the
ball”), and recast the children’s incorrect sentences (child says “I kick it”; mother
replies, “Yes, you kicked it”). Most fundamental forms of grammar are acquired
by children by the time they are 5 years old. All of these grammatical advances
improve social communication, allowing children to indicate their wants and
wishes with greater precision and clarity and respond more appropriately to their
partners’ wants and wishes as well.
242  Chapter 6 Self and Other

Learning the Social Uses of Language

After children have acquired words and rules of grammar, what becomes important
is deciding which words and phrases to use in different social situations and with
different people.

The rules of pragmatics To be effective communicators, children must learn

the rules of pragmatics. First, they must learn that they should engage the atten-
tion of their listener before speaking. Second, they must learn to be sensitive to
their listener’s feedback. If children don’t know when listeners can’t understand
them, they will not be successful communicators. Third, children must learn to
adjust their speech to be appropriate for different listeners. For example, when
they speak to younger children, they should speak in simpler sentences; when
they are talking to older adults, they should use polite words, not slang. Fourth,
children must learn to adjust their speech to the situation. It’s acceptable to speak
loudly or rudely on the playground or street but not in a church, a classroom,
or at the dinner table. It’s more likely to be effective to say politely, “May I have
one of your crayons?” or “Please pass the jam” rather than demanding, “Gimme
a crayon (or jam)!” Fifth, children must learn that to participate in a conversa-
tion, they must be not only effective speakers but also skilled listeners. They must
take turns speaking and remain silent while others speak. Finally, children must
learn to evaluate their own and others’ messages for clarity and usefulness. They
must correct their own messages when necessary and let another speaker know
when they do not understand (Hoff, 2014). They must understand the coopera-
tive nature of human communication, recognizing that for their request to work
the listener must both understand the request and be cooperatively disposed to
fulfill it (Grosse et al., 2010).

Learning to adjust speech to audience To be an effective communicator,

it is important to adjust your speech to suit your listener (Syrett & Kawahara,
2014). By 2 years of age, children are remarkably adept at engaging the attention
of a listener and responding to listener feedback. Researchers in a classic study
videotaped the communicative interactions of 2-year-olds in a preschool class
(Wellman & Lempers, 1977). The results clearly demonstrated the children’s
communicative competence. If the children intended to point out a particular
object to another child, they almost always addressed their listener when they
were playing together or at least not involved with someone else. They directed
communications to other children when they could see each other and when
they were physically close. They made sure that when they spoke, they and their
listener were close to the object they were talking about. They were very effective
in engaging their listeners, and most of their messages (79 percent) met with
adequate responses.
The children also adjusted their communication to the situation: They commu-
nicated more in difficult situations, for example, when an obstacle was between
the listener and the object. Finally, the children responded to feedback from their
listeners. When the speakers received no response, they repeated their message
in some form, but hardly ever repeated messages when they received an adequate
response. They have also found that children as young as 2 years adjust their
speech when talking to other children of different ages. For example, they use
more repetitions and attention-eliciting words (“hey,” “hello,” and “look”) when
 Communication Between Me and You: The Role of Language  243

Weekend Images Inc./iStockphoto

Preschool children use language and gestures to com-

municate about their ongoing activities and express their
wishes and desires. They adjust their speech to the situa-
tion and audience, here, telling a secret.

talking to their baby brothers and sisters than when addressing their mothers
(Dunn, 2015). Preschool children also adjust their speech when speaking to peers
of different status or ability: They use more deferential speech with a higher-status
peer and more assertive speech with a lower-status peer (Kyratzis & Marx, 2001)
while 5-year-olds adjust their speech when talking to a child with less well-
developed language skills by using more directives, clarification, and providing
more information(Murphy et al., 2014). They can even adjust their speech to
deceive a listener (Rhodes et al., 2015).
Preschool children’s communicative competence does have some limitations, of
course. Preschoolers are more effective in conversations that are one-to-one, face-
to-face, about single, familiar objects in their immediate environment, with friends
than in conversations with nonfriends, in groups, on the phone, or about absent
objects or their own feelings, thoughts, or relationships (Bauminger-Zviely et al.,
2017; Dunn, 1988).

Learning to listen critically Children are not always aware that they do not
understand a message. If the message is simple and the ambiguity is obvious, even
preschoolers can recognize the lack of clarity (Gllis & Nilsen, 2014). This was dem-
onstrated when researchers gave 3- and 4-year-olds requests that were ambiguous
(“Give me the cup,” when there were four cups on the table) or impossible (“Bring
me the refrigerator”), and the children recognized that the requests were prob-
lematic and requested more information (Revelle et al., 1985). However, when the
task requires more thought and the lack of clarity is less obvious, even school-age
children may not realize that they do not understand a message. In one experiment,
researchers gave 1st and 3rd graders game instructions that left out essential infor-
mation (Markman, 1977). First graders were generally unaware that information
was missing and had to be urged to try to play the game before they realized they
didn’t know enough to do so. Children can be taught to be more effective listeners
and ask for clarifications (Patterson & Kister, 1981) which, in turn, can improve
overall oral language skills (Fricke et al., 2013). Listening skills continue to be a
critical ingredient of successful social exchanges and sustained social relationships
throughout childhood, adolescence, and adulthood (Dunn, 2015; Gottman et al.,
2007).
244  Chapter 6 Self and Other

earning from Living Leaders: Susan Harter

accessible to the real world. Her advice for under-
graduates: “Don’t put the methodological cart
before the conceptual horse! Instead find a burn-
ing question that intrigues you and then select or

Courtesy of Susan Harter

develop measures, not the other way around.”

Further Reading
Harter, S. (2012). The construction of the self: Develop­
mental and sociocultural foundations (2nd ed.).
New York: Guilford.

Susan Harter is Professor Emerita of Psychology

Carol S. Dweck
and former Head of the Developmental Psychol-
ogy Program and the Center for the Study of Self
and Others at the University of Denver. After earn-
ing her PhD at Yale University, she served as the
first female faculty member in that psychology
department. Her interest in psychology had an
early beginning. She performed her first science
experiment in fourth grade—pairing a hen with

Courtesy of Carol S. Dweck

a duck egg. After hatching, the duck “imprinted”
on the hen, and Harter was hooked on a career
in science. Her interest in social development
was gradual: First, she was fascinated by animals
on the farm she grew up on, then by children
through her teacher/mother; finally she devel-
oped an interest in adolescents. Her focus since
then has been the influence of socialization on
the development of self-esteem, and she is best Carol Dweck is the Lewis and Virginia Eaton Pro-
known for her well-used instrument for assess- fessor of Psychology at Stanford University. Since
ing dimensions of self-esteem. Harter has also receiving her PhD from Yale University, she has
examined the construction of multiple selves as taught at the University of Illinois, Columbia, and
children move into adolescence and false-self Harvard. Her work examines the self-conceptions
behavior in which adolescents don a false self people use to guide their behavior. She is a
for peers and parents as a strategy for gaining strong believer in the concept of mindset and
more social support. Her work has clear practi- thinks that with the right one, you can have a
cal applications and has been a major impetus more successful social and intellectual life. This
behind the national focus on fostering children’s is the message of her book Mindset, based on
self-esteem. She has developed social inter- more than three decades of research in which
ventions for enhancing realistic self-esteem in she has been figuring out why some people
children and adolescents. Instead of the global achieve their potential and others, equally
approach many schools use, she recommends talented, don’t. The key isn’t ability; it’s whether
a focus on raising self-perceptions in areas of the person looks at ability as something inher-
greatest value to individual students. Her hope is ent or something that can be developed. She
that future developmental psychologists will use wondered how humans cope with failure and
a variety of approaches from social to neuro- found that people who attributed failure to lack
logical and will make research relevant and of ability became discouraged whereas people
 Chapter Summary  245

who thought that they simply hadn’t tried hard There is clearly hope for all of us, from students
enough were inspired by setbacks. Dweck’s work to late-life learners, if we take Dweck seriously
has clear practical value, and she has designed and develop the right mind-set. According to
a computer-based training module, Brainology, Dweck, the great challenge is to figure out how
to help children develop a mind-set based on to get kids ready for the world of the future. What
the belief that they can succeed if they make skills and mindsets will they need to thrive? How
an effort. In 2011, she received the Distinguished can we help foster them? She urges readers
Scientific Contribution award from the American to use your undergraduate years to become
Psychological Association and in 2017 received the person you want to be, the person who will
the Yidan Prize for her educational work focus- make your contribution to your community or
ing on at-risk children. She has taken her own to society.
work to heart, too. She began playing the piano
in adulthood and learned to speak Italian in Further Reading
her 50s, even though these are things that Dweck, C. (2017). The journey to children’s mindsets—and
adults are not supposed to be good at learning. beyond. Child Development Perspectives, 11, 139–144.

Chapter Summary
The Sense of Self
• By the end of the first 6 months of life, infants can distinguish between them-
selves and others, and by the end of the first year attain rudimentary self-
recognition.
• By 4 years of age children can distinguish between past and present selves.
• At first, children use concrete terms to describe themselves (physical attrib-
utes, possessions, preferred activities). Later they include psychological traits.
Adolescents’ view of self is more integrated and includes the possibility of con-
tradictory traits.
• Children with autism exhibit delays or deficits in self-recognition.
• Gender, culture, and family influence the development of self.
Self-Perceptions
• Self-esteem refers to a sense of global self-worth and is distinct from evaluations
of competence in specific areas such as scholastic ability, athletic skill, physical
appearance, behavioral conduct, and social acceptance.
• High self-esteem is linked to positive adjustment including school success,
good relationships with parents and peers, and less risk taking, anxiety, and
depression.
• High self-esteem fosters experimentation, which might increase early sexual
activity and drinking.
• Girls have lower global self-esteem than boys beginning in middle childhood.
• The quality of the parent–child relationship affects self-esteem. Parents who
are authoritative (firm, clear, and affectionate) have adolescents with higher
self-esteem.
• Peers and mentors are also influential sources of support for self-esteem.
• As children develop, their positive and often unrealistic views of their abilities
gradually come into line with objective evaluations.
246  Chapter 6 Self and Other

Identity Formation
• A major task of adolescence or young adulthood is to develop a stable identity,
including a sexual and an ethnic identity. Ethnic identity refers to the sense of
belonging to a certain ethnic or racial group.
• Influences on adolescents’ identity development include social, biological, and
cognitive factors.
• Achievement of a stable identity is associated with good adjustment.
• Biracial and bicultural adolescents face challenges in achieving a clear identity.
• Religious identity is associated with youth adjustment and is particularly strong
among girls and minority groups.
Development of Social Knowledge about Others
• Children improve their abilities to understand others’ social actions, inten-
tions, motives, and goals as well as learning about the norms and social scripts
that guide social interactions.
• Work on theory of mind is uncovering when and how children come to under-
stand other people’s mental states—thoughts, beliefs, and desires—and how
they affect behavior.
• Children who are autistic show delays or in some cases deficits in developing a
theory of mind.
• Social interactions with family members and friends as well as cultural routines
and practices are important to the development of social understanding.
• Children’s descriptions of others’ attributes and traits undergo developmen-
tal shifts from concrete, physical, and simple to abstract, psychological, and
­differentiated.
Stereotyping and Prejudice
• Stereotypes are general labels applied to individuals based solely on their mem-
bership in a racial, an ethnic, or a religious group without appreciating that
individuals within the group vary. By age 8–9 children can separate stereotypes
from personal views.
• Prejudiced individuals define members of a group not just as similar but also as
bad. Between 7 and 9 years, children come to understand that not all individu-
als in a group are the same, and their prejudice decreases.
• In late childhood and adolescence, prejudice becomes implicit.
• The many causes of prejudice include prejudiced messages from parents,
peers, schools, and media.
• Approaches to reducing prejudice include increasing contact between mem-
bers of different groups, having adults point out the individual characteristics
of members of other groups, and minimizing stereotypes of racial and ethnic
groups in books, television, and movies.
The Role of Language
• Language helps children to interact; to communicate information; to express
feelings, wishes, and views; to control actions; and to modify emotions.
• Before they are able to speak, babies produce sounds such as cooing and
­babbling.
• The social communicative context in which words occur aids children’s acqui-
sition of language.
• The rules for language usage known as pragmatics, determine whether speech
is appropriate for the audience and situation.
 Key Terms  247

Key Terms
babbling individual self stereotype
collective self pragmatics stereotype consciousness
cooing prejudice telegraphic speech
ethnic identity relational self theory of mind
holophrase religious identity
identity self-esteem

At t h e M ov i es

Relevant movies for this chapter include those focused on Birmingham, Alabama, at the height of the Civil Rights
self-esteem, identity, stereotyping, and prejudice. One film Movement. Skin (2008) is based on one of the most moving
that shows a child raising her self-esteem is Whale Rider true stories to emerge from apartheid South Africa. Sandra
(2002), a story about an 11-year-old girl in a patriarchal Laing is a black child born in the 1950s to white Afrikan-
New Zealand tribe who believes she is destined to be the new ers, unaware of their black ancestry, who lovingly bring her
chief and fights her grandfather and a thousand years of tra- up as their little “white” girl. The trouble starts when, at
dition to fulfill her destiny. In Akeelah and the Bee (2006), the age of 10, she goes to an all-white school. The chil-
another 11-year-old girl overcomes her personal insecu- dren call her names, like “blackie” and “frizzhead”; they hit
rities and low self-esteem, her economically disadvantaged her. The film follows her 30-year journey from rejection
background, and pervasive cultural stereotypes to achieve to acceptance, betrayal to reconciliation, as she struggles
success in spelling bees. A relatively recent addition (2010) to define her place in a changing world. Get Out (2017)
to Sesame Street muppet family is Segi, an African American explores interracial dating when a white girl brings home
girl with lots of curly hair and who sings a song “I love my her African American boyfriend to meet her parents. The
hair” as a reminder that you should be proud of curly hair film illustrates the subtle ways in which racism is often
(see http://muppet.wikia.com/wiki/I_Love_My_Hair). expressed.
Movies about identity development include Real There are a number of excellent movies on the horrors
Women Have Curves (2002), the story of a first-generation of genocide. Schindler’s List (1993) won the Academy Award
Mexican American teenager who is torn between her main- for best picture. It dramatizes an inspiring incident in which
stream ambitions and her cultural heritage. Towelhead a man saved more than a thousand Jews from the Holocaust
(2008) presents a collision of racism, acculturation, and in WWII. Hotel Rwanda (2004) focuses on the efforts a Rwan-
cultural identity set against the backdrop of the American dan man made to save the lives of his family and more than
family. The film Just Black? (1991) consists of interviews with a thousand other refugees by granting them shelter in his
young men and women of mixed racial heritage who dis- besieged hotel. It is listed by the American Film Institute as
cuss their struggle to establish a racial identity and question one of the 100 most inspirational movies of all time. D ­ arfur
whether there is room in the United States for multiracial Now (2007) is a documentary film examining the genocide
identity. Movies exploring young gay men’s search for their in Darfur, Sudan. It follows the story of six individuals, tied
sexual identity include Redefining Normal (2008) and The together by the same cause, including an activist in the
Art of Being Straight (2008) while Pariah (2011) examines an United States, the Prosecutor of the International Criminal
African American teenage girl’s embrace of her identity as Court in The Hague, a woman whose baby was beaten to
a lesbian. death by Janjaweed attackers who now fights in the Suda-
The award-winning film Eye Was Blind (2005) nese Liberation Army, and a displaced farmer who became
explores religious and interracial issues and forces viewers the head sheikh of a camp of 47,000 displaced Darfurians.
to examine the fact that they may have their own stereo- Eyes and Ears of God: Video Surveillance of Sudan (2012) is a
typical ways of judging people based on their physical documentary film that shows civilians defending them-
appearance, culture, and race. Racial prejudice is vividly selves against the Sudanese military with the help of over
portrayed in 4 Little Girls (1997), which recounts the events 400 cameras distributed across the war zones in the Nuba
leading up to the bombing of the 16th Street Church in ­Mountains, Blue Nile, and Darfur.
 CHAPTE
C H APT E R 7

Family
Early and Enduring Influences

Alice lives with her mother and father and

grandmother and nine brothers and sisters. Her
parents are strict about rules and make sure
that all the children are in bed with lights out
before 10 every night. Aletha has never met her
father; she lives alone with her mother next door
to her aunt and cousins. Sometimes she stays
© Radius Images/ Media Bakery

overnight with her cousins; her mother is happy

to have a night on her own. Allan has two fathers
who were married in San Francisco and are look-
ing forward to adopting another child soon. All
of these children live in families—but their fami-
lies are dramatically different. In this chapter, we
describe some of these differences and discuss
the strong and enduring effects families have on
children’s social development.

What is a family? It is a social unit in which parents and children share economic,
social, and emotional rights and responsibilities and a sense of commitment and
identification with each other. Families vary in their structure—one parent or two,
a single child or several—but all families have common functions. For one thing,
they are children’s earliest and most sustained source of social contact. They also
offer the most intense and enduring of all interpersonal bonds. In addition, families
share memories of the past and expectations for the future, and this continuity over
time makes family relationships qualitatively different from shorter-lived relation-
ships with playmates, friends, teachers, and neighbors. Because they are first, most
intense, and most enduring, family relationships are the standard against which
other relationships are judged.
Families are also systems for socialization, which means that family members
channel children’s impulses into socially accepted outlets and teach children the
skills and rules they need to function in society. When children are very young,
parents begin the process of socialization to ensure that the children’s standards
of behavior conform to those regarded as desirable and appropriate by the parents

248
 The Family System  249

and society. From the moment of birth, whether the child is wrapped in a pink or
blue blanket, placed in a sling or nestled in a bassinet, indulged by a parent or left
to cry it out, socialization has begun.
The family system is composed of a number of subsystems, including those of
mother and father; mother and child; father and child; mother, father, and child;
and subsystems involving siblings. Socialization takes place within each of these sub-
systems, which we discuss in this chapter. We also discuss how differences in family
socialization are related to social class, culture, and history, and we explore some of
the major changes in the structure and functioning of the family in recent decades.

The Family System

The family is a complex system made up of interdependent members and subsys-
tems, and this has implications for the ways families function. Most simply, changes
in the behavior of one member of the family affect the functioning of the other
members (Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 2006; Kuczynski & DeMol 2015; Sturge-Apple
et al., 2010). For example, if the father’s role in the family shifts, changes also occur
in the mother’s role and the children’s experiences. Family members influence each
other both directly and indirectly. Direct effects are more obvious: Spouses affect
each other by praising or criticizing; parents affect their children by hugging or
spanking; children affect their parents by clinging or talking back. Indirect effects
involve a two-step process: Fathers affect their children indirectly by modifying their
relationship with their mother, which then affects the child’s development; mothers
affect their children indirectly by modifying the quantity and quality of father–child
interaction, which in turn affects the child’s behavior. Children influence the rela-
tionship between their parents indirectly by altering the behavior of either parent.
In a well-functioning family system, parents have a good relationship with each
other, they are caring and supportive of their children, and the children are coop-
erative and responsible and care for their parents. In a dysfunctional family system,
parents have an unhappy marriage, they are irritable with their children, and the
children exhibit antisocial behavior, which intensifies problems in the parents’ rela-
tionship. It is difficult to reverse the negative quality of these family interactions
because systems in general resist change. This is why, for example, negative patterns
of interaction intensify and solidify in families with an aggressive child (Dishion
& Snyder, 2016). If family members make no effort to communicate rationally, to
defuse anger, or to solve problems, they are likely to become locked into a pattern
of interaction that promotes or sustains maladaptive behavior in family members.
The key to good family functioning is adaptability.

The Couple System

The founding subsystem within the family system joins two adult partners. Develop-
mental psychologists have sometimes overlooked the significance of this subsystem,
but the nature of this relationship unquestionably has important effects on chil-
dren’s development. Directly or indirectly, the quality of the couple’s union
facilitates—or hampers—the quality of parenting, sibling relationships, and children’s
development.

How does the couple’s relationship affect children? When partners offer
each other emotional and physical support and comfort, the likelihood that they
will provide this type of support and caring to their children is high. Research has
250  Chapter 7 Family

shown that when partners are mutually supportive, they are more involved with
their children, their child-rearing practices are more competent, and their relation-
ships with their children are more affectionate, responsive, and sensitive (Cowan
& Cowan, 2002, 2010; Klausli & Owen, 2011). In turn, children whose parents are
mutually supportive and affectionate are well adjusted and positive (Goeke-Morey
et al., 2003). In contrast, parents who are in conflict and lash out at each other with
hostility, belligerence, and contempt inflict problems on their children (Cummings
& Davies, 2010; Davies et al., 2015). When the conflict occurs in the child’s early
years, the children are unlikely to develop emotionally secure attachments to their
parents (Frosch et al., 2000). When the conflict occurs in later years, the children
are likely to become aggressive or depressed (Davies et al., 2015; Katz & Gottman,
1993, 1996).

Problems when parents fight Children are directly affected by their parents’
conflict when they witness their arguments and fights. Mark Cummings and his
colleagues showed children live or videotaped interactions between adult actors
behaving like two conflicted parents in a home setting as well as studies of observed
conflicts between their parents. Adults disagreed about issues such as which movie
to see or argued about who would wash the dishes. The more frequent and violent
their conflicts and the more often the arguments were about something a child had
done or said, the more likely children were to be upset and to blame themselves
for the incident (Cummings & Davies, 2010; Davies et al., 2006). Children who
observed intense and destructive conflicts between their parents suffered from emo-
tional insecurity, depression, anxiety, behavior problems, relationship difficulties,

Stop ignoring
me!
Stop yelling
at me!
 The Family System  251

and poor emotion regulation, even years later (Cummings et al., 2006; Cummings &
Davies, 2010). Some children may even develop eating disorders in adolescence as
a response to parent–parent conflict (George et al., 2014). In some cases, children’s
biological capacity to manage stress (as assessed by cortisol levels) was impaired
(Davies et al., 2007; Sturge-Apple et al., 2012). However, if parents handled their
disagreements constructively, showing respect for each other’s opinions, express-
ing mutual warmth and support, and modeling effective conflict negotiation strate-
gies, this lessened the harmful effects on children. Exposure to constructive conflict
could even teach children how to negotiate conflict and resolve disagreements with
others outside the family, although the negative effects of exposure to destructive
conflict may potentially outweigh exposure to constructive conflict (Davies et al.,
2012, Cicchetti, & Martin, 2012). Children were most likely to have problems if
their parents expressed anger frequently, intensely, physically, and without resolu-
tion (Cummings & Davies, 2010).

“Matt was really sensitive to other people’s emotions. Perhaps that is why he would get
so upset when his parents argued. He would do his darndest to stop the fight as if he was
really feeling the anger between his parents. Fortunately, his parents generally settled
their arguments in an amicable way so Matt suffered no long-term harm.”

The indirect effect of parental conflict occurs when marital difficulties affect
parental child-rearing practices, and child-rearing practices affect children’s devel-
opment. Parents in conflicted marriages are likely to have parenting styles that are
angry and intrusive, and their children, in turn, display a good deal of anger when
they interact with their parents (Katz & Gottman, 1997) or with other children
(McCloskey & Stuewig, 2001; Stocker & Youngblade, 1999) and view peers as threat-
ening and hostile (Bascoe et al., 2009).
Several different theoretical explanations have been offered to account for the
effects of parental conflict on children’s social development. Each has received
empirical support. Social learning theory suggests that children learn how to inter-
act with people and resolve conflicts by watching their parents; if parents fight,
children learn aggressive interaction strategies (Crockenberg & Langrock, 2001). A
second explanation, based on attachment theory, suggests that as a result of expo-
sure to conflict between their parents, children experience emotional arousal and
distress and develop a sense of emotional insecurity, which leads to later problems
in social interactions (Cummings & Davies, 2010). In support of this viewpoint,
researchers have found that children’s insecure representations of their parents’
relationship were a significant intervening mechanism in the association between
parents’ destructive conflict and children’s emotional difficulties in early elemen-
tary school (Sturge-Apple et al., 2008).
According to a third theory, which emphasizes children’s cognitive processes, the
impact of parental conflict depends on how children understand it. If they perceive
the conflict as threatening, they become anxious, depressed, and withdrawn; if they
perceive the conflict as being their fault, they are more likely to act out; if the parents
resolve the conflict, the children are less likely to have these problems because they
expect that they, too, will be able to resolve conflicts (Grych & Cardoza-Fernandes,
2001; Grych & Fincham, 1990). A fourth theory suggests that poor parental mental
health accounts for the effects of parental conflict on children’s functioning. In one
study supporting this viewpoint, Cummings and his colleagues found that paren-
tal depression mediated the impact of marital distress on adolescents’ depressive
symptoms (Cummings et al., 2005). A fifth explanation is that the effect of parental
252  Chapter 7 Family

conflict on children’s social behavior is, in part, genetic. Researchers have found a
stronger link between marital conflict and adolescent conduct problems in families
in which the mothers or fathers are identical twins than in families in which the
mothers or fathers are fraternal twins (Harden et al., 2007).
Regardless of the theoretical explanation—all of which have merit—it is valu-
able to view the links between parental conflict and child adjustment as reciprocal
and transactional, not a one-way effect from parents to children. When Cummings
and his colleagues examined the relations between parental discord and child out-
comes across three time points, they found that parental discord at the first time
predicted children’s negative emotional reactivity at the second time. Children’s
negative reactivity was related to dysregulated behavior (children did more yell-
ing and causing trouble) and agentic behavior (children made more efforts to
intervene in their parents’ conflicts). Children’s agentic behavior then predicted
decreased parental discord at the third time point (Schermerhorn et al., 2007).
Children’s agentic behavior also was related to more conflict resolution by their
parents (Schermerhorn et al., 2010). This suggests that as a result of their chil-
dren’s efforts, parents might have become more aware of the negative effects
of their marital discord and, as a consequence, reduced their overt conflict and
sought out conflict resolutions. Children’s dysregulated behavior and negativity, in
contrast, predicted increases in marital discord and elevations in children’s adjust-
ment problems.

Overcoming these problems Researchers have implemented programs to help

parents improve their relationship and thereby help their children. Cummings
and his colleagues (2008) devised a program for couples with 4- to 8-year-old chil-
dren in which they were taught about the effects of constructive and destructive
marital conflict. Compared with parents in a control group who merely read the
same information, couples who participated in the program increased their knowl-
edge about marital conflict, engaged in more constructive and less destructive
conflict, and their children were better adjusted than those of the control group.
These effects were still evident a year later. A program aimed at adolescents was
also successful in improving their attachments with their fathers (Cummings &
Schatz, 2012). In another program, parents of 4-year-olds participated in profes-
sionally led group discussions on parenting or marital issues (Cowan et al., 2005).
Their children exhibited less-aggressive acting out, suffered from fewer internaliz-
ing problems, experienced fewer problems with their peers, and even 10 years later
were still doing better socially and had fewer behavior problems (less aggression
and hyperactivity) than children whose parents were in a control group (Cowan
et al., 2011).

And baby makes three: the impact of a new baby on the couple system
Just as the couple’s relationship affects the children, children affect the couple’s
relationship. The most immediate effect occurs after the birth of the couple’s first
child. This significant life change brings with it a shift toward a more tradi-
tional division of labor (Cowan & Cowan, 2000, 2010) and less marital satisfac-
tion as well (Twenge et al., 2003). Satisfaction declines more markedly in women
(Cowan & Cowan, 2010). In fact, mothers’ workload increases by 2 hours while
fathers’ load increases by only 40 minutes after the baby arrives (Yavorsky et al.,
2015). However, when mothers and fathers are supportive of each other’s par-
enting there is less of a drop in couple satisfaction (Durtschi et al., 2017, Soloski, &
Kimmes, 2017).
 The Family System  253

Although the birth of a child rarely destroys a good relationship between the
mother and the father, the presence of a child, especially if the child is difficult, may
be enough to undermine a fragile relationship (Hogan & Msall, 2002).

“Looking back on it, Jason’s birth put strains on what was already a crumbling mar-
riage. I didn’t want to think that it was crumbling, so I ignored the signs for a long
time. But when Jason was just a tiny baby—and difficult—Charlie began working longer
and longer hours. He began missing not just weeknight suppers but important family
times—weddings, holidays, birthday parties. He was never there to walk the floor to get
Jason to sleep or to watch him doing the nice normal kid things like learning to walk
and talk or later to talk to the teachers about things that came up at school. I ended up
taking care of everything to do with Jason, and finally it was just as easy to ignore Charlie
altogether.”

nto Adulthood: Transition to Parenthood

problems, and conflicts. Who would give up

© Radius Images/ Media Bakery

what? Who would take responsibility for what?
How could they keep the marital relationship
fulfilling while dealing with the child’s inces-
sant demands?
The researchers assessed family functioning,
the quality of the marital relationship, parenting
effectiveness, and parents’ adjustment in late
pregnancy and when the children were 6
months, 18 months, 3 years, and 5 years old. At
Although bringing a child into a family is gener- the 18-month assessment, the effects of the
ally heralded as a happy event, becoming intervention were encouraging. Fathers in the
parents poses risks. To make the transition less intervention group were more involved and
stressful, psychologists have designed programs satisfied with their parenting and reported
to strengthen couple relationships and reduce less-negative change in their marital satisfaction,
the adverse consequences of the transition to sexual relations, and social support. Mothers in
parenthood. In the Becoming a Family project, the intervention group were more satisfied with
Philip and Carolyn Cowan (2000, 2010) studied the division of labor and with their marriages
72 couples who were expecting their first baby overall; they were happier with their sexual
and 24 couples who had not yet decided relations, and they seemed better able to
whether to become parents. They selected balance life stresses and social supports. Fewer
one-third of the expectant couples to participate of the intervention couples were separated or
in a 6-month group intervention that concluded divorced. By the time the children were in kinder-
3 months after the birth of their baby. In weekly garten, though, some of the positive effects of the
sessions, a clinically trained married couple early intervention had worn off. Although higher
encouraged these parents-to-be to raise any couple satisfaction continued in the intervention
issues they were grappling with. Both wives and group, there were few differences in parenting
husbands described their dreams of creating an styles or children’s behavior. The researchers
ideal family and talked about the impending concluded that to sustain good family function-
birth. Interestingly, everyone had trouble imagin- ing, giving “booster shots” from time to time over
ing what would happen after the baby was born. the family life cycle would be helpful (Schulz
After the birth, the couples confronted changes, et al., 2006).
254  Chapter 7 Family

The Parent–Child System

Most parents have some beliefs about the qualities they would like to see their chil-
dren develop and the child-rearing methods that should encourage them. How par-
ents go about this process of rearing their children and how successful they are is
the topic of this section.

How parents socialize children Although socialization begins when the infant
is born, it becomes more deliberate as children achieve greater mobility and begin
to use language. When children reach this point, their parents cuddle and pet them
and praise them for all sorts of achievements that they and society regard as desir-
able. They no longer accept behavior just because it’s “cute.” They stop children
from climbing out of their cribs, banging on pots and pans, and hitting the kitty.
Some parents stay relatively relaxed and permissive as their children engage in
these activities. For other children, practicing newfound motor skills and exploring
the world becomes a real trial because parents restrain them with playpen bars and
a barrage of “No’s!” Parents’ efforts to socialize their children increase as children
go through the preschool years and are maintained until parents are satisfied with
the result or give up in frustration.
Most parents try to socialize their children to behave politely, get along with oth-
ers, value honesty and hard work, and achieve a myriad of other goals that vary
somewhat from family to family. For example, among aboriginal parents in Canada,
socialization goals include respecting cultural traditions and being proud of their
heritage (Cheah & Chirkov, 2008). Regardless of their specific goals, though, par-
ents use learning principles to teach their children social rules and roles. They use
reinforcement when they explain acceptable standards of behavior and then praise
or punish the children according to whether they conform to or violate these rules.
They use modeling when they demonstrate behaviors they want the children to
adopt. They also inadvertently use modeling when they act in ways they don’t intend
the child to imitate. If parents lie to their friends, ridicule their coworkers, and bully
their children, these negative behaviors are as likely to be adopted by the children
as are the parents’ positive behaviors, and they are more likely to be emulated than
the behaviors parents preach about.

Differences in socialization approaches In addition to having somewhat dif-

ferent socialization goals, parents differ in the ways they go about the job of sociali-
zation. One difference is related to their emotional involvement: Some parents are
warm and responsive in their approach to socialization; others are cold and reject-
ing. When parents are warm and loving, socialization is more effective. Children
whose parents are responsive, warm, and engaging are more socially competent
(Grimes et al., 2004) and popular (Isley et al., 1999) than children with rejecting
parents. Parental rejection is linked with poor academic and socioemotional out-
comes across a wide range of countries (China, Colombia, Italy, Jordan, Kenya,
­Philippines, Sweden, Thailand, and the United States; Putnick et al., 2015). A second
difference is related to the parents’ level of control: Some parents are permissive
and undemanding, pretty much allowing children to do as they wish; others are
demanding and restrictive. The ideal seems to be a happy medium. If parents use
the minimum amount of pressure necessary to bring the children’s behavior into
line with the parents’ goals, children are more likely to cooperate and to inter-
nalize their parents’ standards (Holden, 2015). If parents exert too little control,
their children are more likely to have externalizing behavior problems (Barber &
 The Family System  255

Harmon, 2002; Barber & Zia, 2013). If they exert too much control, they might
influence the children’s immediate behavior, but in the long run the children may
come to view themselves as helpless and unworthy and might avoid contact with the
parents—which gives the parents less opportunity to socialize them.
A key aspect of strict control is physical punishment—slapping, spanking, shak-
ing, beating. According to one meta-analysis, physical punishment is linked to a
variety of negative outcomes, especially increases in children’s aggression (­Gershoff,
2002). A more recent meta-analysis involving nearly 161,000 children confirmed
the links between physical punishment and detrimental child outcomes (Gershoff
& Grogan-Kaylor, 2016). This is a controversial topic, however, and not everyone
agrees that spanking is bad (Baumrind et al., 2002). In another meta-analysis,
researchers compared different types of physical punishment, including (1) con-
ditional spanking, which was used to back up milder disciplinary tactics such as
reasoning and time-outs; (2) physical punishment as the predominant disciplinary
tactic; and (3) severe punishment, including shaking and spanking that was anger
driven and out of control (Larzelere & Kuhn, 2005). Only the latter two types of
physical punishment were associated with negative child outcomes, including anti-
social behavior and poor conscience development. In fact, conditional spanking
was associated with reductions in noncompliance and antisocial behavior even
more than nonphysical disciplinary tactics such as ignoring, time-outs, and loss of
privileges. These findings suggest that mild, judicious physical punishment can be
an effective disciplinary strategy. This view is consistent with experimental studies
demonstrating that the negative effects of punishment can be avoided by making
punishment contingencies clear and reinforcing appropriate behaviors (Matson &
Taras, 1989; Walters & Grusec, 1977).

Parenting styles Putting together the emotional and control dimensions of par-
enting led researchers to identify four parenting styles (see Figure 7.1): Authoritarian
parenting is emotionally rejecting and highly controlling.

“When we were bad as kids, my mother would threaten, ‘Just wait until your father gets
home. He’ll give you such a licking.’ Then my father would walk in, and when he heard
what we’d done, he got the strap and walloped our backsides.”

Emotionality
Warm, Rejecting,
responsive unresponsive
demanding
Restrictive,

Authoritative Authoritarian

FIGURE 7.1 Parenting styles. Combining the

Control

dimensions of control and emotion produces

four different parenting styles.
undemanding
Permissive,

Source: Maccoby, E. E., & Martin, J. A. (1983).

Permissive Uninvolved Socialization in the context of the family: Parent–child
interaction. In P. H. Mussen (Series Ed.), & E. M.
Hetherington (Vol. Ed.), Handbook of child psychology:
Vol. 4. Socialization, personality, and social development
(pp. 1–102). New York: Wiley.
256  Chapter 7 Family

Permissive parenting is emotionally positive and low in control.

“The two girls who live across the street from us are spoiled rotten. Their parents cater
to them and give them anything they want. All one of the girls has to do is pout, and
the mother caves. I’ve heard them yell at their parents, ‘Get over here right now,’ and
the parents do it.”

Authoritative parenting is emotionally positive and firmly controlling.

“If I told my parents that I really objected to some law they’d laid down, they always
listened to my side of things. Sometimes they would even change their minds—but
not often.”
“My parents spanked me twice, both times for lying. My mother always said she
thought it was terrible to punish children physically. She especially hated punishments
like washing out a child’s mouth with soap because he’d said something dirty. She used
banishment: ‘Go to your room until you can behave.’ ‘Sit on the stairs until you’re ready
to apologize.’”

Uninvolved parenting is emotionally negative and low in control.

“It seems like my parents were mostly indifferent and when they did pay attention to us
it wasn’t good. Looking back, I’d say they didn’t give us much direction. It was like we
raised ourselves.”

Diana Baumrind was the first psychologist to link authoritarian, authoritative,

and permissive socialization styles with child outcomes (Baumrind, 1967). Observ-
ing preschool children in their daily activities for 14 weeks, she identified three
groups of children who had widely varying patterns of behavior: Children in one
group were energetic and friendly; children in a second group were conflicted and
irritable; and children in the third group were impulsive and aggressive. Baumrind
then interviewed the children’s parents and observed them interacting with the
children at home and in the laboratory. Later she followed the parents and children
through adolescence (Baumrind, 1991; Baumrind et al., 2010). What she found was
that children in the energetic–friendly group, who were more socially competent
in every way, were likely to have authoritative parents. They permitted the children
considerable freedom and were not intrusive. However, they imposed restrictions in
areas in which they had more knowledge or insight, and they were firm in resisting
children’s efforts to get them to acquiesce to demands. They expected appropri-
ately mature behavior from the children, setting reasonable limits but also being
responsive and attentive to the children’s needs. The children developed high levels
of self-esteem, adaptability, competence, and internalized control; they were popu-
lar with their peers and seldom behaved in antisocial ways. Positive outcomes were
still evident in adolescence for children who had authoritative parents in the pre-
school years.
In contrast, conflicted–irritable children, who tended to be fearful and moody,
were likely to have authoritarian parents. These parents were rigid, power-assertive,
harsh, and unresponsive to the children’s needs. The children had little control
over their environments and received little gratification. Baumrind suggested that
these children often felt trapped and angry but also fearful of asserting themselves
in a hostile environment. In childhood and adolescence, these children, especially
the boys, were lacking in self-confidence, less socially competent, more unfriendly,
and less likely to be leaders of their peers.
 The Family System  257

Children in the impulsive–aggressive group were likely to have permissive par-

ents. These parents had affectionate relationships with their children, but because
of their excessively lax and inconsistent discipline and their encouragement of the
children’s free expression of impulses, they did not diminish the children’s uncon-
trolled, noncompliant, and aggressive behavior. (Baumrind’s findings are summa-
rized graphically in Figure 7.2.)
Later researchers identified the fourth parenting style, uninvolved (Maccoby &
Martin, 1983) or disengaged (Sturge-Apple et al., 2010). This type of parenting
reflects the behavior of parents who are indifferent to their children. They do what-
ever is necessary to minimize the costs of having children—giving them as little time
and effort as possible. They focus on their own needs before those of the children.
Particularly when children are older, these parents often fail to monitor their activi-
ties. When asked the classic question, “It’s 10 o’clock—do you know where your chil-
dren are?” these parents often have to admit they do not. Children with uninvolved
parents are likely to be impulsive, aggressive, noncompliant, and moody (Sturge-
Apple et al., 2010; Thompson, 2006b). As adolescents, they may be delinquents
(Dishion & Bullock, 2002). When parents increase their involvement, children’s
problem behaviors decrease and social skills improve (El Nokali et al., 2010).
The characteristics of parents who display each of the four parenting styles and
the typical behaviors of their children are summarized in Table 7.1.

Why parents have different parenting styles Where do these differences in

parents’ styles of socializing their children come from? There are many sources.
One is the quality of the parents’ relationship with each other. Parents in good
marriages are more likely to be authoritative (Cowan & Cowan, 2010). In fact,
how positive and supportive couples are with each other as newlyweds before the
arrival of children is related to how authoritative they are as parents a decade later
(Tanner, Stapleton, & Bradbury, 2012). A second source of differences in parent-
ing styles is parents’ personalities (Belsky & Barends, 2002; Bornstein et al., 2011).
Parents with less agreeable personalities (measured outside the child-rearing con-
text) are more authoritarian—less responsive, more rejecting, and more power
assertive (Koenig et al., 2010). Parents’ abilities also affect their parenting styles:
Parents who are poor at taking another person’s perspective or are low in empathy
are more authoritarian (Gerris et al., 1997; Psychcogiou et al., 2008); parents who
are good at adapting to changing or stressful circumstances are more authoritative

Energetic-
friendly
children

Conflicted-
irritable FIGURE 7.2 Dimensions of parents’
children Control behavior and children’s characteristics.
Parents of energetic–friendly children
Nurturance
had higher scores on both dimen-
Impulsive- sions: control and positive emotion
aggressive
(nurturance).
children
Source: Adapted from Baumrind, D. (1967).
Child care practices anteceding three
30 35 40 45 50 55 60
­patterns of preschool behavior. Genetic
Parents' behavior Psychology Monographs, 75, 43–188.
258  Chapter 7 Family

TABLE 7.1

Relations between Parenting Style and Children’s Characteristics

Parenting Style Children’s Characteristics
Authoritative Parent Energetic–Friendly Child
Is warm, involved, responsive Is cheerful
Shows pleasure and support of child’s constructive behavior Is self-controlled and self-reliant
Considers child’s wishes and solicits opinions; offers Is interested and curious in new situations
alternatives Has high-energy level
Sets standards, communicates them clearly, and enforces Maintains friendly relations with peers
them firmly Cooperates with adults
Does not yield to child’s coercion Copes well with stress
Shows displeasure at bad behavior; confronts disobedient
child
Authoritarian Parent Conflicted–Irritable Child
Shows little warmth or positive involvement Is moody, unhappy, aimless
Does not solicit or consider child’s desires or opinions Is fearful, apprehensive, easily annoyed
Enforces rules rigidly but doesn’t explain them clearly Is passively hostile and deceitful
Shows anger and displeasure; confronts child regarding bad Alternates between aggressive behavior and
behavior and uses harsh, punitive discipline sulky withdrawal
Views child as dominated by antisocial impulses Is vulnerable to stress
Permissive Parent Impulsive–Aggressive Child
Is moderately warm Is aggressive, domineering, resistant, noncompliant
Glorifies free expression of impulses and desire Is quick to anger but fast to recover cheerful mood
Does not communicate rules clearly or enforce them Lacks self-control and displays little self-reliance
Ignores or accepts bad behavior; disciplines inconsistently Is impulsive
Yields to coercion and whining; hides impatience, anger Is aimless; has few goal-directed activities
Makes few demands for mature, independent behavior
Uninvolved Parent Impulsive–Aggressive–Noncompliant–Moody Child
Is self-centered, neglectful, unresponsive Is moody, insecurely attached, impulsive, aggressive,
Pursues self-gratification at expense of child’s welfare noncompliant, irresponsible
Tries to minimize costs (time, effort) of interaction with Has low self-esteem and is immature, alienated from family
child Lacks skills for social pursuits
Fails to monitor child’s activity, whereabouts, companions Is truant, associates with troubled peers, may be
May be depressive, anxious, emotionally needy delinquent, is sexually precocious

(van Bakel & Riksen-Walraven, 2000). Parents’ mental health affects their behavior as
well: Neurotic parents—that is, parents who are depressed, anxious, and obsessive—
are more negative and rejecting with their children (Belsky et al., 1995; Smith,
2010). An uninvolved style of parenting is often found in parents who are depressed
(Hammen, 2009) or stressed by marital discord or divorce (Hetherington & Kelly,
2002). Their own anxiety and emotional neediness drives these parents to pursue
self-gratification at the expense and neglect of their children’s welfare (Patterson &
Capaldi, 1991).
Other factors that affect parenting styles include how much education and finan-
cial resources parents have: Parents with less education use more authoritarian
discipline (Carpenter, 1999; Evans & Kim, 2013) and more neglectful parenting
(Kang, 2013). Parents’ beliefs or theories about children’s development matters
 The Family System  259

too. Parents who believe that infants intentionally misbehave are more likely to use
physical discipline to prevent spoiling them than parents who believe that infants
do not understand the difference between right and wrong (Burchinal et al., 2010).
Yet another source of parenting styles is the parent’s family of origin. Whether they
know it or not, parents are affected by the experiences they had with their own par-
ents when they were young (Murphy-Cowan & Stringer, 1999; Smith & Wild, 2019;
Wakschlag et al., 1996). Parents who had memories of unhappy or unstable child-
hoods were more authoritarian (Kochanska et al., 2007). To some extent, parenting
styles are transmitted from one generation to the next, although the transmission
process is open to modification.
The circumstances in which families live also have an influence on parents’
behavior. Parents who live in dangerous neighborhoods and are afraid about

esearch Up Close: Transmission of Hostile Parenting

across Generations
Laura Scaramella and Rand each time point. It also included assessments of
Conger (2003) used a prospec- an important child characteristic, negative
tive study across three genera- emotional reactivity. This was an important
tions to examine the degree to component of the study because children who
which hostile parenting in the first generation react to environmental restrictions with negative
was passed on to parents in the second genera- emotionality can provoke their parents’ hostility,
tion (Figure 7.3, Path a). They also looked at and their negative temperaments can cause
whether hostile parenting in the second genera- them to be more prone to developing problems
tion was related to children’s behavior problems in response to hostile parenting. In technical
in the third generation (Path b). jargon, children’s temperaments can moderate
Their study offered the methodological both continuities in parenting across generations
advantage of having independent raters assess and effects of parenting on children’s emotional
parents’ behavior and children’s behavior at development (Paths c and d).
The researchers observed 75 9th graders in
Time 1: Time 2: the laboratory as they and their parents tried to
G1: Parenthood/ G2: Early adulthood/
G2: Middle adolescence G3: Early childhood
resolve common family problems (curfew
disagreements, homework disputes). They
G3: Negative emotional reactivity recorded the degree of hostile parenting (angry
(early childhood) and coercive disciplinary tactics). Five to eight
years later, when the 9th graders had entered
c d adulthood and become parents themselves,
G1 G2 G3
they were observed with their 18-month-old
a b
Hostile Hostile Problem toddlers in a toy-cleanup task. The researchers
parenting parenting behavior
were thus able to assess the amount of hostile
parenting used by these young parents with their
FIGURE 7.3 Continuities in hostile behavior across genera- own children. The toddlers were evaluated for
tions. G1 = first generation; G2 = second generation;
negative emotional reactivity (anger, distress,
G3 = third generation.
struggle) when the researchers restrained
Source: Scaramella, L. V, & Conger, R. D. (2003). Intergenerational
their arms.
continuity of hostile parenting and its consequences: The moderating
influence of children’s negative emotional reactivity. Social Development, As expected, the young parents who had
12, 420–439. Reprinted with permission of Wiley-Blackwell. been treated by their own parents in a hostile
260  Chapter 7 Family

and angry fashion when they were in ninth grade However, the combination of earlier hostile child
were more likely to be hostile toward their own rearing by parents and later negative emotional-
children a decade later. Moreover, the more ity in offspring is likely to ignite a sequence of
hostile the young parents were, the more disobe- events that intensifies problems over time.
dient, aggressive, sullen, and withdrawn their Intergenerational studies such as this one
toddlers were. Children’s temperaments mattered have a number of limitations. One limitation is
too: Continuity of parenting was evident only that because they require contact with a sample
when children were above the median on over an extended period of time, they are
negative emotional reactivity. In families in which complicated and expensive and they often suffer
children had more positive temperaments, hostile from participant attrition. In addition, these
parenting in the first generation did not predict researchers were not able to fully explore the
hostile parenting in the second. One interpreta- influence of fathers. First-generation father data
tion of these findings is that children’s negative were not available for one quarter of the sample
emotional reactivity stresses parents, and because the parents had divorced. Researchers
stressed parents react to their children’s behavior in the future can contribute more information
with well-learned behaviors from their own about the important issue of cross-generational
childhoods. parenting continuity by using larger and more
Taken together, these results begin to address complete samples. In fact, these researchers
the questions of why not all people who are suggest that another factor that can disrupt the
raised by hostile parents become hostile and intergenerational transmission of hostile patterns
why not all children with hostile parents develop is the quality of the parenting partner. Specifically,
behavior problems. Highly reactive children may when a parent who was treated harshly during
not be at risk for problems if their parents’ own his or her own childhood has a warm and
childhood experiences were not hostile, and supportive coparent in adulthood, the intergen-
hostile parenting may not lead to later conduct erational transmission of hostility link may be
problems if children are not emotionally reactive. broken (Conger et al., 2012).

their children playing outside are more likely to be authoritarian and place
more restrictions on their children’s activities (Leventhal et al., 2015; Parech &
Kimbro, 2011; Parke, 2013). Their style of strict control may be adaptive because
living in a dangerous neighborhood brings with it a higher risk that children will
be harmed or become involved in antisocial activities (Dodge et al., 2005). When
parents move to more affluent and less-dangerous neighborhoods, they use less
harsh discipline than parents who remain in poor neighborhoods (Leventhal &
Brooks-Gunn, 2003). The parents’ culture is another important source of ideas
about how to socialize children (which we discuss later in this chapter).
Finally, children’s behavior affects parenting styles. It is not uncommon for
people—especially people who have never had children—to think that the main
direction of effects in the family is from parents to children. In fact, socialization
is a two-way street, a process of mutual shaping by which parents modify children’s
behavior and children influence the behavior of their parents (Holden, 2015;
Kuczynski & DeMol, 2015). The behavior of the firstborn child is so influential,
it even affects whether parents have a second child; if the first child is smart and
sociable, parents are likely to go for two; if the first child is difficult, they are more
likely to stop with one (Markus, 2010). Children with difficult temperaments or
behavior problems provoke increasingly coercive socialization strategies from their
parents (Ganiban et al., 2011; Rothbart, 2012). Children with fearful temperaments
are more accepted by their parents (Lengua & Kovacs, 2005) and respond to more
subtle parental socialization strategies (Kochanska et al., 2007).
 The Family System  261

These child effects have been observed not only in correlational studies but also
in experiments. In one experiment, researchers paired conduct-disordered boys
with mothers of typically developing boys and asked them to play freely for 5 min-
utes, to clean up the materials they were using, and to solve some math problems
(Anderson et al., 1986). The mothers were more negative and controlling with
the conduct-­disordered boys than with typical boys—whether they were their own
sons or other boys. Child effects on parenting styles have also been demonstrated
in behavior genetic studies. In one study, children who were at risk for antisocial
behavior because their biological mothers acted in antisocial ways in high school
(ran away from home, got into fights, ditched school) were more likely to elicit
harsh and hostile treatment from their adoptive parents than were children without
this risk (O’Connor et al., 1998). Clearly, children’s characteristics affect parenting.

“With Mikey one unkind word and he would absolutely crumple. We never spanked
him; he couldn’t take it, and he’s never needed it. All he needed was a firm word. But
Erica is a different story. We can yell at her until we are blue in the face and she won’t
obey. No, with Erica, either we enlist her cooperation or forget it.”

Socialization: from bidirectional to transactional Today, child development

researchers recognize that socialization is bidirectional—that parents’ behavior
affects children’s and children’s behavior affects parents’. But looking at socializa-
tion over time suggests that the process is even more complex. Children and their
parents change each other over time in a transactional process (Sameroff, 2009,
2010). To demonstrate the transactional nature of socialization, researchers have
documented across-time links between parents’ and children’s behaviors. In one
study, they showed that children’s ability to regulate their impulsive behavior at age
7 predicted fewer punitive maternal reactions when the children were 9 years old,
which in turn predicted better regulation of impulses by the children when they
were 11 years old (Eisenberg et al., 1999). In another study, researchers showed that
parents’ warmth toward their children predicted the children’s empathy 2 years
later, and children’s externalizing behavior problems predicted less warm and
responsive parenting over the same period (Zhou et al., 2002). In a third study,
researchers found that parents’ inconsistent discipline predicted higher levels of
irritability in their 8- to 11-year-old children, and children’s positive emotional-
ity predicted higher levels of maternal acceptance a year later (Lengua & Kovacs,
2005). Finally, in a fourth, nationally representative study of 11,000 5- to 8-year-olds,
researchers found that parents’ spanking when the children were 5 years old pre-
dicted increases in their externalizing behavior, and children’s externalizing behav-
ior at the same age elicited more spanking over time (Gershoff et al., 2012).

Mothers’ and fathers’ parenting Over the past decades, there has been a signifi-
cant shift in how much fathers participate in children’s lives. In the 1970s, fathers
were only about one-third as engaged with their children as mothers were; today
it’s closer to three-quarters (Pleck, 2010). Nevertheless, even today, fathers typically
spend less time with their children than mothers do and are less likely to supervise
the children’s play with peers (Ladd, 2005; Ladd & Pettit, 2002). This difference
appears not only in the United States but also in other countries including Great
Britain, Australia, France, Belgium, and Japan (Zuzanek, 2000). But despite the
fact that fathers spend a limited amount of time with their children, they have an
important influence on the children’s development (Lamb & Lewis, 2013). Studies
show that fathers make a significant contribution to their children’s social behavior,
262  Chapter 7 Family

independent of the mother’s contribution (Hart et al., 1998; McDowell & Parke,
2009; Parke & Cookston, 2019). If fathers are more positive and prosocial in their
interactions and responsive to their children’s emotional displays, the children are
more competent with peers; if fathers are confrontational, angry, and emotionally
insensitive in their interactions, their children are less competent (Baker et al., 2011).
Fathers are more likely to spend more of their available time in play activities
with their children than mothers are (Yeung et al., 2001). The quality of their play
differs, too. Fathers’ play is more physically arousing; mothers play conventional
games, interact with toys, and talk more (Parke, 2013a; Parke & Cookston, 2019).
Even with adolescents, fathers are more playful than mothers—joking and teasing
(Shulman & Klein, 1993). Fathers might use their distinctively arousing style as a
way to increase the salience of their interactions despite their more limited time
with the child. Or men might just be more physical than women: Human males of all
ages are more boisterous than females (Maccoby, 1998). However, physical play is
not such a central part of the father–infant relationship in all cultures (Roopnarine &
Jin, 2016; Schwalb et al., 2013). Fathers are not more likely than mothers to play
with their children in Sweden or on Israeli kibbutzim (Haas & Hwang, 2013), and
in China, Malaysia, Italy, India, and among the Aka pygmies of central Africa where
neither mothers nor fathers engage in physical play with their children (Hewlett &
Macfarlane, 2010; New & Benigni, 1987; Roopnarine, 2004). These cross-cultural
data suggest that cultural and environmental contexts as well as biological factors
shape parents’ play patterns.

“In our family, when Ron comes home from work, the kids squeal with delight. He gets
down on the floor with them and roughhouses. He tosses the baby in the air; he gives
them horsey rides on his back. Then he says, ‘Okay, kids, that’s it,’ and he hands the
baby back to me and shoos Emma and her sister off to their toys. When I come home
from work, the kids say, ‘Feed me, feed me.’”

et You Thought That . . .: Parenting Is a Brain Drain,

Not a Brain Booster
Parenting is hard work. It involves multitasking,
loss of sleep, frayed nerves, and weakened social
relationships. You might think that that this
parenting burden would lead to a brain drain as
parents strain to keep up with child-rearing
demands. If you think so, you are wrong. It turns
out that parenting is good for your brain.
According to Craig Kinsley and Kelly Lambert
(2006, 2012), research indicates that the dra-
matic hormonal fluctuations that occur during
Tetra Images/Getty Images

pregnancy, birth, and lactation might remodel

the female brain, increasing the size of neurons in
some regions and producing structural changes
in others. Estrogen and progesterone apparently
enlarge the cell bodies of neurons in the area of
the hypothalamus, which regulates basic mater-
nal responses, and increase the surface area of
 The Family System  263

neuronal branches in the hippocampus, which simultaneously monitoring sights, sounds, odors,
governs memory and learning. When researchers and other animals (Higgins et al., 2007; Lambert
studied the brains of lactating mother rats using & Kinsley, 2009). These benefits last, too. Mother
functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), rats up to 2 years old—equivalent to women
they found that activity in the mother’s brain that older than 60 years—learn spatial tasks signifi-
is integral to reinforcement and reward increased cantly faster and remember them longer than
significantly when mothers nursed their pups virgin rats (Gatewood et al., 2005; Pawluski et al.,
(Ferris et al., 2005). In pregnant rats, neurons in 2016). Examination of their brains reveals fewer
the hypothalamus increased as the pregnancy deposits of amyloid precursor proteins, which
progressed (Kinsley et al., 2006; Pawluski et al., seem to play a role in the deterioration of the
2016). In essence, the hormones of pregnancy aging brain (Love et al., 2005). Males gain
“rev up” these neurons in anticipation of birth mental benefits from being parents, too. When
and the demands of motherhood. After birth, researchers tested mother and father marmo-
these neurons direct the mother’s attention and sets, a small Brazilian monkey, on a “foraging tree”
motivation to her offspring, enabling her to where they had to learn which containers held
provide care, protection, and nurture (Lambert & the most food, both mothers and fathers outper-
Franssen, 2013). formed nonparents (Lambert & Kinsley, 2009).
Mothers’ reproductive experience also Similarly, in a mouse species in which the male
enhances spatial learning and memory. contributes significantly to parental care,
Researchers have found that young female rats researchers found that fathers were quicker than
that had experienced one or two pregnancies nondads to investigate novel stimuli, such as
were better at foraging for food than virgin rats Lego blocks (Kinsley & Lambert, 2008, 2012) and
and better at remembering the location of a to locate food in a maze (Frassen et al., 2011).
food reward in mazes (Kinsley & Lambert, 2008). But what about human mothers and fathers?
Transitioning from foraging to hunting, a task that Researchers have also used fMRI to examine the
involves a moving target, maternal females have brains of human moms as they listen to their
also exhibited superior performance. When babies cry (Lorberbaum et al., 1999). Brain areas
females with previous reproductive experience associated with emotional regulation, planning,
were exposed to live crickets, lactating females and decision making (the anterior cingulate
had shorter latencies to capture the crickets than and right medial prefrontal cortex) showed
nonlactating females (Kinsley et al., 2014). increased activity. The patterns observed were
Pregnant and lactating rats also suffered less fear similar to those of the rodent mothers. Other
and anxiety (as measured by levels of stress researchers have found that the brain areas that
hormones in their blood) than virgin rats when regulate reward become activated when human
confronted with challenges such as forced mothers merely gaze at their children (Bartels &
swimming or exploring a novel environment Zeki, 2004; Swain & Lorberbaum, 2008). Human
(Wartella et al., 2003) because of reduced brains also undergo changes in sensory regula-
neuronal activity in the brain regions of the tory systems that parallel the alterations in other
hippocampus that regulate stress and emotion animals. Human mothers are capable of recog-
(Love et al., 2005). Oxytocin, the hormone that nizing their infants’ odors and sounds, possibly
triggers birth contractions and milk release, also because of enhanced sensory abilities (Barrett &
appears to have effects on the hippocampus Fleming, 2011). Mothers with high postbirth levels
that improve learning and long-term memory. In of the hormone cortisol are more attracted to
addition, motherhood is associated with an and motivated by their babies’ scents and better
increase in the number and complexity of glial able to recognize their infants’ cries (Everette
cells, the connective tissue of the central nervous et al., 2007). Evidence suggests that after birth
system that enhances learning and spatial mothers may be better equipped to engage in
memory (Tomizawa et al., 2003). Finally, rat the multitasking that is so integral to competent
mothers are good at multitasking; they nearly parenting and more vigilant and able to shift
always beat virgins in competitions that involve their attention to changing infant cues. As Barrett
264  Chapter 7 Family

and Fleming (2011, p. 370) note, “A mother must life (Perls & Fretts, 2001). Perhaps pregnancy
have the attentional command to focus on her and motherhood enhance women’s brains at a
infant which allows her to be sensitive to infant crucial period when the menopause-induced
needs, that is, to respond contingently, appropri- decline in reproductive hormones is starting.
ately and in a timely manner. She must also have Fathers, as well as mothers, show the same
the cognitive flexibility to switch her attention higher levels of activity in areas of the brain
efficiently across many situational demands in involved in emotional processing when exposed
highly stimulating environments.” to infant cries (Seifritz et al., 2003).
A possible long-term effect of motherhood is In brief, reproductive and child-rearing experi-
suggested by the finding that women who had ence promotes changes in the brain that alter
been pregnant at or after the age of 40 were four skills and behavior, particularly among mothers
times more likely to survive to age 100 than but also among fathers. Being a parent is
women who had been pregnant only earlier in apparently good for the brain, not a brain drain.

The Coparenting System

When two parents are raising a child, each parent interacts with the children and,
their actions are related; this creates another subsystem within the family—the
coparenting system. Researchers studying this system have identified three different
coparenting patterns (Kotila & Schoppe-Sullivan, 2015; McHale, 2010). In some
families, coparenting is cooperative, cohesive, and child centered; these families are
likely to have a high degree of family harmony. As one couple put it:

“We’re a team and work really hard to support each other’s parenting. It works pretty
well for us and the kids too.”

In other families, coparenting is hostile; these parents actively compete against each
other for their children’s attention and loyalty. In the third type of coparenting,
spouses invest different amounts of time and energy in parenting, leading to an
imbalance in their involvement with the child. This discrepancy can result from one
parent’s relative disinterest in parenting or from “gatekeeping,” which is when one
parent limits or controls the other parent’s level of participation. For example, if a
mother assumes that women are more fit for parenting than men, she might set up
subtle barriers that limit the father’s involvement.
Researchers have found that these three coparenting patterns are related to chil-
dren’s social development—even after they control for other factors, such as the
mother’s well-being, the overall quality of the parents’ marriage, and the mother’s
and father’s warmth when interacting with the child individually (Cox & Paley,
2003). Children exposed to hostile–competitive coparenting in their first year are
likely to exhibit high levels of aggressive behavior in early childhood; children who
are exposed to large discrepancies between the parents are likely to develop anxiety
(Fivaz-Depeursinge & Corboz-Warnery, 1999; McHale, 2010). Cooperative copar-
enting, in contrast, has positive effects on children’s social-emotional development
(McHale, 2010), on child and adolescent adjustment (Teubert & Pinquart, 2010,
2011), and it can even reduce the negative effects of a problematic temperament
(Schoppe-Sullivan et al., 2009). Coparenting has been found to mediate between
the marital and parenting subsystems (Pedro et al., 2012), which suggests that par-
ents can learn strategies of either cooperation or conflict in this context of shared
parenting.
 The Family System  265

nsights from Extremes: When Is a Family Too Large?

Family size in the United States culture today, Suleman faces an enormously
has decreased steadily over the difficult task.
past century. Your great grand- This extreme case illustrates the difficulties
mother might have had eight, involved in parenting a large family, being a
nine, or even ten children single mother, and having limited financial and
because this was an economic necessity to help personal resources for child care. Many experts
maintain the family farm or business. Extended worry about the consequences for these chil-
families often shared a household and dren’s development. The “octomom” case also
everyone—aunts, uncles, cousins, grandparents— raises questions about the use of alternative
helped care for the children. But now, when both reproductive technologies. Suleman conceived
parents are likely to work outside the home the octuplets, as well as her six older children, by
and relatives tend to live far away, large families in vitro fertilization (IVF). Although it is normal to
are more difficult to manage. The average have only two or three embryos implanted by IVF,
number of children in a family today is only in this case, as Suleman requested, the doctor
2.4 (Livingston, 2015). implanted at least six embryos. This extreme case
The challenges of caring for a large family not only underscores the challenges of caring for
were brought to national attention in January a large number of children but also suggests
2009, when Nadya Suleman, a single mother that as a society, we need to examine the ethics
who already had six young children, gave birth and wisdom of unregulated use of in vitro
to octuplets. How could she possibly cope with fertilization. Sometimes too many is just too much.
the task of caring for 14 children? Guidelines for By the time the octuplets were just 6 months old,
child care facilities suggest that at least one Suleman told a reporter she regretted having
caregiver is needed for every four infants to had more than two or three embryos implanted
ensure that the babies receive proper care. This (Us Magazine, August 20, 2009). In 2012, she
means that at least four caregivers would be checked herself into a treatment center for
needed to care for Suleman’s children. If she had anxiety, exhaustion, and stress. Currently, she is a
been living in an earlier era when extended part time counselor and continuing to care for
family members were available to share the her children, largely by herself. The octuplets
burden of raising large broods of babies, or if she turned 8 years old in 2017 and according to their
had lived in another culture where all members mom “she has embraced everyday with grati-
of the community share the child care load, the tude” (People Magazine, February 6, 2017). But
challenge would not be so daunting. But in our not for the faint of heart!

The Sibling System

More than 80 percent of families in the United States and Canada have more than
one child, and the number, spacing, and relations among these children affect the
functioning of the entire family. Most children spend more time interacting with
their siblings than with their parents or anyone else (Dunn, 2015; Larson & Verma,
1999). Interactions between siblings provide plenty of opportunities for children to
learn positive and negative ways of interacting and may be more emotionally intense
than exchanges with other family members and friends (Katz et al., 1992). As one
9-year-old put it (Hadfield et al., 2006):

“My sister knows more about me so I’m kind of closer to her than to my friends.”
266  Chapter 7 Family

How are siblings affected by birth order? Position in the family—that is, whether
a child is born first, second, or later—creates distinct experiences for children. First-
born children experience a period during which they reign supreme in the eyes
of their parents only to be displaced by the birth of a younger sibling with whom
they must share their parents’ affection. “Only” children enjoy the parents’ exclu-
sive attention forever. The lives of later-born children are filled with the doings and
demands of other children from the day they are born. Not surprisingly, researchers
have discovered differences among children depending on their birth order.
Firstborn children are generally more adult oriented, helpful, and self-controlled
than their siblings, and they tend to be more studious and conscientious (Herrera
et al., 2003; Zajonc & Mullally, 1997). Indeed, firstborns are overrepresented in
Who’s Who and among Rhodes scholars. Firstborn sons tend to be conservative and
like to maintain the status quo, perhaps because of the expectations and demands
their parents place on them; second-born sons are more likely to support change
and innovation (Sulloway, 1995). Later-born children also tend to be less fearful
and anxious than their firstborn siblings; they experience less guilt, have less dif-
ficulty coping with stressful situations, are less likely to be treated for psychologi-
cal problems, and have more self-confidence and social poise (Dunn, 2015). Like
firstborns, only children are likely to be high achievers, but sustained by their close
relationship with their parents, they are less anxious and show more personal con-
trol, maturity, and leadership (Falbo & Polit, 1986). In social relations both inside
and outside the family, only children seem to make more positive adjustments than
children who are involved in sibling rivalry.
These differences in children based on birth order are not large, and we have
been careful to use words such as “tendency” and “likely” to describe them because
of their modest magnitude. The behaviors and personalities of firstborn children,
later-born children, and only children overlap a great deal, and similarities between
siblings are likely to outweigh differences. Nevertheless, birth order is an interest-
ing aspect of a child’s social experience and an important component of the family
context.

Birth order and parent–child interactions It is the parents, to a large extent,

who determine whether firstborn children find the changes precipitated by the
arrival of a sibling seriously distressing (Teti, 2002). When the new baby is born, par-
ents typically have less interaction with their older children, and mothers become
more coercive and engage in fewer playful interactions with them (Dunn, 2015),
particularly if the new addition to the family is either unwanted or unplanned
(Barber & East, 2009). As a result, firstborns are likely to have emotional and
behavioral problems but usually only if they are higher in negative emotionality
(Volling, 2017). Even when it is the older adolescent sibling who becomes a mother
the younger sibling may suffer due to less parental attention and their own involve-
ment in assisting their older sister as a supplementary caregiver (East et al., 2009;
East & Chein, 2013).

“Aiden was the apple of my eye for 3 years. But when his younger sister was born, some-
thing seemed to change. When Aiden acted babyish I didn’t have the patience with him
that I used to have. Now I had a real baby to care for and I got firmer with Aiden. That
was hard on him for a while, I know.”

If mothers continue to be responsive to the needs of their older children and help
them understand the feelings of their younger sibling, intense sibling rivalry is less
 The Family System  267

likely (Howe & Ross, 1990). In fact, for most children the arrival of a sibling is not
a difficult transition, and they adjust well to this change in family composition
(Volling, 2017). If fathers become more involved with their firstborn children after
the new sibling arrives, this, too, can counter the children’s feelings of displacement
and jealousy. In fact, one positive effect of the birth of a second child may be that
fathers get more involved in child care (Kramer & Ramsburg, 2002). When fathers
have a well-developed sense of their parenting efficacy as expressed in their confi-
dence in disciplining their firstborn, these older siblings show less aggression after
the birth of a sibling (Volling, 2017).
Friends, too, can serve as buffers in this potentially stressful situation. In one
study, researchers found that preschool children who had good friends were
less upset when their lives were disrupted by the birth of a new baby than chil-
dren who did not get along well with their peers (Kramer & Gottman, 1992).
Moreover, the preschoolers with good friends were more accepting and behaved
more positively toward their new sibling. In a 13-year follow-up of the children
in this study, the researchers found that the children who had experienced
rewarding friendships before the birth of their sibling had better relationships
with the sibling in adolescence (Kramer & Kowal, 2005). Even having contact
with other children outside the family, such as in day care, can serve as a buffer
when a sibling is born. Sometimes, though, after the arrival of a second child,
mothers reduce their work hours and remove their older children from child
care (Baydar et al., 1997). This is a good example of Bronfenbrenner’s ecologi-
cal theory in practice.
Even though brothers and sisters grow up in the same household with the same
parents, they may be treated differently or at least perceive themselves to be treated
differently by their parents. These differences create nonshared environments
within the family that lead to different developmental consequences for the siblings.
If children perceive themselves to be treated worse than their sibling, adverse effects
such as heightened sibling rivalry and increased stress are common (Teti, 2002). In
one study, children who perceived themselves to be less favored by their parents
were more likely to experience an increase in externalizing problems (Richmond
et al., 2005). In another study, the more adolescents perceived their treatment by
their parents to be unfavorable compared with treatment of their siblings, the less
positive they felt about themselves (Barrett et al., 2000). Fortunately, most children
see their parents’ differential treatment as reasonable. In one study of 11- to 13-year-
olds, only one-quarter viewed their parents’ behavior as unfair or capricious (Kowal
& Kramer, 1997). The majority accepted it and understood that siblings’ different
ages, needs, and personal attributes accounted for the parents’ behavior. Only when
children didn’t understand or tolerate parents’ differential treatment did they view
their relationships with their siblings negatively.

Birth order and sibling interactions Position in the family also affects how chil-
dren interact with their siblings. Older sisters often act as caregivers; a firstborn girl
in a large family might warm bottles, change diapers, and soothe a squalling infant
with the efficiency and skill of a young mother (East, 2010; Edwards & Whiting,
1993). A national survey in the United States estimated that 1.4 million children
and adolescents are involved in some type of family caregiving (National Alliance
for Caregiving, 2005). Children and adolescents who assume such household
responsibilities, including sibling caregiving, gain an increased sense of maturity,
self-esteem, self reliance, and empathy (East, 2010). But there is a “dark side” to
such caregiving: Sibling care that is time-consuming (20 or more hours per week)
268  Chapter 7 Family

or extends over several years has been linked to increased stress, depression, aca-
demic difficulties, school dropout, and teen pregnancy (East, 2010; East & Weisner,
2009). As well as acting as caregivers, older siblings can serve as resources for their
younger siblings in times of stress, particularly if the children do not have a support-
ive adult or helpful friend (Conger et al., 2009). Having a warm relationship with a
sibling is particularly helpful when the life stressor is a family-related event, such as
a death of a relative, but less helpful when it is a personal event, such as a breakup
with a friend, which suggests that there is some domain specificity in the protective
function of sibling support (Waite et al., 2011). Sisters especially are protective in a
family crisis such as a divorce or the birth of a child to an older sibling (Kramer &
Conger, 2009; Shumaker et al., 2011). Older siblings also serve as teachers for their
younger siblings (Watson-Gegeo & Gegeo, 1986, p. 37):
Older sister: Then when you’re full, you just speak like this, “I don’t want any more now.”
Younger brother: (Whining) What?
Older sister: I don’t want to eat any more now.
Younger brother: I don’t want?
Older sister: Then you just speak as I said, like this, “I don’t want any more now.”
Younger brother: I don’t want.
Older sister: I’m full now.
Younger brother: Full now.
Older sister: I’m full. I don’t want to eat any more now.
Younger brother: Don’t want to eat any more now.
Whereas older siblings look to parents as their main source of social learning,
younger siblings use both parents and older siblings (Dunn, 2015; Pepler et al.,
1982). In one study, 70 percent of younger siblings reported getting social advice
from siblings, especially from older sisters (Zukow-Goldring, 2002). The style of
teaching that siblings use depends on the children’s ages. Preschool-age older sib-
lings are likely to use demonstrations as they try to teach their younger siblings how
to do things. School-age older siblings are more likely to use detailed verbal instruc-
tion and scaffolding (i.e., hints and explanations), especially when the younger
sibling is quite young (Howe et al., 2006; Recchia et al., 2009). The children’s cul-
ture affects sibling teaching. Researchers have found, for example, that school-age
Mayan children teaching their younger siblings to make tortillas used demonstra-
tion and scaffolding but less verbal instruction than is common in Western cultures
where formal schooling is more prevalent (Maynard, 2004).
Older siblings also act as managers, supervisors, and gatekeepers who extend or
limit younger siblings’ opportunities to interact with other children outside the fam-
ily (Edwards & Whiting, 1993; Parke et al., 2003). In these contexts, older siblings
can act protective and helpful—“My older brother and sister stick up for me around
the house and in the street”—or they might act dominating—“My older brother
is always bossing me around and messing with my stuff” (Hadfield et al., 2006).
Typically, older siblings do both. They show more nurturing behavior and more
antagonistic behavior, such as hitting, kicking, and biting, toward their younger sib-
lings compared with the younger siblings’ behavior toward them (Campione-Barr &
Smetana, 2010; Dunn, 1993; Teti, 2002).

“When our family went on car trips I sat in the back seat next to my younger sister.
Under my breath and too quietly for my parents to hear, I would make a buzzing sound
to pester her. It drove my sister crazy. She’d yell to our parents, ‘She’s bothering me!’
But they would say, ‘Cut it out now, Lynn. She isn’t doing anything at all.’”
 The Family System  269

But older siblings are not always a positive influence; they also can serve as devi-
ant role models, encouraging early sexual activity, drug use, and delinquency in
their younger brothers and sisters (East, 1996; East & Khoo, 2005; Garcia et al.,
2000). When an older sister becomes pregnant, the odds of her younger sibling
doing so increases as well (East et al., 2007). In one study of African American
youth, older siblings’ willingness to use drugs when they were 12 years old predicted
their younger siblings’ drug use 2 years later (Pomery et al., 2005). This effect was
especially evident when the families lived in high-risk neighborhoods where oppor-
tunities and pressures to use illicit substances were high.
Having good relationships with siblings can compensate for poor relationships
with peers. In two studies, researchers found that children with poor peer rela-
tionships were buffered from adjustment problems if they had a positive relation-
ship with a sibling (East & Rook, 1992; McElwain & Volling, 2005). The reverse
was also true: Children with poor relationships with their siblings were buffered
from adverse effects if they had high-quality friendships (McElwain & Volling,
2005). Only when relationships with both siblings and friends were poor did
children in this study show high levels of aggressiveness and disruptive behavior
(Figure 7.4).
Sibling relationships change as children grow older. When siblings reach adoles-
cence, they become more alike, share more interests, and are less concerned about
grabbing their parents’ attention than when they were younger (Dunn, 2002). Sib-
ling rivalry and ambivalence are likely to diminish, and intimacy between siblings
typically increases. Sibling relationships become even closer if parents are posi-
tive and accepting (Kim et al., 2007). In adolescence, siblings communicate more
openly with each other about their appearance, peer relationships, social prob-
lems, and sexuality than they do with peers or parents. The quality of adolescents’

Sibling relationship quality

High
High Moderate
Low
Friendship quality in the sharing task

Moderate FIGURE 7.4 Association between

friendship quality and parent-
reported aggressive-disruptive
behavior as a function of sibling
relationship quality in a sharing task.
Source: Copyright © 2010 by the
American Psychological Association.
Low Reproduced with permission. McElwain,
N. L., & Volling, B. L. (2005). Preschool
children’s interactions with friends and
older siblings: Relationship specificity and
joint contributions to problem behavior.
30 40 50 60 Journal of Family Psychology, 19, 486–496.
The use of APA information does not
Aggressive-disruptive behavior imply endorsement by APA.
270  Chapter 7 Family

sibling relationships can have both short-term and long-term consequences. Ado-
lescents who had supportive sibling relationships were more satisfied and better
adjusted in young adulthood at age 20 (Hollifield & Conger, 2015). Men who had
poor-quality relationships with their siblings in their youth were more likely to
experience major depression and use more mood-altering drugs by the time they
were 50 (Waldinger et al., 2007). This association suggests that better sibling ties
serve a protective function that helps children develop better mental functioning
or that sibling relationships continue to be important positive resources across the
life span.

The Family Unit: Stories, Rituals, and Routines

In addition to the family subsystems we have discussed, the family unit itself is an
agent of socialization. Families develop distinct climates, which provide different
socialization contexts for children (Fiese & Schwartz, 2008; McHale 2010). Storytell-
ing, routines, and rituals are powerful methods parents and children use to create
their family climate.
Stories help transmit family values and reinforce the uniqueness of the family
as a unit. They teach children about their identity and often encapsulate a mes-
sage about the family (Sherman, 1990). Families retell stories because this enables
them all to get involved and creates a sense of familiarity (Norrick, 1997). One
source of family stories is family history. Family members recount stories about
their own early experiences, and these stories are handed down across genera-
tions, shaping interactions and expectations among family members. Using sto-
ries, parents can teach their children about the kinds of behavior that the family
values. The following is an example of a family story told by a mother to her 4-year-
old child, which underlines the grandparents’ importance and kindness (Fiese &
Bickham, 2004, p. 268):

“When I was a little girl I lived with my grandfather and grandmother. Grandpa had
a big, comfy chair, and I would crawl up on his lap, and he would tell me stories. And
one of my favorite things was to comb Grandpa’s hair. One day I decided to comb his
hair, but he didn’t know that I had some little ponytail holders and some pins, and I
put little curls all on the top of his head, and he fell asleep. And when he woke up he
had the prettiest curls you ever saw all over his head, and he didn’t even mind. Wasn’t
that nice?”

Mothers who tell stories like these about their own childhoods, emphasizing
themes of closeness, nurturance, and play, have been found to engage in more
turn-taking and reciprocal interactions with their children; mothers who tell sto-
ries that emphasize either achievement or rejection by family members are less
engaged and, when they interact with their children, are more intrusive and direc-
tive (Fiese, 1990). When parents and children jointly retell family stories, those
who identify themselves as “storytelling families” and those whose stories focus on
hard work and accomplishment are more satisfied and better functioning than
families who are not storytellers or who tell stories focused on chaos and fear
(Kellas, 2005).
Family routines and rituals are other important elements of socialization (Fiese,
2006; Fiese et al., 2013; Pratt & Fiese, 2004). Routines are day-to-day activities that
keep the family functioning such as making dinner or washing the dishes. Rituals
 The Family System  271

involve formal religious observances, family celebrations, and rites of passage. They
have a symbolic value and tend to explain “this is who we are as a family.” They also
provide continuity across generations. Both routines and rituals have benefits for
children. Household routines are linked to better adjustment for children who live
in single-parent, divorced, or remarried households (Fiese et al., 2002; Cicchetti &
Toth, 2006; Luthar et al., 2000). Bedtime routines are related to better sleep habits
for children (Fiese, 2006). Mealtime routines predict that children and adolescents
will have higher self-esteem and fewer emotional problems will be less likely to use
drugs and alcohol and are less likely to develop eating disorders (Center on Addic-
tion and Substance Abuse [CASA], 2010; Eisenberg et al., 2004, 2008; Fiese et al.,
2006; Fiese & Hammons, 2011). Rituals have been linked with higher levels of fam-
ily cohesiveness, which in turn predicted better adolescent outcomes (Crespo et al.,
2011).
An important question is whether family stories, routines, and rituals truly con-
tribute to better outcomes for children or are just proxies for other aspects of good
family relationships. In one study, researchers found that associations between
mealtime routines and adolescents’ substance use remained significant even after
adjusting for family connectedness, suggesting that they do have value above and
beyond family relationships (Eisenberg et al., 2008). In another study in which a
variety of factors (youth age and gender, racial background, family income, family
structure, parental education, maternal employment, and family relationship qual-
ity) were controlled, mealtime routines were still linked to less adolescent depres-
sion (Musick & Meier, 2012). Nevertheless, intervention studies are needed to
determine whether a change in family routines would, by itself, lead to improved
outcomes in children and adolescents.

eal-World Application: “Let’s Have Dinner”

When you were growing up, did average, only 18 to 20 minutes (Center on
your family eat dinner together? Addiction and Substance Abuse, 2010). Can
This activity may be more these brief encounters benefit children? They
important than you thought. obviously provide opportunities for family
Social critics bemoan the loss of members to connect and briefly catch up on
family dinners in our fast-food society, and the day’s events but perhaps even more (Fiese,
parenting experts suggest that “the family that 2006). If having dinner together is linked with a
eats together stays together” (Grant, 2001). variety of positive outcomes for children and
They are preaching to the choir. More than youth, what is the best way to involve children in
80 percent of parents in one study viewed family the family dinner? How can parents make
dinners as important, and 79 percent of teens mealtimes meaningful and pleasant when
considered eating family meals to be among children would rather be playing, watching TV, or
their top-rated family activities (Zollo, 1999). texting? Based on extensive qualitative observa-
Survey research suggests that a 50 percent of tions of mealtime routines and rituals, Barbara
children and 30 percent of adolescents regu- Fiese came up with some helpful guidelines to
larly eat dinner with their families (Child Trends, facilitate family dinners for children of different
2012). However, family meals are brief, lasting, on ages in Table 7.2 (Fiese & Schwartz, 2008).
272  Chapter 7 Family

TABLE 7.2

The ABC’s (Activities, Behaviors, Communication) of Family Mealtimes across

Developmental Periods
Age (years) Activities Behaviors Communication
0–1 Introduce solid foods Have short meals of 10 to 15 Imitate sounds that child
slowly—one at a time minutes. makes.
Introduce names of foods.
2–5 Turn off the television Set a regular mealtime. Talk about what happened in
during mealtimes. Expect good manners—say the neighborhood.
In early years, introduce please and thank you. Talk about what happened
finger foods. Have mealtimes last around when siblings were in
In later years, have children 15–20 minutes. school.
prepare food with adult
­supervision.
6–11 Turn off the television. Strive for five regular meals Talk about what happened
Have child assist in preparing together as a family. in school.
at least one meal per week. Assign a role for each child Tell family stories.
(setting the table, clearing Plan for the weekend.
the table, washing dishes).
12–16 Turn off the television and Set aside one meal per week Talk about current events.
cell phone. when everyone is expected Explore different careers.
Have children assist in meal to be home. Talk about different countries.
planning for the week. Talk about family history.

Source: Fiese, B. M., & Schwartz, M. (2008). Reclaiming the family table: Mealtimes and child health and well being. Social Policy Report,
­Volume XXII, Number IV, © 2008. Reproduced with permission of the Society for Research in Child Development.

Family Variation: Social Class and Culture

Every family is embedded in a larger social system—termed the macrosystem in
Bronfenbrenner’s ecological theory (Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 2006). In this sec-
tion, we discuss how two aspects of the macrosystem—social class and culture—
affect what happens in the family.

Differences in Family Values and Practices Related

to Socioeconomic Status
There is a long history of research relating parents’ beliefs and practices to their
social class or socioeconomic status (SES), a construct that comprises three related
demographic characteristics: education, income, and occupational status. Differ-
ences in parents’ use of language are especially notable. Lower SES mothers talk
to their children less and are not as tuned in to the children’s speech as high SES
mothers are (Hoff, 2014). Mothers with lower-SES also tend to be more authoritar-
ian, punitive, and controlling (Hart & Risley, 1995; Smith, 2010; Straus & Stewart,
1999). They are more likely to issue brusque orders and less likely to give lengthy
explanations. Higher–SES parents reason with their children and present choices
 Family Variation: Social Class and Culture  273

and then subtly influence the decisions the children make as well as provide more
enrichment opportunities through tutoring and lessons (Lareau, 2003, 2011).
SES differences in parents’ responsiveness and use of punitive discipline have
been observed in cultures throughout the world (Bradley & Corwyn, 2005). Dra-
matic evidence of the link between economic resources and parenting practices
comes from a study of over 127,000 parents in 28 developing countries (Bornstein
& Putnick, 2012). In this study, mothers varied widely in both cognitive caregiv-
ing (reading, telling stories, naming, counting, and drawing with their children)
and socioemotional caregiving (playing, singing, and taking children with them out
of doors). The mothers’ caregiving in the developing countries was related to the
countries’ GDP (gross domestic product—an international index of socioeconomic
level) after controlling for life expectancy and education. The poorer the coun-
try, the less cognitive and social caregiving the mothers provided. Moreover, just as
authoritarian discipline is more common in low-SES families in Western countries,
violence was a more common aspect of discipline in poorer developing countries
(Lansford & Deater-Deckard, 2012).
At the other end of the continuum from poor parents in developing countries
are affluent parents in Western countries. High-income parents in the United States
have been found by researchers to have problems in their parenting too (Ansary
et al., 2017). They put a lot of pressure on their adolescents to achieve, are often
emotionally distant from them, frequently fail to follow through with serious con-
sequences when they misbehave, and do not consistently monitor their activities—
behaviors that lead to adjustment problems (Luthar & Barkin, 2012; Luthar et al.,
2013). Clearly wealth does not protect children from social problems and might
even increase them. Children and adolescents need supportive, involved, and vigi-
lant parents whatever their level of income, education, or occupation.

Cultural Patterns in Child Rearing

The culture in which the family is embedded also influences parents’ socialization
practices. Parents in traditional cultures are less responsive and affectionate than
parents in modern, technologically advanced cultures (Bradley & Corwyn, 2005).
High rates of spanking and harsh punishment are common. In some countries
(Ghana, Seirra Leone, Central African republic, and Ivory Coast), over 90 percent
of parents reported that they used physical punishment as a disciplinary strategy
(Lansford & Deater-Deckard, 2012). Also, children are disciplined for different rea-
sons in different countries. Yoruba parents in Nigeria, for example, believe that
children’s comments are not worth paying attention to; children should simply
heed their wiser and more knowledgeable elders. Physical punishment is imposed
for what we in North America consider mere childish indiscretions. Parents in
­Indonesia punish their children for not showing respect to adults. In one study, only
42 percent of Indonesian parents allowed their children to express negative emo-
tions toward adults compared with 86 percent of U.S. parents (Zevalkink, 1997).
Others report that parents in Nepal discourage anger expressions but encourage
expressions of shame (Cole et al., 2006, Tamang, & Shrestha, 2006; Cole & Tan, 2015).
Socialization practices also differ in individualistic and collectivistic cultures
(Greenfield, 2009). Predominantly individualist cultures, such as the United States,
Canada, and Europe, value individual autonomy and emphasize competition, self-
actualization, dominance, and open expression of emotion. Collectivist cultures
value interrelatedness and connectedness with the group and emphasize social har-
mony, cooperation, empathy, accommodation to the needs of others, and some-
times deference to authority. Although both individualistic and collectivist values
274  Chapter 7 Family

Hill Street Studios/Blend Images/Getty Images, Inc.

Both nuclear and
extended families are
important in most
Latino cultures, which
emphasize sharing and
cooperation in good
times and bad.

are found in all societies, meta-analysis of more than 50 studies of people (mostly
college students) in different cultures revealed that people in the United States and
Canada are more individualistic than people in India, Hong Kong, Japan, Korea,
Singapore, and Taiwan and less collectivistic than people in India, Hong Kong,
Taiwan, Israel, Nigeria, Mexico, China, and Brazil (Oyserman et al., 2002).
These differences are reflected in family structures and parenting styles. The spirit
of collectivism in Latino American culture is evident in child-rearing practices that
encourage children to develop an identity embedded firmly in the context of their
familia (Buriel, 2012). For many Latino Americans, the word familia includes not only
the nuclear family but also the extended family—including grandparents, aunts,
uncles, nieces, and nephews—and even goes beyond blood relatives to include fictive
kin such as godparents. Because of the value of familism and respect based on age and
gender, in Latino culture grandmothers are often the symbolic heads of extended
families and are sought after for advice and support in child rearing (Ramos-McKay
et al., 1988). It is important for Latino Americans that children internalize the values
of respeto, which teaches respect for parents and other adults (Calzada et al., 2010,
2012) and familismo, which stresses the importance of family ties and obligations (Tse
et al., 2015). Befitting this goal, Latino American parents are more authoritarian and
less authoritative than European American parents (Schumm et al., 1988; Steinberg
et al., 1991) but as parents acculturate (adopt the values and customs of a new coun-
try) they use more authoritative approaches (Parke et al., 2004).

ultural Context: How Effects of Parenting Vary

Across Cultures
At a basic level, effects of parent- differences occur in one area: physical punish-
ing are similar across cultures. ment. Children who are physically disciplined in
Responsive and affectionate countries where it is common and culturally
parenting is related to positive accepted are not as anxious or aggressive as
child outcomes, and hostile, rejecting parenting children who are physically disciplined in coun-
is related to negative outcomes (Bradley & tries where it is rare. For example, in Kenya, India,
Corwyn, 2005; Hill et al., 2003). However, significant and Italy, physical punishment is the norm,
 Family Variation: Social Class and Culture  275

20
Thailand
China
16
Philippines FIGURE 7.5 Links between physical disci-
Italy
Child aggression

pline and child aggression in countries

12 India where use of physical punishment is
Kenya normative (Kenya, India, and Italy)
or non-normative (China, Thailand,
8
Philippines).
Source: Lansford, J. E., Chang, L., Dodge, K. A.,
4 Malone, P. S., Oburu, P. Palmerus, K., . . . Quinn, N.
(2005). Cultural normativeness as a modera-
tor of the link between physical discipline and
children’s adjustment: A comparison of China,
0
Low High India, Italy, Kenya, Philippines, and Thailand.
Child Development, 76, 1234–1246. Reprinted with
Use of physical discipline
permission of Wiley-Blackwell.

and children who receive more of it do not and inculcation of aggression in children. Thus,
become as aggressive or anxious as children although the link between children’s individual
who are punished more in China, Thailand, and experience of punishment and aggressive
the Philippines, where physical punishment is less behavior is weaker in cultural groups where
common (Gershoff et al., 2010; Lansford et al., physical punishment is normative, those groups
2005; Figure 7.5). Apparently, if children perceive that use more physical punishment also exhibit
that physical punishment is widely accepted higher levels of violence. By making physical
within their cultural group, being spanked does punishment normative, the overall impact could
not signify rejection or unfair treatment by their be an increase in societal aggression and
parents (Rohner et al., 1996). But if they are the hostility as children internalize cultural norms and
only ones in their neighborhood being hit, they generalize them to using physical force to solve
are more likely to act out or withdraw. A similar problems (Deater-Deckard et al., 2003). The net
pattern is found among Protestant families in the result would be higher levels of violence in
United States (Ellison et al., 2011). Although cultural groups in which physical punishment of
physical punishment is linked to later antisocial children is the norm.
behavior and emotional problems for children in Many international agencies deem the
nonconservative Protestant families, there is no practice of physical punishment, a violation of
link when parents are members of a conservative human rights and have urged nations to institute
Protestant church. Because children from con- domestic bans on it (Global Initiative to End All
servative religious families view physical discipline Corporeal Punishment of Children, 2017).
as both normative and religiously based, they Currently, there are 51 nations of 231 countries
might not experience these practices as humili- worldwide that have adopted legal bans on
ating, demeaning, or improper. corporal (physical) punishment of children by
A word of caution: Advocates of physical parents, teachers, and other caregivers (Global
punishment sometimes argue that making Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of
physical punishment more normative would Children, 2017). But despite these significant
reduce or eliminate its harmful effects. This advances, there are still 147 countries where
argument neglects the question of whether the children can be lawfully hit in the family home,
societal rate of physical punishment affects the 140 where violent punishment remains lawful in
societal level of violent behavior. Lansford and alternative care settings and in day care, 69
Dodge (2008) addressed this issue in a study of where it is not prohibited in all schools, and 60
186 cultures distributed across the six major lacking protection for children in penal institu-
regions of the world. More harsh and frequent tions. The United States has yet to join the nations
use of physical punishment, they found, was that have banned corporal punishment while
related to more warfare, interpersonal violence, Canada has banned such practices in schools.
276  Chapter 7 Family

In Asian families, parenting reflects collectivism and Confucian principles such

as family unity and respect for elders. Children are taught to place family needs
before their own individual desires and to show obedience and loyalty to their
parents. Asian parents emphasize family cooperation and obligation. In general,
they are more authoritarian, restrictive, and directive than European American
parents (Chao & Tseng, 2002). However, in some Asian cultures, such as modern
urban China, where there has been a shift toward a market economy (Zeng &
Greenfield, 2015), parents have shifted toward somewhat more individualistic par-
enting attitudes (Chang et al., 2011). These cultural patterns may be becoming less
pronounced.
Reflecting West African traditions of spirituality, harmony, and communal-
ism, African American families are more interdependent than European Ameri-
can families (Boykin & Toms, 1985; McLoyd et al., 2015). They are more likely
to live near their extended kin, to interact with them frequently, and to have a
strong sense of family and familial obligation; household boundaries are fluid, and
there is willingness to absorb relatives (Harrison et al., 1990; Hatchett & Jackson,
1993). The extended family is particularly important because of the large number
of female-headed households. Grandparents are involved in about one in three of
these families (Pearson et al., 1990). Having the grandmother present increases the
moral-religious emphasis in the household (Tolson & Wilson, 1990).

As Abby’s grandmother, it is my job to keep the family traditions alive and pass them on
to my grandkids. I tell them stories of their ancestors’ achievements and struggles and
make sure that they get a good religious training and attend church. If I do these things,
the kids have a better chance of turning out OK.

Whether they live together or not, when the grandmother is emotionally close to
the mother, child rearing goes more smoothly (Wakschlag et al., 1996). Regardless
of the grandmother’s role, African American parents are more authoritarian, more
likely to stress obedience to adults, and more likely to impose physical discipline
than European American parents are (Dodge et al., 2005; Steinberg et al., 1991).
However, the differences in disciplinary practices may in part be due to SES differ-
ences rather than race alone (Roopnarine & Hossain, 2013; Tamis-LeMonda et al.,
2008).

The Changing American Family

“Family is not a static institution but one that is constantly being reworked, reshaped,
reimagined, and reenacted in complex and dynamic ways.” (Goldberg, 2010)

Just as differences exist between families in different cultures, differences also exist
across different historical eras. According to Bronfenbrenner’s ecological theory,
children and families are embedded in a chronosystem, meaning that the children
and families are affected by changing times. U.S. families today are different from
those in earlier days—even a decade or two ago—in a number of ways.
One major shift is the dramatic rise in mothers’ entry into the paid work force. In
1960, only 20 percent of mothers with preschool children were in the labor force;
in 2016, this number was close to 65 percent (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1975; U.S.
Department of Labor, 2017). For mothers with school-age children, only 40 percent
were in the work force in 1960, but the rate nearly doubled to 75 percent by 2016
(U.S. Department of Labor, 2017).
 The Changing American Family  277

In Canada, similar trends are evident. For mothers with children under 6 years,
the rate rose from 33 percent in 1976 to 60 percent in 2014 while the figures rose
for school-age children from 50 percent to 80 percent across this period. Another
change is that couples are waiting until they are older before they marry and have
their first child. Opportunities to become parents have also expanded. Infertile cou-
ples can now have children through a variety of new reproductive technologies,
or they can follow the old-fashioned route: adoption. Same-sex couples, too, can
become parents, and the number of lesbian and gay parents as heads of households
has increased (Goldberg, 2010).
The number of single-parent families has risen because more women are hav-
ing babies without marrying. In 1960 there were 22 births per 1,000 unmarried
females; in 2015, the figure was 44 births (National Vital Statistics Report, 2017).
Births to unmarried women account for nearly 40 percent of babies born in
the United States (CBS News, 2006). Another reason for the increased number
of single-parent households today is that the divorce rate is higher. It doubled
between 1960 and 1980, and although it has not risen since then, demographers
estimate that 40 to 50 percent of marriages today will end in divorce and 60 per-
cent of these divorces will involve children. One-third of children in the United
States will also experience the remarriage of one or both of their parents, and
62 percent of remarriages end in divorce. Thus, more parents and children are
undergoing multiple marital transitions and rearrangements in family relation-
ships (Cherlin, 2010).
In the following sections, we look at how these changes in the family have
affected parenting and child development. Although the changes have presented
new opportunities, 73 percent of mothers believe that compared to when they were
children, being a mother is more difficult today (CBS News Poll, 2009).

Parents’ Employment and Child Development

As mothers spend more time on the job and less time in the home, family roles
and patterns of functioning have changed. These changes and the stress that work-
ing mothers experience on the job influence parenting practices and children’s
behavior.

Working mothers Both mothers who work outside the home and their children
would like to have more time to spend together (Bianchi & Milkie, 2010; Booth
et al., 2002; Parker, 2009, 2012). However, there is actually only a small differ-
ence in how much time working mothers and nonworking mothers spend on
child care (18 vs 11 hours per week). The main differences in time allocation are
that stay-at-home mothers spend nearly twice as much time on housework, get
more sleep, and have more leisure time than mothers who work outside the home
(Pew Charitable Trust, 2015). What mothers have done as a result of taking on
employment is to reallocate their time and priorities, delegate some household
work to others, increase the enrollment of their children in preschool or after-
school programs, and redefine their parenting role. Fathers in families with
employed mothers have also increased their parenting involvement (Pew Charitable
Trust, 2015; Pleck, 2010).
Public concern about the effects of maternal employment is decreasing.
Two-thirds (66 percent) of adults in 1977 agreed that “It is much better for
everyone involved if the man is the achiever outside the home and the woman
takes care of the home and family,” declining to 32 percent by 2012 (Donnelly
278  Chapter 7 Family

et al., 2016). As Kathleen Gerson reported in her book The Unfinished Revolution
(2010), almost 80 percent of young adults whose mothers worked outside the
home did not believe that they would be better off if their mothers had stayed
home. Many appreciated being the beneficiaries of their mother’s outside labor.
Researchers have found that adult daughters of employed mothers are more
likely to be employed, more likely to hold supervisory responsibility if employed,
work more hours, and earn marginally higher wages than women whose moth-
ers stayed home full time. Sons raised by an employed mother spend more time
caring for family members than men whose mothers stayed home full time, and
daughters raised by an employed mother spend less time on housework than
women whose mothers stayed home full time (McGinn et al., 2015). Children of
mothers who worked outside the home have more egalitarian views of gender
roles, and, in middle-class families higher educational and occupational goals
(Hoffman, 2000). These differences are likely due to the fact that working moth-
ers model achievement of occupational goals and encourage their children to
be self-sufficient and independent at earlier ages than full-time homemaker
mothers do (Hoffman, 2000). Compared with homemakers’ children, working
mothers’ daughters are more likely to see women’s roles as involving freedom of
choice, satisfaction, and competence; are more career oriented, independent,
and assertive; and have higher self-esteem (Hoffman, 2000). Sons of working
mothers not only perceive women to be more competent but also view men as
warmer and more expressive. Part of the reason for this difference in percep-
tions of men may be that men in dual-career families participate more in family
and child-rearing tasks than men with stay-at-home wives (Pleck, 2010). Note,
however, that even in dual-career families, women still perform most of the child
care and housework: two-thirds compared with men’s one-third (Parke, 2013).
The gender difference is especially evident in the areas of managing children’s
schedules and looking after children when they are sick, where mothers are
clearly doing more than dads (Pew Charitable Trusts, 2015).

I’m an eye doctor and Emma’s father is a surgeon, so our kids just take it for granted
that both parents work. It is hard on them sometimes, like when we have a new babysit-
ter or when I have to miss some event at school that’s important to them. But they know
that mommies and daddies go to work, and they’ve never questioned it. I’m sure Emma
will have a career when she grows up.

Research has not provided unequivocal answers to the question of how maternal
employment affects other aspects of children’ social development. Some research-
ers have found that maternal employment when children are very young is nega-
tively related to children’s later social-emotional well-being (Han et al., 2001) and
cognitive development (Brooks-Gunn et al., 2010). However, other researchers have
found no negative effects on children’s attachment security (Huston & ­Rosenkrantz
Aronson, 2005), behavior problems, or self-esteem (Harvey, 1999). In fact, in a lon-
gitudinal study in which children were followed from infancy to age 12, one team
found no association between maternal employment and children’s socio-emotional
development (Gottfried et al., 2002, 2006). Moreover, some researchers have even
found that for children in low-income families, maternal employment is related to
fewer behavior problems (Dunifon et al., 2003). According to a meta-analysis of
nearly 70 studies, children’s achievement outcomes were not negatively affected
by maternal employment (Lucas-Thompson et al., 2010). Children may be at
increased risk when they reach adolescence because mothers who work encourage
 The Changing American Family  279

their children’s autonomy (Zaslow et al., 2005). If thoughtfully coordinated with the
children’s abilities, this encouragement can facilitate independence at a develop-
mentally appropriate time. If not, working mothers’ encouragement of autonomy
and lack of supervision and monitoring can press independence on adolescents too
early, creating problems. Boys especially are likely to respond negatively to prema-
ture pressure for autonomy.
In general, individual differences among children and mothers appear to be
more important than simply whether the mother is an employee or a homemaker.
Both homemaker mothers who derive a sense of satisfaction and self-efficacy from
their homemaking role and employed mothers who enjoy their employment report
that they have more positive relations with children than unhappy homemakers
who would like to be employed (Gerson, 2010; L. W. Hoffman, 2000). In evaluat-
ing the effects of maternal employment, therefore, it is important to consider all
relevant factors, including the mother’s reasons for working, how satisfied she is
with her job, how many demands her employment places on her and her family,
how positive her family is about her employment, and whether the children are well
cared for while both parents are at work.

Work stress and children’s adjustment In recent years, many workers—men

and women—have experienced an increase in work hours, a decrease in job stabil-
ity, a rise in temporary jobs, and, especially among low-wage workers, a decrease in
relative income (Williams, 2010). These factors all play into the work–family equa-
tion and increase the likelihood that parents and children will suffer. Stress at work
takes a toll on children, parents, and marriages (Crouter & Bumpus, 2001). Fathers
who experience work stress are less sensitive and engaged with their children and
their wives (Goodman et al., 2011; Repetti, 1996). After a particularly stressful or
heavy workday, mothers, too, are likely to withdraw from their children (Repetti
& Wood, 1997), and if they have negative experiences at work, are angrier and
more withdrawn from their husbands (Schulz et al., 2004; Story & Repetti, 2006).
The parents’ work schedule can also be stressful and have negative effects on chil-
dren. Researchers found that children’s language development was impaired and
their level of aggression and anxious/depressive symptoms were higher if their
mothers worked nonstandard schedules, such as night shifts (Dunifon et al., 2013;
Han, 2005). In contrast, positive work experiences can enhance the quality of par-
ents’ behavior. Parents whose jobs were more satisfying and complex and offered
them more independence and problem-solving opportunities were warmer, less
strict, and more supportive of their children’s autonomy (Greenberger et al., 1994;
Grimm-Thomas & Perry-Jenkins, 1994), and their children had fewer behavior
problems (Cooksey et al., 1997; Johnson et al., 2002). As Bronfenbrenner’s eco-
logical systems theory suggests, work and family contexts are inextricably linked
(see Chapter 1).

“My mom drops me off at school on her way to work every morning at 8. After school
I go home on the bus and do my homework, watch TV, and chat with my friends.
Mom gets home at 6 on nights when she doesn’t have a meeting or some dinner to
go to. Then she gets home much later. Dad gets home at 7 if the train’s on time.
We have supper together and I have to go to bed at 8. But we spend Saturday morn-
ing ‘mousing around,’ just me and Mom doing errands or hanging around the
house while Dad sleeps late. It works pretty well unless Mom has a deadline at work.
Then I don’t see her at all—she’s at the office all weekend and everyone at home is
grouchy.” (Abby)
280  Chapter 7 Family

Parenting after Thirty

Couples today are marrying later than they did previously (3 to 4 years later than in
the 1950s) and becoming parents at older ages as well (Martin et al., 2012; Ventura
et al., 2012). Reasons for these delays include improved employment and career
opportunities for women and increased flexibility in gender roles for both men and
women. Couples now often want to have completed their educations and become
established in their careers before they take on the responsibilities of parenthood.
In part this is because of the costs of rearing a child. In 2016, it cost $233,610 to
provide the basics of food, shelter, clothes, health care, and transportation to raise
a child until age 18, an increase of nearly $61,000 since 2000 (U.S. Department of
Agriculture, 2017). Birth control and social norms make it possible and popular to
postpone forming a family.
Perhaps because they waited longer (and sometimes tried harder), older moth-
ers feel more responsible about parenting, enjoy it more, and express more posi-
tive affect with their infants than younger mothers do (Ragozin et al., 1982). They
spend more social time with their infants and are more successful in eliciting vocal
and imitative responses from them, perhaps because, as a result of their own matu-
rity, they have gained more social and cognitive skills. Other evidence suggests that
older parenthood has other child benefits such as better language skills and fewer
social and emotional difficulties (Sutclifffe et al., 2012) and increased height, bet-
ter grades in high school, and more likelihood of attending university (Barclay &
Myrskyl, 2016). The benefits in terms of an increase in parenting competence
extends only to age 30, however (Bornstein & Putnick, 2007). Perhaps by this age,
women’s cognitive and emotional development have reached maturity, making fur-
ther shifts in parenting quality unlikely. Moreover, waiting too long increases risks of
birth defects as well as increasing maternal fatigue (Mirowsky, 2002).

“I turned 50 less than a week before Sarah turned 15. For the first time ever I felt miser-
ably depressed by getting a year older. I looked in the mirror the next morning and I
started to cry because there was a middle-aged lady staring back at me. Then at breakfast
Sarah made some crack about ‘what was the point’ of my putting on makeup before
work. Some days I pull out of the driveway and swear I’ll never come back.”

Older fathers have more flexibility and freedom to balance the demands of
work and family than younger fathers, and they are three times more likely to
have regular responsibility for some part of their children’s daily care (Daniels &
Weingarten, 1988). They are more involved in the parental role and experience
more positive affect associated with child rearing (Cooney et al., 1993; NICHD
Early Child Care Research Network, 2000). When they interact with their children,
these older fathers engage in less strenuous physical play and more stimulation
with talk and toys than younger fathers. This might reflect a lessening of physical
energy with age, or it may be that older parents have less stereotyped views of men’s
“proper” role (Neville & Parke, 1997). Waiting too long to become a parent has a
down side for fathers as well as mothers, though. As men age, they produce lower-
quality sperm that increase the risk of birth defects (Wyrobek et al., 2006). Men as
well as women have ticking biological clocks. Finally, it is important to recall the
discussion of cohort effects from Chapter 1, since children who are born at later
dates may benefit not only from parental behavior but also from the increased
social and educational opportunities available at the time of their birth as a result
of social progress.
 The Changing American Family  281

New Reproductive Technologies

Modern reproductive technologies offer hope for couples who cannot conceive a
child. Since Louise Brown gave birth to the first “test tube” baby in 1978, more than
50 million couples around the world have turned to assisted reproductive technolo-
gies to overcome infertility or the absence of a partner and achieve parenthood.
Over 5 million children have been conceived as a result of these procedures (Inter-
national Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technologies, 2016). In
fact, more than 1.5 percent of births involve these new reproductive technologies
in the United States (Toner et al., 2016) and in Europe (Anderson et al., 2006)
although success rates decline as mothers get older (CDC, 2017). However, due to
the high cost of these procedures, in many countries, including the United States,
the rich have more access than the poor to this alternative route to parenthood
(Parke, 2013; Spar, 2006).
Intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) was developed to circumvent problems
when the man has a low sperm count, low sperm motility, or abnormally shaped
sperm (Schultz & Williams, 2002). In vitro fertilization (IVF) was developed to cir-
cumvent problems when the woman’s fallopian tubes are blocked. It can be used
with a male donor’s sperm if the man’s supply of sperm is inadequate or with a
female donor’s egg if the woman cannot produce an egg. Alternatively, a zygote can
be implanted in the uterus of a surrogate mother who then carries the baby to term.
The risk of birth defects in infants conceived through ICSI or IVF is about 30 to
40 percent higher than in spontaneously conceived infants (Hansen et al., 2005).
However, if they survive, these children do as well as children conceived in the usual
manner in terms of their relationships with their mothers, their self-esteem, and
the likelihood they will have behavioral or emotional problems (Golombok, 2015;
Hahn & DiPietro, 2001; Patterson, 2002). In part, these children do well because
of the eagerness and commitment of their parents, who made such extraordinary
efforts to have them (Golombok, 2015). Researchers have found that these parents
tend to feel warmer and more protective toward their infants and toddlers than
parents who have their children the usual way (Golombok, 2015; Hahn & DiPietro,
2001). As we note in the next section on adoption, child adjustment is better when
parents are open with their children about their genetic origins (Golombok, 2015).

Adoption: Another Route to Parenthood

To become parents, other couples adopt a child. They choose adoption for a variety
of reasons: because they are infertile, are older and at risk for chromosomal abnor-
malities, want to avoid a family-related genetic disorder, or want to give an at-risk
infant or a foster child a good home. In 2012, 119,514 children were adopted in
the United States. This represents a 15-percent decrease (20,520) from the 140,034
children adopted in 2001 (Child Welfare Information Gateway, 2016).
In general, adopted children have a higher risk of psychological problems than
nonadopted children (Grotevant & McDermottt, 2014). But if adoption removes
them from adverse conditions, such as long-term foster care or an institutional envi-
ronment, it is better than staying in these dire circumstances (Nelson et al., 2014;
Rutter et al., 2001). The benefits of adoption in these cases depend on the age at
which the child is adopted. Children whose adoption takes them out of adverse cir-
cumstances when they are infants do better than those who remain in adversity for a
longer period. Infants from orphanages in Romania who were adopted before they
282  Chapter 7 Family

were 6 months old were just as socially and emotionally well adjusted as adoptees
who had not suffered early deprivation. Children who were exposed to a longer
period of deprivation or experienced adverse events such as prenatal exposure to
drugs, multiple placements in foster care, or physical or sexual abuse, however,
could not completely rise above their early disadvantages even if they were placed in
good adoptive families. As we saw in Chapters 3 and 4, both brain development suf-
fers and insecure attachment patterns are more common among institutionalized
children in contrast to adopted children (Nelson et al., 2014). Moreover, early-age
adoption is better for parents too: parenting stress is less when children are adopted
at younger ages (Grotevant & McDermott, 2014; Tomello et al., 2011).
Since the 1970s, adoptive procedures have become more open, and it is now
quite common for birth parents, adoptive parents, and adoptees to know each
other or at least know each others’ identities. In spite of concerns that open adop-
tions would undermine adoptive families and lead to confusion and adjustment
problems for adopted children, few problems have been found (Grotevant &
McDermott, 2014). Children, birth parents, and adoptive parents all benefit from
open placements. The children have fewer behavior problems, the adoptive par-
ents have more secure relationships with the children, and the birth parents feel
less depressed, guilty, and regretful (Grotevant, 2007). Part of the reason for the
beneficial effects is that contact with birth relatives is associated with more frequent
family conversations about adoption, which in turn is associated with the develop-
ment of an adoptive identity, a positive outcome for the adoptee (Von Korff &
Grotevant, 2011):

“I talk with my adoptive parents about how filled with drama my birth family is and
I’m glad I’m on the outside, yet on the inside. I’m glad I can be there for everyone,
but then leave, and go to my adoptive family . . . who isn’t perfect either. I feel adop-
tion has given me a lot. A complete sense of perspective that not a lot of children or
teenagers have. It has allowed me to be completely accepting of other families, and
able to see issues in families that I wouldn’t normally have been aware of or really
even cared about. People who have known me for a while have asked the question,
nature or nurture. . . . I’m a prime example . . . a product of both. I like the viewpoint
it gives me.”

Gay and Lesbian Parents

Same-sex-parent families are created in two ways: (1) when a gay or lesbian par-
ent leaves a heterosexual partner who is the child’s biological parent and then
initiates a new homosexual relationship in which the two partners together care
for the child, or (2) when a gay or lesbian couple who do not have children from
a previous relationship choose to become parents through adoption or donor
insemination.
Research suggests that lesbian mothers who have divorced their heterosexual
partners differ little from heterosexual mothers in terms of self-concept, general
happiness, and overall adjustment (Goldberg, 2010; Patterson, 2017). We know less
about divorced gay fathers because only a small minority of these men are granted
custody of their children or live with them (Patterson, 2017). Most of our knowl-
edge about gay and lesbian parenting comes from studies of same-sex couples who
choose to become parents. Research comparing these families with heterosexual
families finds that gay and lesbian parents tend to share household duties more
 The Changing American Family  283

Monkey Business Images /ShutterStock

Children with gay dads enjoy warm interactions with them.

equally than do heterosexual couples (Solomon et al., 2004). Nevertheless, in les-

bian families, the biological mother tends to be more involved in child care and the
nonbiological mother spends longer hours in paid employment. Similarly gay dads
are more likely to share child care and household duties than heterosexual couples
(Goldberg & Allen, 2013). As in heterosexual families, when both partners share in
the child care tasks, they are more satisfied and their children are better adjusted
(Patterson & Farr, 2011).
In general, children in lesbian and gay couple families develop typically. There
is no evidence that they are any more likely than children in heterosexual families
to have emotional or social or achievement problems, nor is there any appreciable
evidence of altered gender roles (Biblarz & Savci, 2010; Patterson, 2017; Potter,
2012). A large majority of children with gay fathers also grow up to be heterosexual
adults just as do children of heterosexual fathers. Moreover, although gay fathers
undoubtedly face prejudice and discrimination, their children describe their rela-
tionships with their fathers as warm and supportive (Goldberg, 2012; Golombok
et al., 2014). Available evidence suggests that increased acceptance of gay and
lesbian parents would benefit children reared in these households. For example,
children of lesbian coparents in the Netherlands, where lesbian and gay parents
are well accepted, experienced less prejudice concerning their mothers’ gender
orientation than children of lesbian parents in the United States, where same-sex
parents are less well accepted (Bos et al., 2008). Similarly, living in a LGTB friendly
community makes parenting and child adjustment easier (Lick et al., 2012). Warm
and loving parents who feel confident and comfortable about their place in society
are more likely to have children who feel secure and good about themselves and
return their parents’ affection.

Parenting Alone
Another major change in families is that more mothers are going it alone. They
are having babies without a husband or they are finding themselves alone after a
divorce. In contrast to 1960 when 8 percent of children lived in single-mother fami-
lies, 23 percent were in single-mother families in 2015 (Child Trends, 2015). What
284  Chapter 7 Family

are the effects of growing up in these single-mother families? In general, the chil-
dren have more difficulties developmentally than children in two-parent families
(Bornstein, 2015; Child Trends, 2015). In a national study in Canada, Ellen Lipman
and her colleagues (2002) found that 6- to 11-year-old children from single-mother
families had more social and psychological problems than children from two-parent
families. In a national study in the United States, researchers similarly found that
preschool children in single-mother families were less securely attached to their
mothers and behaved more negatively with them than children in two-parent fami-
lies (Clarke-Stewart et al., 2000).
However, there also were differences depending on the type of single-mother
family. Children whose mothers had never married were less sociable and socially
skilled and displayed fewer positive behaviors with their mothers than children
whose mothers were single because they were separated or divorced. In a national
study in Finland, differential consequences of single parenthood were also appar-
ent even when the children were grown up: boys whose mothers who were unmar-
ried until their sons were at least 14 years old were eight times more likely to be
repeat violent offenders compared with boys who grew up in two-parent house-
holds, but if mothers became single as the result of divorce, their sons were only
twice as likely to be violent offenders as boys who grew up in two-parent families
(Koskinen et al., 2001).
One reason for the differences among single-parent families in the United
States is that the median family income of never-married mothers is only half that
of divorced mothers (Clarke-Stewart et al., 2000). These mothers are also younger
and less educated than divorced mothers and more likely to be African American.
They might have more psychological problems. Stress, financial hardship, and lack
of social support all contribute to poorer child outcomes in single-mother families,
just as they do in two-parent families (Parke, 2013; Smock & Greenland, 2010). As
one single mother reflected (Golombok, 2000, p. 4):

“You have to be all things to all people. You can never be ill, you can never be tired, and
you can never run out of resources even when you are on your knees. If I was confronted
with the same choices I would do it again, but I wouldn’t choose it as a way of life.”

Children of more affluent single-mothers-by-choice are generally better adjusted

than children from poorer and younger single-parent households (Graham, 2012;
Hertz, 2006). It is important to remember that not all single parents are alike.

Divorce and Remarriage

One hundred years ago, the annual divorce rate in the United States was only about
one divorce for every thousand people. By 1980, the rate had climbed to just over five
divorces for every thousand people. This increase was associated with a reduction
in the legal and moral restrictions against divorce and a shift in the focus of family
life from economic dependence to emotional fulfillment. Since 1980, the tide has
turned again, and divorces have declined. Today the rate is just three divorces per
thousand people—the lowest it has been in more than 30 years (National Center
for Health Statistics, 2017). However, despite this decline, the divorce rate in the
United States remains the highest of any country in the Western world.
Divorce has no single cause, but its probability rises when husbands and wives
come from different ethnic backgrounds, lack the religious conviction that divorce
is wrong, abuse alcohol or other substances, and have poor communication skills or
 The Changing American Family  285

mental health problems (Clarke-Stewart & Brentano, 2006). Couples are especially
likely to divorce if they are low in marital commitment, experience high levels of
stress from having limited education, facing economic hardship, getting married
at a young age, and being overwhelmed with the responsibility of having children,
especially children with problems or children born before the marriage (Amato,
2010).
Divorce is not a single event. It involves a series of steps that start long before
the couple separates, continue through the pain of separation and the difficulty of
setting up two separate households, and reverberate through often lengthy legal
proceedings. Although a divorce can eventually prove to be a positive solution to
a destructive family situation, for most family members the period following the
separation is very stressful. During the first year after the divorce, parents’ feelings
of distress and unhappiness often increase, relationships between parents and chil-
dren become more troubled, and children’s social and emotional well-being usually
worsens (Hetherington & Stanley-Hagen, 2002). In the second year, when families
are adapting to their new status, many parents experience an improvement in their
sense of personal well-being, interpersonal functioning, and family relations. In the
long run, children in stable, well-functioning single-parent households are better
off than children in conflict-ridden intact two-parent families. This does not mean
that the path is easy or that divorce is beneficial for all children, however.

Effects of divorce on children Researchers have found that on average, chil-

dren from divorced families have more behavioral and emotional problems than
children from two-parent families. They are more aggressive, noncompliant, and
antisocial; are less prosocial; have lower self-esteem; and experience more prob-
lems in their peer relationships (Amato, 2010; Amato & Anthony, 2010, 2014;
Hetherington, 2006). In addition, children in divorced families have less positive rela-
tionships with their fathers, especially when divorce occurs in early childhood and
especially when the child is a girl (Amato, 2006). After divorce, fathers are less likely
to maintain contact with their daughters than their sons (Manning & Smock, 2006).
However, these differences between children in divorced and intact families are
not large. A meta-analysis of studies comparing children in divorced and intact
families showed that for psychological adjustment (depression and anxiety), the
effect size was d = .31 and for conduct problems (aggression and misbehavior), it
was .33 (Amato, 2001). This means that, on average, children with divorced par-
ents scored about one-third of a standard deviation lower than children with con-
tinuously married parents on assessments of psychological well-being and good
behavior. Other recent studies (Amato & Anthony, 2014) confirm that children are
negatively affected by divorce: reading and mathematics scores, positive approach
to learning, interpersonal skills, and self-control decreased while internalizing prob-
lems and externalizing problems increased. Researchers have also found that com-
pared with children from intact families, children from divorced families are about
twice as likely to skip school or be suspended, to get into trouble with the police,
to become pregnant as teenagers, to be unemployed in their late teens and early
twenties, to experience clinical levels of distress and depression, use alcohol, smoke,
and use drugs more (Anderson, 2014; Lacey et al., 2016; Zeratsion et al., 2014).
About one-third of the children in divorced families have behavior problems or
unwanted teen pregnancies and about one-fourth have adjustment problems or
poor social relationships, compared with only one-tenth to one-seventh of chil-
dren from intact families (Hetherington & Kelly, 2002; McLanahan, 1999; Wolchik
et al., 2002). Although divorce effects are not large, they have a stronger effect on
286  Chapter 7 Family

children’s problem behavior and psychological stress than do race, birth order, ill-
ness, death of a family member, or parents’ low education. In fact, the link is larger
than the link between smoking and cancer. The effects can be long lasting, too:
Adults who experienced their parents’ divorce—on average—obtain less education,
have less stable marriages, feel less close to their parents, have worse psychological
well being, and die at younger ages compared with adults whose parents stayed mar-
ried (Amato, 2010; Friedman & Martin, 2011).

Who is affected most? Not everyone is affected equally by parents’ divorce. The
age of the child when the parents separate makes a difference. It is often assumed
that if parents separate when their children are either very young or all grown up,
the effect of the divorce will be minor. Effects might indeed be less severe for these
two age groups, but researchers have found that divorce can affect children at all
ages. Infants from divorced families are more likely than those in intact families
to be insecure and disorganized in their attachments to their mothers and fathers
(Solomon & George, 2011) and less positive and engaged in play with their parents
(Clarke-Stewart et al., 2000). Children who are a few years older when their parents
divorce are likely to be confused, fearful, and anxious and can regress to more
immature forms of behavior (Clarke-Stewart & Brentano, 2006). As one college stu-
dent recalls (Clarke-Stewart & Brentano, 2005, p. 111):

“I was four years old when my parents divorced, and I felt confused and bewildered. I
started sucking my thumb and withdrew from activities with other children. I was very
fearful about being abandoned by my mother, and I did not understand why I was being
forced to see my father. I felt I did not know him and was angry at him without under-
standing the reason. I remember only feeling really ‘safe’ in my mother’s presence. She
was the only person I could trust.”

School-age children understand the concepts of “divorce” and “separation” bet-

ter than younger children, but they, too, are usually shocked, worried, and sad when
they find out that their parents are separating. Six- to 8-year-olds are particularly
upset about the loss of their father and they experience anxiety and depression. At
8 to 10 years of age, children are more likely to get angry—about the divorce, about
moving away from their friends, about their parents’ suffering, and about custody
problems, such as living in two homes. Many children of this age ruminate about
the divorce: One study found that 40 percent of these children spent time think-
ing about the divorce at least once a day—even a year afterward (Weyer & Sandler,
1998). Many children at this age suffer psychosomatic stress symptoms—headaches,
vomiting, dizziness, sleep problems, and inability to concentrate (Bergman et al.,
1987). As one college student who was in fifth grade when her parents split up
recalled (Clarke-Stewart & Brentano, 2005, p. 115):

“My parents’ separation was the most devastating event in my life. I remember getting
sick after I was informed of my parents’ plans. I was sick for a week; all I did was sleep
and vomit.”

With adolescence comes increased awareness and understanding of the parents’

problems, but adolescents still tend to see things from their own perspective: “How
could you do this to me?” They are more likely than their peers in intact families to
engage in risky behaviors involving sex, drugs, and alcohol, and, in turn, to get into
trouble at school or with the law (Kirby, 2002). They can feel abandoned, anxious,
and depressed. They might contemplate suicide (Simons et al., 1999).
 The Changing American Family  287

A number of studies have suggested that divorce is worse for boys than for girls.
In a study by Hetherington (1989), for example, preschool boys from divorced
families were more likely than preschool girls to behave aggressively and imma-
turely. Boys might have more problems than girls for a number of reasons: boys are
physiologically more vulnerable to stress than girls; parents and teachers are stricter
with boys’ outbursts; boys in divorced families usually lose their male role model
because they live with their mother; and boys get less emotional support from their
overstressed parents, who find that their noisy, physical, and oppositional behavior
makes them more exhausting and difficult to parent. Gender differences are not
always observed, however. Meta-analyses reveal that boys are not more adversely
affected in terms of psychological adjustment (Amato, 2001). However, boys from
divorced families have significantly poorer social adjustment compared with girls
from divorced families: They have more problems with popularity, loneliness, coop-
erativeness, and parent–child relations. Several large-scale studies have found that
boys from divorced families also have more behavior problems than girls includ-
ing shoplifting, damaging property, being picked up by police, and going to court
(Morrison & Cherlin, 1995; Mott et al., 1997; Simons et al., 1996).
It has been suggested that boys and girls are both affected by divorce but they
express it in different ways: Boys are more likely to externalize their distress and girls
to internalize it. There is some support for this idea. In letters written to their par-
ents by children in divorce-adjustment groups, boys’ themes were more angry; girls’
were more anxious (Bonkowski et al., 1985). Boys also are more likely than girls
to have fights with their divorced mothers (Brach et al., 2000), and in adulthood,
young women from divorced families have more long-term anxiety, depression,
and relationship difficulties (Dixon et al., 1998; Feng et al., 1999; McCabe, 1997;
Rodgers et al., 1997). Another suggestion that has some support is that girls suffer
more before the divorce and boys after it. In one study, adolescent girls showed
negative effects prior to separation whereas boys showed them after the divorce
(Doherty & Needle, 1991), and in a simulation of parents fighting, boys were more
likely to exhibit aggression after the fight; girls were more likely to be distressed
during it (Cummings et al., 1985). A third suggestion is that the reaction to parental
divorce is stronger for boys at younger ages and for girls in adolescence. Support-
ing this suggestion, researchers have found that adolescent daughters of divorced
parents show increases in antisocial behavior, emotional disturbances, and con-
flicts with their mothers; they may be sexually active, get pregnant, and get married
(Hetherington, 1998, 2006). In later years, they are more likely than women whose
parents did not divorce to have relationship problems and to find themselves
divorced, like their parents before them, (Amato, 2006; Hetherington, 2006). Boys
do not show these effects in adolescence and adulthood.
Perhaps more important than gender, however, are individual qualities that help
children adjust to their parents’ divorce. Children who are psychologically healthy,
happy, and confident adapt to the new challenges and stressful experiences brought
on by the divorce more easily than children with psychological problems before
the divorce (Masten, 2014). In fact, they can even gain from the experience and
become better at social problem solving (Hetherington, 1989, 1991). High intel-
ligence helps buffer children from the negative effects of divorce (Hetherington &
Kelly, 2002; Katz & Gottman, 1997). Having an easy temperament also helps chil-
dren recover from their parents’ divorce. Children adjust better to divorce if they
have a more optimistic, constructive, and realistic outlook. These children have
fewer psychological problems in childhood (Guidubaldi et al., 1987; Mazur et al.,
1999), and as young adults they are more secure in their romantic relationships
(Walker & Ehrenberg, 1998).
288  Chapter 7 Family

Divorce and the single-parent household How do we account for these effects
of divorce on children? Of the many explanations, one of the most important is
that children of divorce are growing up in single-parent households, which are at
increased risk for multiple stresses that make child rearing difficult. In fact, a period
of diminished parenting often follows divorce (Hetherington & Stanley-Hagan,
2002). Mothers themselves are suffering from the divorce and therefore are likely
to be self-involved, erratic, and inconsistent in dealing with their children. They
often fail to control and monitor their children’s behavior adequately. Children
reciprocate in the immediate aftermath of divorce by becoming more demanding,
noncompliant, and aggressive or by whining and being overly dependent. Divorced
mothers and sons are particularly likely to engage in escalating, mutually coercive
exchanges.
Children also suffer because they have lost the home and lifestyle to which they
were accustomed. Their family income has dropped, and their mothers often have
trouble making ends meet. Some children are forced to take on more household
responsibilities after the divorce, which leads to resentment and rebellion. Children
find the adjustment to divorce easier if they experience fewer stressors, such as
burdensome household chores, responsibility for younger siblings, moving to a new
town, and repeated trips to court (Clarke-Stewart & Brentano, 2006).
Although parenting improves markedly in the second year after divorce, prob-
lematic parenting is more likely to be sustained with sons—especially temperamen-
tally difficult sons. Divorced mothers and daughters are likely eventually to form
close relationships, although mothers might have to weather their daughters’ acting
out in adolescence (Hetherington & Kelly, 2002). When divorced mothers manage
to be warm and consistent in their discipline, their children—of both genders—
have fewer adjustment problems (Wolchik et al., 2000). Authoritative parenting is
associated with more positive adjustment of children in divorced families, just as it is
in intact families. If divorce reduces stress and conflict and leads to better function-
ing of parents, children tend to benefit in the long run.

Stockbyte/Getty Images, Inc.

Divorced mothers often

have difficulty managing
their sons without the
backup of the father’s
discipline.
 The Changing American Family  289

Another key to the well-being of children in divorced families is the children’s

relationship with their nonresidential parent, most often their father. As long as
the two divorced parents can agree on child-rearing methods and maintain a cor-
dial relationship, frequent visits with the nonresidential parent are linked to more
positive adjustment in children (Dunn, 2008; Fabricius et al., 2010; Warshak, 2014).
These visits are particularly helpful for sons. They are especially important if they
allow the nonresidential parent to maintain a parental role by supervising home-
work, making meals, celebrating holidays, and so on rather than just becoming a
casual adult pal. When conflict between parents continues, however, especially if it
makes the child feel caught in the middle, frequent contact with the nonresidential
parent is associated with problematic behavior by the child (Buchanan & Heiges,
2001). Frequent contact is also bad if the father has a history of antisocial acts such
as stealing and fighting (DeGarmo, 2010). Clearly, what benefits children is having
positive contact with the nonresidential parent in the absence of conflict, stress,
and antisocial behavior and a healthy dose of cooperative coparenting (Carlson &
McLanahan, 2010).

Does custody matter? Does it matter whether children are in sole custody with
their mother or their father or in joint custody with both parents? Most children
today are placed in sole custody with their mother. Mothers obtain primary physical
custody in close to 80 percent of cases and fathers in about 10 percent; joint physical
custody is awarded in only about 4 percent of divorces. But is mother custody always
the best arrangement?
Researchers have found that father custody is advantageous for children’s self-
esteem, anxiety, depression, and behavior problems (Clarke-Stewart & Hayward,
1996). Custodial fathers have higher incomes than custodial mothers and are more
likely to have emotional support from family and friends. Moreover, when children
are in father custody, mothers are more likely to stay involved with them than fathers
are when children are in mother custody (Fabricius et al., 2010). Thus, children in
father custody have the advantage of continued close ties with both parents. In a
national study of 1,400 adolescents ages 12 to 16 years only one-third in mother cus-
tody maintained a positive relationship with their father, whereas more than half of
those in father custody maintained a close relationship with their mother (Peterson
& Zill, 1986).
This does not mean that courts should automatically place all children with their
fathers, however. Fathers who seek custody are more emotionally invested in their
children and more effective parents than fathers who do not seek custody. Moreo-
ver, in one study, even though children in father custody were found to do bet-
ter than children in mother custody on average, they were not better adjusted than
children in mother custody who also had high levels of contact with their fathers
(Clarke-Stewart & Hayward, 1996).
If contact with both parents is important for children’s adjustment after divorce,
is the solution, then, joint custody? In a joint legal custody arrangement, both
mother and father share the responsibility for decisions concerning their children’s
lives, but the children may reside with only one of the parents. In a joint physical
custody arrangement the children live with each parent for close to half the time
and have physical access to both mother and father on a regular basis. This arrange-
ment may give children a sense of security and lessen their sense of abandonment
by one parent (Emery, 2011). According to a meta-analysis of 33 studies, children
in joint physical or legal custody were better adjusted than children in sole custody;
they showed fewer behavior problems and emotional difficulties and had higher
self-esteem and better family relationships (Bauserman, 2002).
290  Chapter 7 Family

However, many factors can undermine the success of joint custody. If parents
have dramatically different lifestyles, contradictory values, or poor communication
skills, if they cannot set aside their conflicts, or if they want to move to different
areas, joint custody is challenging and tends to be unstable. If children are very
young, if parents use them as pawns in their battles, or if joint custody is court
ordered against the parents’ will, the results for children are likely to be negative
(Clarke-Stewart & Brentano, 2006). Joint custody works best when the conflict
between parents is minimal and children don’t feel caught in the middle. Even with
cooperating parents, children can feel torn by joint custody. Here is one student’s
experience of being shuttled back and forth between Dad’s house and Mom’s house
every day (Clarke-Stewart & Brentano, 2005, p. 203):

“It was 4:30 a.m. when Daddy cracked open the door and picked me up from my warm
bed to carry me to the cold van. Then it was my sister’s turn. He would lay each of us
down in the bed he had made for us in the back of the van. Then he would make one
last trip into the house to get our overnight bags full of clothes, homework, and, once
a month, a child support check for Mom. At 5:00 a.m. we would arrive at Mom’s house.
Then Daddy would once again put each of us over his shoulder and carry us in. My sister
and I would try to go back to sleep until 6:30 a.m., when it was time to get up for school.
Mom packed our lunches and drove us to school. Then Daddy would be back to pick us
up when he got off work at 3:30. We would have dinner with him, finish our homework,
pack our bags, go to bed, and then the routine would be repeated. This happened five
days a week, from the time I was six until I was fourteen. On the weekend, we would
spend one and a half days with Mom and one and a half days with Dad. . . . The only
positive thing about this custody arrangement was that I knew I had two parents who
really cared about me. Otherwise, everything was extra difficult because it had to be
divided—where we went for holidays, who we sat beside at school banquets, where we
had our birthday parties. . . . The stress was terrible because I was always thinking about
how I was going to divide myself.”

Joint custody is clearly not a panacea for divorced families, and there are many
ways to make it unworkable. In the long run, its advantage may be its symbolic value
to parents and children (Emery, 2004, 2011). It offers a sign to fathers that they
retain their rights and obligations as parents and conveys to children the message
that both their parents love them and that their fathers are still important.

Remarriage About three-quarters of divorced people remarry (Kreider & Fields,

2001). For divorced women, remarriage is the surest route out of poverty, and a new
partner can provide emotional support and help in child rearing.

As one mother bluntly stated “I don’t need Prince Charming. I’ll settle for a guy who
just brings home a paycheck and helps me with the dishes.” (Hetherington & Kelly,
2002, p. 164)

However, remarriage is not a guarantee of happiness or a fix for children’s prob-

lems. Children in stepfamilies have more emotional problems than children in
intact families or even divorced families (Clarke-Stewart & Brentano, 2006; Leidy
et al., 2011; Pryor, 2008; Sweeney, 2010). More antagonistic relationships among
siblings, especially brothers, are also found in stepfamilies compared with intact
families (Conger & Conger, 1996; Dunn & Davies, 2000). These differences are not
permanent, however (Amato, 1994, 2010). Although the majority of stepchildren
exhibit problems during the transition period immediately following remarriage,
 The Changing American Family  291

most show considerable resilience, and three quarters have no long-term problems
(Hetherington & Jodl, 1994). Younger children adjust more easily; teens have a dif-
ficult time accepting their parent’s remarriage and are at greater risk for external-
izing problems such as using alcohol, becoming delinquent, and having early sexual
intercourse. They also report more conflict with their stepparents than adolescents
in intact families have with their parents (Hetherington & Stanley-Hagen, 2002).
This is not surprising because stepparents are less nurturing and affectionate
with their stepchildren than biological parents are with theirs (Clarke-Stewart &
Brentano, 2006; Pryor, 2008; Sweeney, 2010). Girls, in particular, often feel the loss
of the close mother–daughter bond, which is undermined when a stepdad enters
the family circle:

“I was just jealous, I guess. I missed the times Mom and I spent together sitting on her
bed eating Chinese dinner and watching TV. I resented Nick being there at the dinner
table when I wanted to get her advice about something—a romantic problem, an unrea-
sonable teacher or a fight with a friend. I couldn’t stand it when they hugged or kissed.
I thought it was disgusting. I just felt shut out.”

Another reason for the conflicts between stepparents and stepchildren is the lack
of clear rules of engagement. As one stepdad lamented:

“I have no idea how I am supposed to behave, or what the rules are. Can I kiss my wife in
front of my stepchildren? Do I tell my stepson to do his homework or is that exceeding my
authority? It’s hard living in a family where there are no clear rules or lines of authority.”

Clearly remarriage can help, but it is still challenging for parents and children alike.

earning from Living Leaders: E. Mark Cummings

did not start out to become a psychologist; he
wanted to be a physicist and then a physician.
But an undergraduate course in social develop-
ment and his own recollections of loss, sepa-
ration, and conflict in childhood hooked him
on trying to understand children and families.
After graduate work at UCLA, he worked at the
Courtesy of E. Mark Cummings

National Institute of Mental Health, developing a

model of family influences on children’s soci-
oemotional development. He used this model as
the framework for a series of empirical studies.
Many of his studies involve laboratory analogue
experiments, simulations of events that happen
in families, for example, exposing children to an
argument between two adults. His major discov-
Mark Cummings, who is Professor and William J. ery was that seeing adults arguing can have pro-
Shaw Center for Children and Families Professor found effects on children’s social and emotional
of Psychology at the University of Notre Dame, well-being. This finding has made people more
has devoted his career to studying marital rela- aware of how families function as a breeding
tionships, parenting, and child adjustment. He ground for psychopathology. Cummings
292  Chapter 7 Family

has developed and tested programs to behavior of children whose low-income single
teach parents how to handle their everyday mothers were welfare recipients or welfare leav-
differences—for their children’s sakes. Most ers. Her book, African American Family Life, made
recently he has investigated the effects of com- a major contribution to understanding the links
munity wide conflict in Ireland and in Israel and among economic conditions, race, and child
Palestine on children. According to Cummings “a adjustment and led to renewed debate about
main challenge is to understand child develop- the effects of physical punishment on minority
ment from an international perspective, includ- children and adolescents.
ing processes underlying cycles of conflict and McLoyd is committed to examining the
violence and avenues towards breaking these implications of her research for both practice
cycles.” He suggests that “undergraduates realize and policy. She served as Director of the Children
that the field is wide-open, with much we don’t in Poverty Program at the Center for Human
yet understand and many exciting future ave- Growth and Development at the University of
nues for groundbreaking advances.” Michigan, is past president of the Society for
Research on Adolescence, is associate editor
Further Reading of American Psychologist, is a member of the
Cummings, E. M., Merrilees, C. E., Taylor, L. K., & Mondi, C. MacArthur Network on the Transition to
(2017). Political violence, armed conflict, and youth Adulthood, and has received an award from the
adjustment. New York: Springer.
Society for Research in Child Development for
her Distinguished Scientific Contributions to Child
Vonnie C. McLoyd Development.
Courtesy of Vonnie C. McLoyd, University of Michigan

Further Reading
McLoyd, V. C., Purtell, K., & Hardaway, C. (2015). Social class,
race, ethnicity and the transition to adulthood. In
M. Lamb & R. Lerner (Sr. Editor), Handbook of child
psychology and developmental science (7th edition).
Vol 3: Social, emotional and personality development.
New York: Wiley.

Andrew J. Fuligni

Courtesy of Andrew Fuligni

Vonnie McLoyd is Ewart A. C. Thomas Collegiate

Professor of Psychology at the University of
Michigan. She received her PhD from the Univer-
sity of Michigan and taught there for many years,
interspersed with a period of teaching at
the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Her
goal is to understand the processes that con-
tribute to emotional and social resilience in
economically disadvantaged children and ado- Andrew J. Fuligni is Professor in the Department
lescents. She is known for her work on the effects of Psychiatry and Biobehavioral Sciences and
of poverty on family life and child development Department of Psychology at UCLA . He received
and has completed a project examining the his PhD from the University of Michigan and
 Chapter Summary  293

taught at New York University before moving to and brain development during adolescence
UCLA and joining the Semel Institute for Neurosci- and young adulthood. Fuligni is a Fellow of the
ence and Human Behavior. His research focuses American Psychological Association and Asso-
on family relationships and adolescent develop- ciation for Psychological Science, and was a
ment among culturally and ethnically diverse recipient of the American Psychological Associa-
populations, with particular attention to teenag- tion’s Boyd McCandless Award for Early Career
ers from Asian, Latin American, European, and Contribution to Developmental Psychology. His
immigrant backgrounds. In several studies, he advice: Become familiar with work outside of your
has employed multiple methods to examine the discipline in order to create a truly integrative
extent to which the cultural beliefs and values approach to families and development.
of adolescents shape their family relationships,
peer relationships, educational adjustment, and Further Reading
psychological and physical health. Most recently, Andrew J. Fuligni & Kim M. Tsai. (2015). Developmental flex-
he has been collaborating with other research ibility in the age of globalization: Autonomy and identity
development among immigrant adolescents. Annual
groups to examine the interaction between Review of Psychology, 66, 411–431.
sociocultural experience and biobehavioral

Chapter Summary
• Families are social units in which adult spouses or partners and their children
share economic, social, and emotional rights and responsibilities as well as a
sense of commitment and identification with each other. Families are also sys-
tems for socialization, which means that family members channel children’s
impulses into socially accepted outlets and teach children the skills and rules
they need to function in society.
The Family System
• The family is a complex system involving interdependent members and subsys-
tems whose functioning may be altered by changes in the behavior or relation-
ships of other members. The functioning of the couple system, parent–child
system, and sibling system are interrelated and influence children’s social
well-being.
• The couple subsystem is often regarded as the basis of good family functioning.
Increased parent–child involvement and positive parent–child relationships
have been found when spouses are mutually supportive.
• Conflict between the parents, which can affect children directly or indirectly,
is associated with negative feelings and behaviors directed toward the children
and with problems in children’s social development. Particularly when con-
flicts are unresolved, children are likely to react with negative emotions. The
effects of conflict are reciprocal, with children and parents influencing each
other over time.
• Children have an impact on the couple relationship. The birth of the first
child is associated with a shift toward more traditional masculine and feminine
roles. Both mothers and fathers report declines in marital satisfaction follow-
ing the birth, but fathers are slower to express the decline. Temperamentally
difficult or handicapped children may be enough to destroy an already fragile
marriage.
294  Chapter 7 Family

• Although socialization begins when an infant is born, it becomes more deliber-

ate as children develop. Parents teach social rules directly and serve as models
whom the child may imitate.
• Parents’ relationships with their children can be categorized along the dimen-
sions of emotion and control.
• Authoritative parenting, involving warmth and consistency and firm control,
leads to the most positive social and emotional development in children.
Authoritarian parenting (low warmth and high control) leads to conflicted
and irritable children.
• Many factors influence the use of these parenting styles, including the couple’s
relationship, the parents’ mental health, and the children’s temperaments and
behavior.
• During socialization, children and parents influence each other in mutually
interlocking interactions that are best described as transactional.
• Fathers and mothers make unique contributions to their children’s develop-
ment by their distinctive interactive styles: Mothers are more verbal, fathers are
more physical.
• A cooperative coparenting system can contribute to positive social devel-
opment; competitive or imbalanced coparenting can lead to poor social
outcomes.
• The number, gender, and spacing of the children affect a family’s functioning.
As family size increases, parents and children have less opportunity for exten-
sive contact, but siblings experience more contact with each other.
• Firstborn children often show emotional and behavioral problems after the
birth of a sibling, but the mother’s reaction, efforts to include the firstborn,
and the father’s involvement moderate this. Firstborns are more adult oriented,
helpful, self-controlled, conforming, and anxious than later-born siblings.
• Families share stories, routines, and rituals that transmit values, teach family
roles, and reinforce the family’s uniqueness.
Family Variation: Social Class and Culture
• Each family is embedded in a larger social system termed the macrosystem in
Bronfenbrenner’s ecological theory.
• Parents with lower socioeconomic status tend to be more authoritarian; those
with higher socioeconomic status reason more with their children and present
more choices. Even children of high-socioeconomic status parents who are
uninvolved and aloof can develop social problems.
• Parents’ socialization practices are influenced by their culture, their workplace
experiences, and their neighborhood.
The Changing American Family
• Effects of maternal employment depend on the mother’s reason for working,
her satisfaction with her role, the attitudes of and demands placed on other
family members, and the quality of substitute care provided for the children.
Work-related stress for working parents can negatively affect couples and
children.
• People are becoming parents later today than in the past. Later parenthood
has some positive aspects, for example, parents may be better established in
careers and be more flexible about family roles.
• New reproductive technologies offer hope for couples who cannot conceive
a child. Although the risk of birth defects in infants conceived through these
methods is higher than with natural conception, the children do not have
abnormal levels of psychological problems.
 Key Terms  295

• Adoption can protect infants and children by removing them from adverse
rearing environments. Adopted children are at risk for psychological prob-
lems, but age, gender, and prior living conditions determine the level of risk.
• Gay and lesbian parents are becoming increasingly common. Evidence sug-
gests that children in these families develop normally.
• Parenting alone is also becoming more common. In general, children do more
poorly if their single mothers are younger, poorer, and never married. Chil-
dren of single mothers who are better educated and of higher socioeconomic
status fare better.
• In the first year following divorce, children tend to be disturbed, but in the
long run, most are able to adapt to their parents’ divorce. Family interactions
immediately following divorce are characterized by inept parenting and dis-
tressed, demanding, noncompliant children.
• Children of different ages vary in their understanding of divorce and reac-
tions to it. Effects are more negative for preadolescent sons and adolescent
daughters. Children who have an easy temperament and other psychological
resources adapt to divorce more easily than children who have psychological
problems before the divorce.
• Most children reside with the mother after divorce, although contact with
both parents is valuable for children’s adjustment. Joint custody works best
when conflict between parents is minimal and children don’t feel caught in the
middle.
• Children’s responses to remarriage vary depending on their previous family
experience and their age when the remarriage occurs. It is particularly difficult
for adolescents.

Key Terms
authoritarian parenting joint legal custody routines
authoritative parenting joint physical custody socialization
coparenting nuclear family sole custody
extended family permissive parenting transactional
family system rituals uninvolved parenting

At t h e M ov i es

Every cinema multiplex every weekend shows movies that (2007) investigates a father’s sensitivity and love as he strug-
offer insights into every kind of family life. gles to tell his daughters the devastating news that their
Supportive families. Moviemakers often produce films mother has died on the battlefield in Iraq.
based on their own family experiences, and viewing these Marital conflict in families. What Maisie Knew (2012)
movies can be educational, nostalgic, or even therapeutic. is a fine illustration of how marital conflict can be detrimental
Among movies illustrating positive and supportive family for children. Mostly seen from 6-year-old Maisie’s perspec-
relationships, Crooklyn (1994), Spike Lee’s semiautobio- tive, the film focuses on how she is used as a pawn in the war
graphical labor of love about his African American family, between her parents, who both carelessly ignore her when
depicts how parents committed to their children stand by she’s with them. Her mother is a rock star, working on a new
them and care what happens to them even though they album and touring, and her father is a businessman, always
sometimes become frustrated and angry. Grace Is Gone on his cell phone or on a trip. Their divorce is likely the
296  Chapter 7 Family

best thing for Maisie, as their loud and explicit arguments an example is Making Grace (2004), which shows how two
become part of everyday life. However, their selfish behavior women create a family and confront the challenges and joys
during the custody battles and agreements is where emo- of motherhood including those unique to lesbians. Any Day
tional harm and trouble could have easily been avoided. Now (2012) is an affecting drama about gay parenting rights
Ethnic families. A film providing an excellent illustra- set in the 1970s that has strong themes of tolerance and love
tion of ethnic differences in family practices is What’s Cooking? and also deals with issues such as a junkie neglecting her
(2000), which portrays how Thanksgiving is celebrated in four mentally disabled son, a gross miscarriage of justice, and
households—Vietnamese, Jewish, African American, and what it’s like to remain closeted about your sexual orienta-
Mexican American. The film illuminates the particular ten- tion to keep your job.
sions experienced in families from different ethnic groups. Assisted reproduction families. Sperm Donor X: A Dif-
Divorced families. Movies about children going ferent Conception (2010) is an intimate look at the experi-
through divorce also address family tensions. Children of ences of four diverse women as they go on a trip they never
Love (2002) portrays three children of divorced parents imagined—trying to have children solo using anonymous
dealing with issues of loyalty and love. This is a touching story donor sperm. From the strangeness and humor of picking
about the emotional experiences of broken families. The an anonymous donor to the creation of joyous families of
Squid and the Whale (2005) presents an emotionally honest both biological and adopted children, this film provides
story of two teenage boys dealing with their parents’ divorce. a powerful challenge to old ideas about making a family.
Based on the screenwriter’s childhood experiences, the Maybe Baby (2006) is a documentary that peeks into the
movie captures the pain and confusion that lurk beneath world of single mothers by choice by following the jour-
the boys’ anger and bluster, provides a clear picture of the neys of four single women as they use Assisted Reproduc-
pros and cons of family transitions, and illustrates how well- tive Technology (ART) to create families on their own.
intentioned parents affect their adolescents in profound ways. Through experiences with disapproving family mem-
Kramer vs. Kramer (1979) depicts a husband who learns how bers, friends who call them “selfish,” and medical profes-
to be a nurturing father after his wife walks out on him. sionals who refuse to assist them, the women in this film
This movie marked the beginning of a social movement bring to light basic questions of life, love, fertility, and the
in the 1980s that led to the reform of child custody laws so modern definition of family. http://www.youtube.com/
that ­gender-specific preferences for custodial parents were watch?v=9XEVh3wXMkg.
replaced with the standard of selecting the “best psychological Adoptive families. Like Dandelion Dust (2009) por-
parent.” A humorous take on the issue of how postdivorce vis- trays what happens when an ex-con uses a legal loophole
itation limitations can interfere with relations between chil- to locate his son who was adopted by an upper-crust family
dren and their noncustodial parents is Mrs. Doubtfire (1993). shortly after his father was incarcerated. The issue of who
Working families. Working mothers provide another the boy’s “parents” are is played out in gut-wrenching
popular movie theme. In the fictional movie, The 24-Hour Technicolor. The film Somewhere Between (2012) focuses on
Woman (1999), Grace slowly goes crazy trying to be both a the themes of family, adoption, identity, and race through
superproducer and a supermom. In the more sober docu- the coming-of-age stories of four Chinese girls adopted
mentary, Double Burden: Three Generations of Working Mothers by American families in the 1990s. Wo Ai Ni (I Love You)
(1992), three single-working mothers struggle to put Mommy (2010) is a documentary that transports the
clothing on their children’s backs and food on the table. viewer to the Guangzhou Civil Adoption Agency where
I Don’t Know How She Does It (2011) shows a more recent, 8-year-old Fang Sui Yong meets her adoptive mother from
humorous take on a mother who has it all, balancing work Long Island, New York, for the first time. Sui Yong was
and family. And in The Queen of Versailles (2012) the mother abandoned at the age of 2, lived in the Guangzhou City
really has it all—a family, a husband, servants, dogs, and the orphanage until she was 4, and then lived with a loving
largest house in America—until the economic recession Chinese foster family for the next 4 years. This film follows
turns their life askew. Sui Yong and her new adoptive family over the next 17
Gay and lesbian families. A number of movies about months and documents them becoming a family. www.
gay and lesbian families are also available and enlightening; woainimommy.com.
 CH AP TE R 8

Peers
A World of Their Own

When Abby was 1 year old, she got 2-year-old

Emma’s attention by tugging on her arm and
vocalizing at her loudly. When Abby was 3, she
asked Emma to play and imitated her behavior,
following her around and copying whatever she
did. When Abby was 8, she was usually ignored
by Emma, who was more interested in hanging
out with the other girls in her class at school.
When Abby turned 12, she found herself in
Jani Bryson/iStockphoto

middle school with Emma and they were both

given parts in the school play. Once again they
became best friends. The difference in their ages
no longer mattered, and they felt close because
they shared a history of play dates, church activi-
ties, and neighborhood events and a strong
interest in musical theatre and books about fair-
ies. These examples illustrate some of the ways
Children’s relationships with peers differ from their children interact with each other and develop
relationships with adults. Peer relationships are friendships as they grow up. These interactions
briefer, freer, and more equal. They also are volun- and relationships in the world of peers are the
tary relationships in a way that relationships with focus of this chapter.
family are not. They are more likely to involve shared
positive emotions and conflicts (Gerrits et al., 2005).
They offer children opportunities for new types of interpersonal exploration, facili-
tate the growth of social competence, and open the way for children to form asso-
ciations outside the family. They offer children a cultural community of their own
in which they share behavioral patterns and practices (Howes & Lee, 2006). In this
chapter, we describe children’s interactions with peers and how these interactions
change as children get older. We examine the special roles peers play in children’s
socialization. We also consider the many factors that affect children’s acceptance by
peers and explore the effects of peer rejection. We look at the ways adults can pro-
mote children’s acceptance by peers, discuss the ways children develop friendships,
and describe children’s behavior in peer groups.

297
298  Chapter 8 Peers

Definitions and Distinctions

Several definitions and distinctions are important to understand the research on
children’s peer interactions and relationships. First is the distinction between a
peer and a friend. A peer is another child of roughly the same age; a friend is a peer
with whom the child has a special relationship. Peers form a central part of the
child’s social world. They populate the school classroom, the neighborhood, and
afterschool clubs. They interact with the child during the course of daily routines,
sharing information about tasks, engaging in conversations, and playing together
on the playground. These interactions with peers are often short, do not involve
strong commitments, and are limited to a specific context such as the classroom
or the playground. They may be one-sided because they do not necessarily involve
reciprocal liking or mutual respect. From these interactions, children develop close
relationships with a small number of peers. These are their friends. Friends interact
on a regular and sustained basis, develop expectations about future interactions,
and engage in reciprocal actions such as sharing stories and secrets and supporting
one another. Dyadic relationships with friends are characterized by reciprocal liking
and thus differ from relationships with other peers.
A second distinction in peer research is between dyads and groups of children.
The interactions between peers and friends that we have described relate to dyads,
or pairs of children. Children also form groups of peers with defined boundaries
and social organization. These groups include cliques, teams, and crowds. Groups
develop their own norms, rules, and hierarchies, which regulate the activities of
the group members. Interactions with peers, friendships with peers, and groups
of peers all represent different forms of peer ties and serve different functions in
children’s social development.

Developmental Patterns of Peer Interaction

For many years, psychologists ignored or denied the possibility that very young chil-
dren are capable of having social interactions with each other. Data available today,
however, clearly prove that children are active social partners from a very early age.
Table 8.1 summarizes changes in peer interactions and relationships with age.

First Encounters in Infancy

In the first 6 months of life, babies touch and look at each other and are respon-
sive to each other’s behaviors. But these early behaviors can’t be considered truly
social in the sense that an infant seeks and expects a response from another baby.
It is not until the second half of the first year that infants begin to recognize a peer
as a social partner (Brownell et al., 2006; Howes, 1987). Between 6 and 12 months
infants start trying to interact with other infants by vocalizing, waving, and touching.
Although they sometimes hit and push each other, often these babies’ social behav-
ior is friendly (Hay et al., 2000, 2014; Rubin et al., 2015). However, even as early as
6 months of age a small minority of infants behave aggressively and even persist in
their hitting ways 2 years later when they are toddlers (Hay et al., 2014). Here is an
example of two babies interacting (Mueller & Lucas, 1975, p. 241):

“Larry sits on the floor and Bernie turns and looks toward him.
Bernie waves his hand and says ‘da,’ still looking at Larry.
 Developmental Patterns of Peer Interaction  299

TABLE 8.1

The Child’s Development of Peer Interactions and Friendships

Age* Social Interaction
0–6 months Touches and looks at another infant and cries in response to the other’s crying
6–12 months Tries to influence another baby by looking, touching, vocalizing, or waving
Interacts with other infants in a generally friendly way but sometimes hits or pushes
1–2 years Begins to adopt complementary behavior such as taking turns, exchanging roles
Engages in more social play throughout the period
Begins to engage in imaginative play
2–3 years In play and other social interaction, begins to communicate meaning; for example, invites another
child to play or signals that it’s time to switch roles
Begins to prefer peers to adult companions
Begins to engage in complex cooperative and dramatic play
Starts to prefer same-gender playmates
4–5 years Shares more with peers
Has goal to maximize excitement and enjoyment through play
Begins to sustain longer play sequences
Is more willing to accept roles other than protagonist
6–7 years Reaches a peak in imaginative play
Shows stable preference for same-gender playmates
Main friendship goal is coordinated and successful play
7–9 years Expects friends to share activities, offer help, be physically available
Seeks to be included by peers and avoid rejection
9–11 years Expects to be accepted and admired by friends
Expects friend to be loyal and committed to the relationship
Is likely to build friendships on the basis of earlier interactions
Main friendship goal is to be accepted by same-gender peers
11–13 years Expects genuineness, intimacy, self-disclosure, common interests, and similar attitudes and values
in friends
13–17 years Important friendship goal is understanding of the self
Begins to have romantic relationships
17 years Expects friends to provide emotional support
Romantic relationships provide both intimacy and support

*These are age approximations; individual children vary greatly in the ages at which developmental changes occur.
Sources: Collins et al., 2009; Hartup, 1996; and Rubin et al., 2015.

Bernie repeats the vocalization three more times before Larry laughs.
Bernie vocalizes again and Larry laughs again.
The same sequence of Bernie saying ‘da’ and Larry laughing is repeated twelve more
times before Bernie turns away and walks off.”

Social exchanges between infants are noticeably different from those with adults
(Rubin et al., 2015). They are shorter and less sustained because infants are less reli-
ably responsive than adults. They are also more equal because adults usually take
the lead in maintaining interactions with infants.
300  Chapter 8 Peers

Social Exchanges between Toddlers

Between the ages of 1 and 2, children make gains in locomotion and language,
and this increases the complexity of toddlers’ social exchanges (Dunn, 2005; Rubin
et al., 2015). Objects such as toys facilitate these social exchanges. When toddlers
offer an object to a peer, they receive a positive response nearly 80 percent of the
time; when they take or touch an object that the peer is playing with, the likelihood
of a positive response is much less (Williams et al., 2010). Even at this young age
sharing and cooperativeness are effective social strategies (Brownell et al., 2006,
2013). Toddlers also develop the ability to engage in complementary social interac-
tions (Howes, 1987). That is, they take turns and reverse roles in their play, alter-
nating between “hider” and “seeker,” for example. They also begin to imitate each
other and show awareness that they’re being imitated (Eckerman, 1993). When
they have positive social interactions, they’re more likely to smile or laugh than they
did when they were infants (Mueller & Brenner, 1977). Their interactions also last
longer (Ross & Conant, 1992).
But can toddlers interact with more than one other child at a time? Children
of this age often spend time in groups—in Mommy-and-Me playgroups or in
child care centers. So how do they interact when more than one other child is
present? Researchers studying 2-year-olds in groups of three children discovered
that although sometimes play consisted of two children playing while the third just
watched, more than half of the time all three children participated actively and
directed vocalizations, gestures, and movements toward each of the other two chil-
dren in quite complex social exchanges (Ishikawa & Hay, 2006).
In the late toddler period (2 to 3 years), children’s main social achievement is
sharing meaning with a partner (Mueller, 1989). Children suggest a particular activ-
ity by looking at their partner and then running to a tricycle or a set of Legos. They
give a signal to switch roles by saying “My turn!” and tugging on a doll. They commu-
nicate that they both share knowledge by smiling at each other as the doll changes
hands. This sharing of meaning makes it possible for children to play a wider range
of games and engage in pretend play together (Howes, 1987; Lillard et al., 2013).

Jani Bryson/iStockphoto

These babies have a

clear interest in each
other and can interact
in simple ways.
 Developmental Patterns of Peer Interaction  301

Peer Play in Early Childhood

Nearly 90 years ago Mildred Parten (1932) described the ways children play
together in early childhood, and the categories she identified are still used today.
Table 8.2 summarizes the types of peer play Parten observed among 3- to 5-year-
olds. Children of this age engage in any of these different types of play, depend-
ing on the circumstances, but as they get older, they are increasingly likely to play
together in the more complex and social ways reflected in associative play and
cooperative play and are decreasingly likely to simply watch or play alongside
each other in parallel play. Negative exchanges and conflicts also increase over
the preschool years (Rubin et al., 2015). In fact, social play and conflicts seem
to go together. Young children who frequently initiate conflicts with peers are
also the most sociable and the most likely to initiate peer interactions (Brown &
Brownell, 1990).
Pretend play seems to be particularly important in the development of social
competence, social skills, and emotional understanding in early childhood. It per-
mits children to experience the roles and feelings of others in a playful context, and
it teaches them to function as part of a social group and coordinate their activities
with other children (Li et al., 2016; Lindsey & Colwell, 2013). Pretend play first
appears about halfway through the second year, usually with mother or an older sib-
ling, but as children develop social skills and have more opportunities to meet other
children, peers become the most common pretend-play partners (Dunn, 1988;
Haight & Miller, 1993). By age 3, children’s pretend play is quite complex, coop-
erative, and dramatic. By this age, children can share symbolic meanings in their
pretend play (Fein, 1989), and this ability increases as they grow (Goncu, 1993).
As a result, 4-year-olds have longer play sequences and can negotiate roles, rules,
and themes of pretend play more easily than 3-year-olds. When they are 3 years
old, all children want to be Batman, but as 4-year-olds, they are willing to accept
the lesser role of Robin, recognizing that their turn as Batman will come later. The

TABLE 8.2

Types of Play in Preschool-Age Children

Type of Play Description
Onlooker behavior Children watch or converse with other children engaged in play activities. About half of 2-year-
olds engage in this type of play.
Parallel play Children play in similar activities, often side by side, but do not engage one another. This type of
play is common in 2-year-olds but diminishes by the time a child is 3 or 4.
Associative play Children play with other children but do not necessarily share the same goals. They share toys
and materials and might even react to or comment on another child’s ongoing activities (e.g.,
sharing paints or remarking on another child’s art work). However, they are still not fully
engaged with each other in a joint project. This type of play is seen commonly in 3- and 4-year-
olds and less often in 2-year-olds.
Cooperative play At ages 3 to 4 years, children begin to engage in play in which they cooperate, reciprocate, and
share common goals. Some examples of cooperative play are building a sand castle, drawing a
picture together, and playing a fantasy game in which characters interact with each other.

Source: Parten, M. (1932). Social play among pre-school children. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 28, 231–241. The use of APA information
does not imply endorsement by APA.
302  Chapter 8 Peers

pretend play of 5-year-olds includes slow-motion fistfights and gun battles and pro-
longed, staggering death scenes with broad and exaggerated gestures. It includes
dressing up and acting out complex rituals such as getting married or being rescued
by a prince. Pretend play peaks when children are about 6 years old. By this time,
it involves highly coordinated fantasies, rapid transitions between multiple roles,
and unique transformations of objects and situations (Power, 2011). In the United
States, middle class children and girls engage in more pretend play than working
class children and boys (Karnik & Tudge, 2010). Although pretend play is common
in westernized countries (Smetana, 2002), even across Western cultures the nature
of pretend play varies. For example, early elementary school Italian children had
significantly more types of affect expression in pretend play than children in the
United States, whereas children in the United States had more imagination in their
play (Chessa et al., 2013). However, this type of play is far from universal. According
to a survey of mothers in 16 countries, only 5 countries (all Western) reported that
children engaged frequently in imaginative play (Singer et al., 2009). In contrast
to individual-oriented Western societies, in many collectivist, group-oriented cul-
tures, such as Kenya, Mexico, Vietnam, Thailand, Morocco, and India, and among
Bedouin Arabs, children rarely engage in this kind of play (Ariel & Sever, 1980;
Edwards, 2000; Singer et al., 2009). While most scientists regard pretend play as a
possible precursor of a variety of positive developmental outcomes, the pathways
through which pretend play helps children’s social development is still unclear
(Lillard et al., 2013).

Peer Society in the School Years

After children start school, they continue to increase their social interactions with
other children and decrease their social interactions with adults. In one study,
researchers found that from 1 to 12 years of age, children spent progressively
more time with child companions and fewer hours with adults (Ellis et al., 1981;
see ­Figure 8.1). The nature of peer interactions shifts during this period as well.
Physical aggression toward peers decreases and generosity and helpfulness increase
(Eisenberg et al., 2015). The hallmark of the school years is concern about being
accepted by peers and fitting in with classmates.

70

60

Percent of observations
50
with peer companions

40

30

FIGURE 8.1 At about the age of 2½ years, children begin to Percent of observations
20
spend more social time with other children as companions and with adult companions
less social time with adult companions.
10
Source: Copyright © 2010 by the American Psychological Association.
Reproduced with permission. Ellis, S., Rogoff, B., & Cromer, C., Age 0
segregation in children’s social interactions. Developmental Psychology, 1– 2 3–4 5–6 7–8 9 –10 11–12
17, 399–407. The use of APA information does not imply endorse-
Age (in years)
ment by APA.
 Developmental Patterns of Peer Interaction  303

The importance of the peer’s age The type of peers children choose to spend
time with also changes over the school years. The age of the peer becomes a more
important factor, and companionship with same-age peers increases (Rubin et al.,
2015). Children’s preference for age mates serves a special role in social develop-
ment because these peers share interests and abilities (Maccoby, 1998). In Western
societies, age segregation in classrooms and on sports teams facilitates this trend. In
many other cultures, however, older children play with younger ones as well as car-
ing for and teaching them (Weisner, 2011; Zukow-Goldring, 2002).

The importance of the peer’s gender Gender also matters in children’s choice
of play companions (Martin et al., 2013; Mehta & Strough, 2009). Up to age 3 or
4, children are equally likely to choose same-gender or other-gender companions
for play. Up to age 7, they are willing to play with a peer of the opposite gender.
But over the course of elementary school, both boys and girls increasingly choose
playmates of the same gender and exclude children of the other gender (Furman &
Rose, 2015; Rubin et al., 2015). This preference for same-gender play partners is evi-
dent across a range of non-Western cultures (Monroe & Romney, 2006). The gender-
exclusivity rule has exceptions, of course, but they often operate underground.
For example, a girl and boy might spend time together at church or in the neigh-
borhood, but they keep their friendship a secret from their classmates (Gottman,
1986; Thorne, 1986). They don’t want to be teased or taunted at school. This trend
holds until at least adolescence. Even then, the prevalence of friendship groups that
included both girls and boys rose only from 10 percent to 22 percent from the sixth
to ninth grade (Molloy, Gest, Feinberg, & Osgood, 2014).
Gender segregation is obvious at school as boys and girls play different games
and use different equipment (Blatchford et al., 2003; Leaper, 1994, p. 29):

Jake and Danny are playing on the big swing, and Laura runs up, calling excitedly, “Can
I get on?” “No!” says Jake emphatically, “We don’t want you on here. We only want boys
on here. . . . We like to have boys.”

Children segregate themselves into gender-specific groups because of their differ-

ent interests and play styles even in first grade (Silvern, 1995, p. 3):

“Girls like to talk about girl things” says Katrina . . . [while] Mike and his crowd are read-
ying their plastic spoons to flip raisins, and David is concentrating on blowing enough
bubbles to move his chocolate milk from the carton onto the table.

Researchers have documented the differences in boys’ and girls’ play styles
(Power, 2011; Rose & Rudolph, 2006). Girls tend to play quiet games, in small
groups, near school buildings, and close to adult supervision (Thorne, 1986). They
are inclined to prefer play involving artistic endeavors, books, or dolls. They like
unstructured activities, such as talking and walking. They are more intimate and
exchange more information than boys (Fabes et al., 2003; Lansford & Parker, 1999;
Zarbatany et al., 2000). Boys tend to play high-energy, run-and-chase games in large
groups and to play more sports and games with rules (Pellegrini et al., 2004; Rose
& Rudolph, 2006). Noise and boisterousness often characterize boys’ play. Boys are
more competitive in their play than girls are, and, as they become older, boys tend to
prefer organized games controlled by rules (Pellegrini et al., 2004). Even the nature
of pretend play differs: Boys are more likely to enact superhero roles, whereas girls
portray mommies and princesses (Haight & Miller, 1993). It’s no surprise, then,
304  Chapter 8 Peers

that children want to play with children of their own gender—play might not go so
well when Superman swoops in to save an unwilling damsel in distress or boys race
through a quiet circle of girls playing with Barbie dolls.
Both boys and girls are more competitive in groups than in dyads, but the differ-
ence is more marked for boys (Benenson et al., 2001). Boys are particularly active
and forceful when the group includes only boys. In a mixed-gender group, boys
become less boisterous and girls more so because children adjust their behavior to
fit the style of play that is preferred by their other-sex playmates (Fabes et al., 2003).
It is important not to exaggerate gender differences in play styles, however. Both
boys and girls participate in both cooperative and competitive activities, and the
play behaviors of boys and girls have many similarities (Underwood, 2004).

Peer Interactions in Adolescence

The amount of time that adolescents spend with their peers peaks in adolescence
(Lam et al., 2014). In fact, high school students spend nearly 30 percent of their
waking hours with peers during a typical week, not including the time they spend
together in class. This is twice as much as they spend with parents and other adults
(13 percent). This pattern of involvement with peers is particularly salient in West-
ern cultures (Brown, 2004; Brown & Braun, 2013). Researchers have found that, on
average, 12th graders in the United States spend 2½ hours each day talking with a
peer—more than twice as much as students in Korea and Japan (Larson & Verma,
1999). Moreover, in contrast to younger ages, peer interaction in adolescence is
under relatively limited adult guidance and scrutiny.
When they are with their peers, adolescents are usually engaged in recreation
and conversation (Larson et al., 2009), and in these activities they pick up ideas
about how they should act. Peers offer the perspective of equals who share abili-
ties, goals, and problems. They are experts in what’s cool and happening, and they
influence teens’ styles of interpersonal behavior, selection of friends, and choice of
fashion and entertainment. Peers have a stronger influence on whether teens use
alcohol, tobacco, and illegal drugs, especially marijuana, than parents do (M. Allen
et al., 2003). Peer influence is especially significant if adolescents lack parental sup-
port. Adolescents whose parents are warm, supportive, and authoritative are less sus-
ceptible to peer pressure than adolescents whose parents do not have these qualities
(Steinberg, 1986). It also helps if the parents of adolescents’ friends are authorita-
tive. In one study, adolescents whose friends described their parents as authoritative
were less likely to use drugs and run afoul of the law than adolescents whose friends
described their parents as authoritarian (Fletcher et al., 1995). This association was
significant even when researchers statistically controlled for the influence of the
adolescents’ own parents.
In adolescence, gender segregation in peer activities breaks down a bit as dating
begins (Brown & Klute, 2006; Mehta & Strough, 2009), and peer groups with shared
interests in sports, school, and other activities are used as a means of exploring and
enhancing self-identities (Brown & Braun, 2013; Brown & Klute, 2006). We explore
adolescents’ romantic relationships and peer groups later in this chapter.

Peers as Socializers
In childhood and adolescence, peers are important socializers who influence chil-
dren’s values and behaviors just as parents do.
 Peers as Socializers  305

Modeling Behavior
Peers influence each other by acting as social models. Children learn a great deal
about how to behave simply by observing the actions of their peers. Even 2-year-olds
imitate each other and so are able to sustain an interaction and learn more sophis-
ticated forms of play, such as tossing a ball back and forth (Eckerman, 1993). Pre-
schoolers who have poor language skills improve when exposed to more linguistically
competent peers (Justice et al., 2011). Older children learn about social rules by
watching their peers. On the first day at a new school, for instance, a child might
learn that students stand when the teacher enters the room, that it is risky to shoot
spitballs, and that the big redheaded kid should be avoided because he’s a bully. By
imitating their peers, especially the ones who don’t get in trouble, children learn class
rules and develop social skills that help them get along with their new classmates. In
adolescence, young people copy peer models as they decide what to wear, how much
to eat, when to start smoking, whether to join a gang, and if they should skip school
(Albert et al., 2013; Dishion et al., 2001). Given a choice, children are most likely to
imitate peers who are older, more powerful, and more prestigious (Bandura, 1986).

Reinforcing and Punishing Behavior

Peers also influence each other in more deliberate ways. As the term peer pressure
implies, peers not only model behaviors but also actively try to convince other chil-
dren to engage in them. They tell children how to behave and reinforce them with
praise and positive reactions for behaviors they approve of or punish them with criti-
cism and negative reactions for behaviors they dislike. Peers are increasingly likely
to reinforce each other as they get older (Charlesworth & Hartup, 1967).
Researchers have documented how peers’ positive reinforcement in the form of
approval affects children’s social behavior. In one case study, they examined the effects
of peer praise on the social involvement of three socially withdrawn girls (Moroz &
Jones, 2002). Teachers rewarded the girls’ classmates for publicly praising the girls’ social
behavior during brief daily sessions, and the effects of the peers’ praise were observed
during recess. After the experimental manipulation, all three girls behaved more socia-
bly; they participated more in group activities and were more engaged with peers.
Researchers have also observed effects of peers’ negative actions on other
children’s behavior. For example, they have seen that children play less with toys
regarded as being for the opposite gender after they have been criticized by their
peers for doing so (Lamb et al., 1980). Similarly, when adolescents are greeted with
peers’ jeers for their choice of clothing or their taste in friends, they are likely to
adjust their dress code or change their companions.
Perhaps most obvious and most often documented by researchers is the effect of
peer pressure to engage in antisocial behaviors (Albert et al., 2013; Sullivan, 2006).
Peer pressure in this case includes modeling the antisocial behavior, encouraging
friends to do it too, reinforcing them by hanging out together when they engage
in the antisocial behavior, and criticizing or dropping peers who don’t get with
the program. Not surprisingly, influence is most marked when a high-status peer
encourages the deviant or risky behaviors (Prinstein et al, 2011).

Contagion
Whereas research on reinforcement and punishing implies that peers actively encour-
age or discourage behaviors in one another, research on internalizing problems
306  Chapter 8 Peers

such as depression and anxiety suggests there may be more passive, emotional “con-
tagion” processes that happen between friends as well (Giletta et al., 2011; Schwartz-
Mette & Rose, 2012). Especially in adolescence, having friends with internalizing
symptoms, such as depression and anxiety, increases one’s own chances of develop-
ing internalizing symptoms. How this happens is not entirely clear, but it may be that
depressed or anxious youth talk or think in ways that are associated with depression
(e.g., feeling bad about themselves, talking about problems too much), which leads
their friends to talk or think in these ways too, which results in the friends developing
anxious or depressive symptoms (Giletta et al., 2011; Schwartz-Mette & Rose, 2012).

Social Comparison
A fourth way that peers influence each other is by providing standards against which
children measure themselves. Children have few objective ways to rate their own
characteristics, abilities, and actions, and so they turn to other people, particularly
peers. Through a process of social comparison, they watch and evaluate their peers
and then use what they’ve learned to evaluate themselves. Social comparison helps
children define who they are and determine how well they think they stack up
against their peers. Such comparison plays a major role in determining self-esteem
(Harter, 2012). If children think that they are as good as their peers, their self-
esteem is high, but if they see themselves as falling short, their self-esteem suffers.
Comparing themselves with their peers is adaptive. If a boy wants to know how
good a fighter he is, it’s better if he thinks about how well he’s done in neighbor-
hood scuffles and how tough his peers think he is rather than comparing himself
with professional boxers. If a girl wants to evaluate her reading ability, she is better
off comparing herself with other children in her class rather than judging herself
by how well her older sister reads. As a basis for self-definition, the peer group
is unequaled. Children use social comparison with their peers as a way to evalu-
ate themselves with increasing frequency in the early years of elementary school
(Harter, 2012), and, once begun, this process never really stops. In adolescence,
young people employ social comparison with peers routinely as they argue with
their parents, “Everyone else can; why can’t I?” (Daddis, 2011). As social media
has become so central to children’s lives, peers who one encounters online
have become another source of social comparison for children and adolescents
(Fardouly & Vartanian, 2015).

ultural Context: Peer Roles and Relationships

in Different Cultures
Peers’ roles vary in different influenced by peers (DeRosier & Kupersmidt,
cultures. Compared with U.S. 1991). Their parents often directly discourage
youths, adolescents in Japan peer interactions (Ladd, 2005; Schneider, 2000).
and China spend less time with Even styles of relating to peers vary across
peers, and their parents’ values play a more cultures. Italian children are more likely than
prominent role (Chen, Chung et al., 2011; Canadian children to embrace debates and
Rothbaum, Pott, et al., 2000). Latino children, disputes with their friends, and, perhaps as
similarly, are more family oriented and less a result of their tolerance for conflict, their
 Peers as Socializers  307

friendships are more stable (Casiglia et al., 1998). 0.3

Children in China, India, and Korea are more
cooperative and compliant with their peers than 0.2
are children in Canada and the United States
(Farver et al., 1995). In one study, for example, 0.1
researchers found that 85 percent of Chinese

Peer liking
0
5-year-olds’ interactions with peers were coopera-
tive and considerate, whereas 78 percent of
– 0.1
Canadian children’s interactions involved
conflicts from simple disagreements to aggres- – 0.2
sive attacks (Orlick et al., 1990). Differences
between ethnic groups in the United States –0.3
parallel these differences between cultures.
Korean American preschoolers use more polite –0.4
–1 1
requests and statements of agreement and less
Assertive bids
frequently tell their peer partners what to do or
Canadian Chinese
refuse their peer’s suggestions than do European
American children (Farver et al., 1995; Farver & FIGURE 8.2 Chinese children who made assertive bids to get a

Shin, 1997). This difference is related to the toy were less liked by their peers, whereas this relation was not
significant for Canadian children.
different ways that Asian and American cultures
Source: French, D. C., Chen, X., Chung, J., Li, M., Chen, H., & Li, D.
view the relative importance of individuals and
(2011). Four children and one toy: Chinese and Canadian children
groups (Chen, Chung et al., 2011; Chen & faced with potential conflict over a limited resource. Child Develop-
French, 2008). In individual-oriented societies, ment, 82, 830–841.
a person’s identity is determined largely by
personal accomplishments, whereas in group-­ children grow up, they must become more
oriented collectivistic societies, identity is related assertive. Historical shifts in China are changing
to membership in a larger group (Schneider, children’s social values, however. Although
2000). Children’s peer relationships reflect these Chinese children of elementary school age
cultural orientations. accepted peers’ shyness in 1990, they did not do
Another difference reflected in peer relation- so in 2002 (Chen et al., 2005). Perhaps the shift
ships is the particular types of social behavior toward a market-oriented economy in China with
that the culture values. In traditional Chinese its focus on assertiveness and self-direction is
culture, shyness and sensitivity are valued in responsible for this change. In rural areas of
children and are believed to reflect accomplish- China, shyness is still associated with better
ment, maturity, and understanding (X. Chen social and psychological adjustment in children
et al., 2006; Chen, Chen et al., 2009; Chen, (Chen, Wang et al., 2009, 2011). This will likely
Chung et al., 2011). Not surprisingly, then, change as economic transformation expands to
Chinese children accept peers who have these these areas. Still, some traditional Chinese social
characteristics, whereas Canadian children tend attributes such as social sensitivity continue to
to reject them (Chen & Tse, 2008). As Figure 8.2 be valued among Chinese children. In compari-
shows, in play groups of 7-year-olds, Chinese son with Canadian 12-year-olds, Chinese chil-
children liked peers who made the fewest dren who were highly socially sensitive to
assertive bids for the only available toy; information about social evaluations and social
Canadian children tended not to like them understanding showed better social and school
(French et al., 2011). Among older children and adjustment, whereas the opposite was found for
adolescents, even in China, shy peers tend to be the Canadian children (Chen et al., 2016).
rejected (Chen & Rubin, 1994; Chen et al., 2005) Clearly, in our efforts to understand peer relation-
and experience more loneliness (Yang et al., ships, we need to consider both cultural and
2015), in part because of the expectation that as historical contexts.
308  Chapter 8 Peers

Peer Status
Peers are important because they give children a sense of acceptance or status in
the world outside the family. In this section, we discuss psychologists’ studies of chil-
dren’s peer status. We examine the ways their peers’ views of them affect children,
and we consider how we can promote children’s acceptance by peers.

Studying Peer Status: Acceptance and Rejection

The most common way to study children’s peer status is with a sociometric technique.
This technique measures peer acceptance and rejection by assessing how much chil-
dren like or dislike each other (Rubin et al., 2015). In the nominations sociometric
technique, researchers ask each child to name a number of peers (usually three)
whom they like most in their class and the same number of peers whom they like least
(Coie et al., 1982). The researcher then sums the scores of most-liked and least-liked
nominations for each child. Popular children are those who receive the
largest number of most-liked nominations and the fewest least-liked
ones. Average children receive some of both types of nomination but
not as many most-liked nominations as popular children. Neglected
children receive few most-liked and few least-liked votes. They are not
necessarily disliked by their classmates; they are isolated and friendless.
Controversial children receive a large number of most-liked nomina-
tions and a large number of least-liked nominations. Rejected children
receive many least-liked nominations and few most-liked nominations.
Because children are asked to name peers whom they don’t like, ethical
concerns have been raised that using this technique will cause further
social problems for disliked children. However, evidence suggests that if
© Blend Images/Media Bakery

the nominations technique is administered carefully, with efforts to pre-

vent negative consequences, it does not pose significant risks (Hymel
et al., 2002; Mayeux et al., 2007).
The nominations approach has the advantage of being quick and easy
to administer. However, by limiting the number of choices, researchers
miss information about how children feel toward most of their class-
mates. An alternative approach is to use a roster-and-rating sociometric
procedure (Parker & Asher, 1993). Children are given a list of all their
This prom king and queen exemplify popu- classmates and asked to rate on 5-point scales how much they like to
larity as both preference and prominence, play with each of them, work with them, and so on. Each child’s level of
having been elected to their positions by their acceptance is then determined from his or her average rating.
classmates and recognized as school leaders.
Both of these sociometric approaches are useful. Nominations are
helpful for questions concerning children’s most extreme likes and dis-
likes; rating-scale assessments are better for finding out how each child feels about
everyone else in the group. Rating-scale measures of acceptance are also better for
detecting changes in acceptance when interventions are carried out to help chil-
dren with peer-relations problems (Asher et al., 1996).
Notably, although for decades researchers referred to well-liked children as “pop-
ular” (i.e., received many liked most and few liked least nominations (Coie et al.,
1982), these are not necessary the peers who youth themselves think of as “popular,”
especially by adolescence. In fact, more recently, researchers adopted a different
approach in which they actually asked youth to nominate which of their peers is
“popular” (teachers and parents also are sometimes asked to report on popular-
ity). Youth who receive many “popular” nominations (and sometimes also fewer
 Peer Status  309

“unpopular” nominations) are referred to as “perceived popular.” In childhood,

perceived popularity is quite strongly related to popularity assessed with sociometric
techniques or, in order words, being well liked. In adolescence, however, these asso-
ciations become weaker. At this age, popular adolescents tend to be visible and well
known among their peers, but not necessarily well liked. In fact, often times they are
dominant or aggressive with peers (Asher & McDonald, 2009; Cillessen & Bellmore,
2011; Rose, Swenson, & Waller, 2004).

Factors that Affect Peer Acceptance

Children’s status as popular, rejected, or neglected depends on their behavior and
their cognitive and social skills. It also depends on superficial factors, such as the
child’s name and physical appearance.

Behaviors that make a difference Researchers have investigated how children’s

peer status is related to their behavior (Rubin et al., 2015). Two types of popular
children have been identified. The majority of popular children are friendly toward
their peers and well liked by them. They are assertive but not disruptive or aggres-
sive. When they join a group, they do it smoothly so that the ongoing action con-
tinues without interruption (Black & Hazen, 1990; Newcomb et al., 1993). They
are good at communication, help set the rules for the group, and engage in more
prosocial behavior than less popular children.

Aiden cannot pass up a chance to greet and chat with a classmate at school. His face
lights up when he sees someone he knows and he instantly gives a big cheery “Hi!” And
his classmates always smile back.

A small number of children and adolescents who are perceived to be popular,

however, display a mix of positive and negative behaviors (Closson, 2009; Hawley,
2003a; LaFontana & Cillessen, 1999). These popular–aggressive kids are athletic,
arrogant, and aggressive but at the same time are viewed as cool and attractive.
Because their peers respect them, their aggressive tactics do not interfere with
their popularity (Kuryluk et al., 2011). They wield high levels of social influence
even though their actions are often manipulative rather than prosocial (Cillessen &
Mayeux, 2004; Cillessen & Rose, 2005; Rodkin et al., 2000). Their classmates imi-
tate their styles of dress and taste in music and want to be friends with them so
that they can be part of the in-group. Even school bullies can enjoy this kind of
popularity, although their peers might avoid them for fear of becoming their next
victim (Juvonen et al., 2003). The popular–aggressive phenomenon illustrates the
adaptive value of aggression; for these individuals, aggression provides a route to
power and influence (Hawley, 2014; Hawley et al., 2007). However, it is also a risk.
Adolescents who are high in perceived popularity—typically popular–aggressive
kids—show increased alcohol use and sexual activity over the years of high school
(Mayeux et al., 2008). They also appear to have poorer academic skills, especially if
they are also aggressive, and to have experienced lower levels of maternal sensitivity
(Rodkin & Roisman, 2010; Schwartz et al., 2006).
There are also two types of rejected children. Aggressive-rejected children have
poor self-control and exhibit frequent aggression and behavior problems (French,
1990; Parkhurst & Asher, 1992). Nonaggressive-rejected children are anxious,
withdrawn, and socially unskilled (Crick & Ladd, 1993; Gazelle & Ladd, 2003; Oh
et al., 2008). Social withdrawal is one of the strongest correlates of peer rejection in
310  Chapter 8 Peers

middle childhood and adolescence (Deater-Deckard, 2001; Newcomb et al., 1993)

and appears in other cultures, such as India, as well (Prakash & Coplan, 2007).

Our next door neighbor’s daughter who is in Aiden’s grade walks around school glumly,
her eyes on the ground, and she never calls out a hello. She is always alone and I feel
sorry for her when I see her.

Neglected children, whose peers ignore them but do not necessarily reject them,
are shy, quiet, and less aggressive than other children. Two types of children are
neglected. Socially reticent–anxious children watch others from afar, remain unoc-
cupied in social company, and hover near but do not engage in interaction. Socially
uninterested–unsociable children are not anxious or fearful but simply refrain from
social interaction because they prefer to play alone (Ladd et al., 2011).

Biological predispositions Underlying these behaviors that affect peer status

are biological predispositions evident in children’s temperaments. Children who
are likely to be rejected by their peers because they are disruptive, aggressive, and
hyperactive are temperamentally active, outgoing, impulsive, and unfocused; that is,
their temperaments are characterized by high extraversion-surgency (Berdan et al.,
2008; Gülay, 2012) and poor effortful control (Ormel et al., 2005; Valiente et al.,
2003). Children who are likely to be rejected or neglected by their peers because
they are withdrawn are temperamentally unsociable: They are less likely to smile
and gaze during interactions with their mothers in early infancy (Gerhold et al.,
2002) and have low extraversion-surgency in early childhood (Ormel et al., 2005).
Children who are likely to be popular because their interactions with peers are fre-
quent and competent have temperaments that are neither inhibited nor impulsive
(Corapci, 2008).
As in other areas of development, temperament interacts with experience to pre-
dict peer status. Children are more likely to be rejected by their peers if they are
exposed to high levels of conflict between their parents and have a temperament
that is low in effortful control (David & Murphy, 2007). They are more likely to
become socially withdrawn if their mothers are negative and they have a shy tem-
perament (Hane et al., 2008).
Some behaviors related to peer interactions may even map onto neural-based sys-
tems; namely, the Behavioral Activation System (BAS) and the Behavioral Inhibition
System (BIS). Children high on BAS tend to approach peers and social interactions,
whereas children high on BIS tend to avoid peers and social interactions. Research
indicates that socially competent children who interact well with peers tend to be
high on BAS and low on BIS (Kingsbury et al., 2013). Evidence that peer status has
biological underpinnings has also been shown in studies of children’s hormone lev-
els (lower levels of trait cortisol are associated with poor-quality peer relationships;
Booth et al., 2008) and heart rate (better regulation of heart rate is related to higher
peer status; Graziano et al., 2007).

Social-cognitive skills Children are more likely to be accepted by their peers if

they have the social knowledge and skill to ask new acquaintances for information
(“Where do you live?”), offer information (“My favorite sport is basketball”), or
invite other children to join them in an activity (“Wanna help me build this fort?”)
(Putallaz & Gottman, 1981). These children are comfortable in new social situa-
tions and want to interact with other children, feel confident that they have some-
thing useful to contribute, and act interested in learning what others in the group
 Peer Status  311

are like. Children who have a better understanding of other people’s mental states
and more awareness of their emotions and motives are less likely to be anxious
and withdrawn or aggressive and disruptive than children who lack this knowledge
(Hoglund et al., 2008). Children who lack social skills and hover silently on the out-
skirts of the group or make aggressive or inappropriate remarks are behind from
the beginning.
Approaching a new social situation is similar to solving a cognitive problem. Chil-
dren approaching a group of peers need to understand the others’ communications
clearly, interpret their behavior accurately, formulate their own goals and strategies
based on these interpretations, make useful decisions about how to act, communicate
clearly to others, and try out and then evaluate their own social strategies. This is quite
a tall order, especially for a young child, and some children are better at it than oth-
ers. To examine the interplay of these skills, Kenneth Dodge devised a model of social
information processing, which we presented in Chapter 1, “Theories,” Figure 1.3.
This model stresses the cognitive steps in evaluating social situations. As children
progress through the steps in the model, they make decisions or take actions that
are accurate or inaccurate, helpful or unhelpful. Here are two hypothetical exam-
ples of what might happen when a child encounters a social situation:

Joni, 7 years old and quite socially competent, sees two girls playing a board game. She
notices that one of the girls smiles at her in a friendly way (step 1, encodes cues). She
thinks that the girl would like her to play (step 2, interprets cues), and decides that
she, too, wants to play with the two girls (step 3, clarifies goals). She reviews possible
actions to accomplish her goal—smile back, ask to join in, just stand there—and consid-
ers how the girls might react to each possible choice (step 4, reviews actions/responses).
Joni decides to make a friendly comment about the girls’ game (step 5, decides). Just
then the smiling girl looks up again, and Joni smiles back and says, “Looks like fun”
(step 6, acts). The girls invite her to play the next game.
Jamie, a 6-year-old boy who is less socially competent, sees two boys playing, but
because he’s looking at their sneakers he misses the friendly look one boy gives him
(step 1, fails to encode the social cue). Jamie decides that the boys are unfriendly
(step 2, incorrectly interprets cues) and wonders what he might do. He thinks of some
things he could say—ask the boys why they don’t ask him to play, call them mean and
ugly—and fails to consider how they might react (step 3, fails to clarify goal; step 4, fails
to review possible acts and responses). Jamie decides on the latter approach (step 5,
decides) and blurts out, “You two are really selfish not to let me play!” (step 6, acts). It’s
no great surprise that the boys ignore him, and eventually he moves off.

Using this model, Dodge compared 5- to 7-year-old children who were rated as
being either socially competent or socially incompetent by their teachers and peers
(Dodge, 1986). The children were shown a videotape of situations similar to the ones
Joni and Jamie encountered in which a child is trying to join the play of two other
children, and asked what they would do in each of five of the steps in the model
(step 3 was omitted in this study). The researchers found that socially incompetent
children were less likely to notice and interpret the cues correctly, generated fewer
competent responses, and chose less-appropriate responses. The researchers then
asked the children to participate in an actual peer-group entry situation with two
children from their class. Children who understood what to do when they viewed
the videotape were better at the real task of gaining entry into the peer group. In
a related study conducted by these researchers, 8- to 10-year-olds were asked how
they would respond to a peer’s provocation (e.g., knocking over a block tower in an
312  Chapter 8 Peers

ambiguous way so the child couldn’t tell if it was accidental or not). Children who
were rated by their teachers or peers as being particularly aggressive showed more
deficits at each step of the social information-processing model and responded less
competently when another child actually provoked them. These studies provide
clear evidence that cognitive skills used to process social information are involved in
children’s interactions with peers. Underlying these specific information-processing
skills may be a broader capacity, namely children’s theory of mind, which we dis-
cussed in Chapter 6, “Self and Other,” (i.e., children’s understanding that people
have mental states such as thoughts, beliefs, and desires that affect their behav-
ior) which is positively linked to children’s social acceptance (Caputi et al., 2012;
Slaughter et al., 2015).
Deficits in social understanding can lead to maladaptive behavior, poor interac-
tions, and reduced peer acceptance. However, the opposite is also true: Peer rejec-
tion can lead to deficits in social information processing (Gifford-Smith & Rabiner,
2004). Dodge and his colleagues (2003) found that children who were rejected by
their peers in kindergarten became less competent in social information processing
by grades 2 and 3. Similarly, children’s not understanding of a faux pas—a social
blunder involving unintentional insult—was observed to lead to increased peer
rejection and, in turn, peer rejection was linked to impaired acquisition of faux pas
understanding (Banerjee et al., 2011). The relations between information process-
ing and peer interactions are reciprocal.

Are children always reflective? Although the social information-processing

model has clear strengths, it does not explain all social interactions with peers. Chil-
dren do not always respond reflectively and thoughtfully; sometimes their behavior
is impulsive or automatic. They make many social decisions outside of conscious
awareness. They might think that they are aware of their decisions, but, in fact,
assessment of brain activity suggests that the decision-making sequence has already
been completed while the child is still thinking about what to do (Klaczynski, 2005).
As children are exposed to social situations, they develop a set of social habits that
they employ when they encounter similar situations. This automaticity of social
behavior has its advantages. It permits a quick response, saves time and cognitive
energy that would otherwise be used deliberating among alternatives, and makes
for a more efficient social life. At the same time, it can lead to problems, espe-
cially if assumptions about the new situation are not correct—for example, if a boy
responds aggressively to a perceived slight by a peer because he assumes the peer
is a bully, even though the peer did not intend to cause harm. In such situations,
children assume that negative or ambiguous behaviors directed toward them are
intentionally hostile and respond without deliberation (Fite et al., 2008; Gifford-
Smith & Rabiner, 2004); their responses have become so scripted and routinized
that conscious reflection plays little part in their behavior.
The step-by-step social information-processing approach may be a better model
for encounters in new situations than in familiar situations or with well-known
peers. Researchers have found that when children respond quickly, they are more
likely to rely on habitual behaviors than when they are given plenty of time to con-
sider their responses (Rabiner et al., 1990). The social information-processing
model may also be more suitable for explaining the reactions of children who
are by temperament more reflective, rational, and deliberative and less useful for
impulsive children (Dodge & Pettit, 2003). Because children’s cognitive assess-
ments and behavioral responses in social situations are influenced by their feel-
ings as well as their thoughts, emotions should also be incorporated into the social
 Peer Status  313

information-processing model (Lemerise & Arsenio, 2000; Lemerise & Maulden,

2010). To illustrate, emotions such as anxiety, fear, and sadness can interfere with
processing of social cues; depressed children, who suffer from these emotions, are
less well accepted by their peers (Kochel et al., 2012).

Children’s goals in social interactions Children’s goals affect their strategies

in social situations, and this, too, is related to their peer status (Asher et al., 2008;
Rodkin et al., 2013). Children who endorse communal goals and want to create or
maintain social relationships are likely to use prosocial strategies and to be accepted
by their peers; children whose goal is to dominate others may choose coercive strate-
gies and be rejected. Researchers have asked children how they would respond in
hypothetical social situations, such as, “Your family has moved to a new town and
this is your first day at a new school. Recess starts, and the children go out to play.
What would you like to do?” High-status, popular children offer positive goals and
strategies. For example, they say they would like to make friends with the children
in the schoolyard and they would ask the children to play. They describe outgoing
and sociable behaviors to achieve this goal. In contrast, low-status, rejected children
are more likely to describe hostile goals and strategies and to say that they would try
to avoid the situation—for instance, “I’d probably just go play outside by myself.”
Socially withdrawn children pursue low-cost social goals and use indirect strategies
to initiate social interactions, for example, asking “Could you look at this?” rather
than coming out and saying “Can I play with you?” Goals also shape how children
respond to routine negative altercations such as hitting and name calling. Children
whose goals focus on developing harmonious relationships react with more adaptive
coping strategies including engagement, problem solving, and advice seeking. Chil-
dren whose goal is to solicit social status engage in responses that are less effective,
including less-effortful engagement, less-effortful problem solving, and retaliation.
These responses are likely to encourage further altercations and not improve social
relationships (Rudolph et al., 2011). Sometimes children have mixed social goals.
Children who are high in perceived popularity, for example, might have the mixed
goals of wanting to be popular and wanting to dominate and influence their peers.
They achieve these mixed goals by a combination of prosocial behavior and manipu-
lative or socially savvy behavior (Caravita & Cillessen, 2012; La Fontana & Cillessen,
2010) or even aggressive behavior (Cillessen & Bellmore, 2011; Rodkin et al., 2013).

Physical appearance Another factor that influences children’s peer status is

how they look. When adults meet for the first time at a party or a bar, they base their
initial appraisals on superficial physical characteristics. Children do this too. Even
newborns, when they are shown photos of unfamiliar faces that have been judged by
adults to be “attractive” or “unattractive,” look more at the attractive ones (Langlois
et al., 2000; Slater et al., 2000). Three-year olds show the same preference, choosing
attractive faces over unattractive ones (Langlois, 1986).
Adults also tend to attribute positive qualities to people who are physically attrac-
tive, and children do this as well (Langlois & Stephan, 1981; Langlois et al., 2000).
Children expect to find characteristics such as friendliness, fearlessness, and will-
ingness to share in good-looking peers, and they expect unattractive children to be
aggressive, antisocial, and mean. Have these expectations any basis in reality? Judith
Langlois and her colleagues (2000) reported research that indeed confirms these
expectations and even suggests that attractiveness may be more important than we
thought. In a number of studies, even people who knew them well judged attrac-
tive children more positively than unattractive children. They were rated higher on
314  Chapter 8 Peers

social appeal, interpersonal competence, and psychological adjustment. Objective

observers also found them to be better adjusted. The attractive children were also
more popular (Langlois et al., 2000). This link between attractiveness and popular-
ity has been confirmed in other studies as well. When African American children in
grades 4 and 7 were asked what makes a boy or a girl popular, physical appearance
was one of the characteristics they mentioned most often in one study (Xie et al.,
2006). As one 12-year-old boy said,

“I really like kids who are good lookin’ and buff; they’re cool!”

Thirteen-year-olds’ perceptions of their own unattractiveness was related to their

feeling less accepted by their peers in a second study (Radiukiewicz & Dzielska,
2010). In a third study, children and adolescents described obese peers as less attrac-
tive and rated them as less liked (Zeller et al., 2008). And in a fourth study, children
in a weight-loss program reported increases in social acceptance after successful
weight reduction (Nguyen et al., 2012). Nor does the impact of physical appear-
ance cease after childhood since even college teachers who are viewed as attrac-
tive receive higher student ratings in comparison to their less attractive colleagues
(Hamermesh & Parker, 2005).

Blending in Another factor that affects peer status is children’s ability to blend in.
Children who look or act odd are unlikely to be popular; children with disruptive
or hyperactive behavior are likely to be rejected (Mrug et al., 2009; Pedersen et al.,
2007; Stenseng et al., 2016). Some researchers argue that the reason peers reject
socially withdrawn children is that they don’t fit in; their demeanor runs contrary
to age-specific norms and expectations for social interaction (Rubin et al., 2009,
2015). Atypical behavior becomes more salient to the peer group as children get
older, which might explain why the association between social withdrawal and peer
rejection increases with age (Ladd, 2006).
Even unusual names sometimes mean being “odd person out.” Children learn
very quickly which names are popular and thus acceptable or desirable. As a result,
they’re more likely to be friendly to a peer with a name that’s familiar, such as
Michelle or Michael, Jennifer or Jason, than to a child with a name that’s currently
out of favor, such as Horace or Myrtle (Rubin, Bukowski, et al., 2015). They like
children with gender-typical names rather than names that are usually given to
the opposite sex; pity the boys named Ashley, Alexis, Courtney, and Shelby (Figlio,
2007). They also prefer peers who play in what other children consider acceptable
ways. When children violate gender-role patterns, they are not so popular. Children
who have gender-atypical attributes—boys who are overly dependent, are wimpy,
or can’t regulate their expressions of sadness; girls who are overly independent or
uncontrolled—are less accepted by their peers (Bakker et al, 2011; Perry-Parrish &
Zeman, 2011). Moreover, having friends who feel pressure to conform to gender
norms leads young adolescents to feel that pressure themselves (Korienko et al.,
2016). High school students who were nonconventional in their appearance and
mannerisms also were less accepted by their peers than those who conformed to
social conventions (Horn, 2007).
Wearing the right clothes also makes a difference. In one study, 8- to 12-year-olds
in Britain said that children who wore name-brand athletic shoes would be more
popular and able to fit in with their peers better than children wearing generic
athletic shoes (Elliott & Leonard, 2004). They also claimed that they would prefer
to talk to these children.
 Peer Status  315

Children from a majority ethnic group are more popular too; they blend in
because they are similar to most of their classmates. In a study of 7th graders in
Indonesia, for example, boys in the two majority ethnic groups (Sundanese and
Javanese) were less lonely than boys in minority groups (Eisenberg et al., 2009). In
a study of U.S. children in child care, similarly, children who lacked peers with a
shared ethnic heritage struggled with peer interactions (Howes et al., 2008).

Consequences of Peer Rejection

Children have many unpleasant ways of expressing their dislike of their peers. In
one study of children in grades 3 through 6, children were creative and cruel in the
ways they rejected disliked peers (Asher et al., 2001). They shunned them (“Let’s go
to my house so we can get away from Frankie.”), controlled them (“Get away from
me, Josh!”), said mean things about them (“I really can’t stand Janie. She gives me
the creeps.”), denied them access to others (“You aren’t in the club—we don’t need
you.”), and attacked them directly by hitting or saying things such as “You know
what you got in your brain? A load of bricks.” When children are rejected by their
peers, effects can be dismal. We discuss some of these effects in this section.

What determines how children react to rejection? Children respond to being

rejected by their peers in different ways, depending on their characteristics (Asher
et al., 2001; see Table 8.3). They are more likely to interpret ambiguous comments
as rejection and respond with distress if they are sensitive to rejection and frequently
receive negative feedback. They are less likely to interpret ambiguous comments as
rejection if they are self-confident and approach social situations in a positive way
rather than dreading that they won’t measure up. Children who maintain a sense of

TABLE 8.3

What Determines How Children React to Rejection?

Rejection Characteristic Response
Clarity of the rejecting child’s If the rejecting child’s intention is unclear—for example, in a noisy cafeteria, where
communication it is difficult to tell whether the rejecting child is ignoring or simply didn’t hear the
rejected child—more sensitive children will react as if they have been rejected.
Identity of the rejecting child When the rejecting child is a close friend or family member, the rejected child is likely
to be more distressed than if the rejecting child is a casual acquaintance.
Personality of the rejected A rejected child who broods over slights attributes negative events to his or her own
child inadequacies rather than to external causes, believes that his or her abilities or char-
acteristics can’t be changed, or approaches social situations as a test of his or her own
“okayness” rather than as an opportunity to meet new people and learn new things is
more likely to be distressed by perceived rejection.
Behavior of the rejected child The rejected child’s response to rejection can influence the intensity and duration of
the rejecting behavior; for example, responding vengefully or failing to stand up for
oneself can make a situation worse. Children who respond with humor can turn the
rejection into something funny and thus gain the rejecting child’s acceptance.
Social support of the rejected A rejected child who has friends and other sources of support can cope with rejection
child more easily.
Consistency of the rejection A rejected child who experiences rejection frequently and consistently is more likely to
expect and even anticipate it.

Source: Adapted from Asher et al., 2001.

316  Chapter 8 Peers

humor and respond in a joking or playful way to a peer’s rebuff can often turn the
situation around and gain the acceptance they seem at first to be denied, whereas
children who react aggressively or shrink back and fail to stand up for themselves
are likely to find themselves rejected again and again. Children’s reactions to rejec-
tion depend on who is doing the rejecting as well. Rejection is more hurtful if it
comes from a peer the child is close to or admires.

et You Thought That . . .: Names Would Never Hurt You

Remember your mother telling et al., 2003). They were told that they were
you “sticks and stones may break playing Cyberball against two other players on
your bones but names will never the Internet. When these other “players”
hurt you”? Bet you thought she excluded the study participants from the game,
was right. the participants’ functional magnetic reso-
If you did, you (and your mom) nance imaging (fMRI) records showed
were wrong. Being called names or rejected in increased activity in the anterior cingulate
other ways by peers is undeniably painful. More cortex—a brain area that is linked to the uncom-
than 2000 years ago, Aristotle wrote that “without fortable feeling of physical pain. The more the
friends no one would choose to live,” and in the participants reported that they felt rejected and
centuries since then, writers, musicians, play- distressed in the Cyberball game, the higher
wrights, and poets have all described the pro- was their neural response in this area. The
found human pain that results from the loss or Cyberball participants also showed increased
lack of social bonds. In some countries, social activity in the right ventral prefrontal cortex—a
isolation is used as an extreme form of legal region of the brain associated with regulating
punishment, even interchangeable with the death feelings of pain (Figure 8.3). When there was
penalty. Our everyday language emphasizes the more activity in this neural region, the excluded
pain of broken social bonds and rejection by participants reported feeling less stress.
peers when we speak of “broken hearts” and “hurt Apparently, this area of the brain is involved in
feelings.” Now researchers using neuroimaging reducing the distress of rejection just as it helps
have documented the fact that social rejection people manage the discomfort of physical pain.
hurts and have shown that physical pain and Further investigation by these researchers
social pain have similar neurological bases showed that reactions to being rejected during
(Eisenberger & Lieberman, 2004). a Cyberball game in the virtual world were
In one study, young adults played a ball-­ similar to reactions to social rejection in the real
tossing game on the computer (Eisenberger world (Eisenberger et al., 2007).
Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, 294–300.
alarm system for physical and social pain.

Reproduced with permission of Elsevier.

Why rejection hurts: A common neural
Eisenberger, N.I., & Lieberman, M.D.,
Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8,

FIGURE 8.3 Right ventral prefron-

tal cortex (RVPFC) activation is
associated with social pain regula-
tion and physical pain regulation.
 Peer Status  317

Short- and long-term consequences of rejection Being rejected can lead to

both short-term and long-term problems. Loneliness is one of the immediate prob-
lems (Kochenderfer & Ladd, 1996). Rejected children often report feeling lonely;
they are more likely to feel socially isolated and alienated than children of any other
peer status. Here are some examples of how rejected and lonely children feel (the
first two examples are from Hayden et al., 1988; the third example is from a Web
site where people describe things they believed when they were children, http://
iusedtobelieve.com/):

“Today everybody’s going to Mary Ann’s party. I’m the one that gets left behind. I’m not
invited to the party so I won’t do anything on the weekend. Anywhere the whole group
goes, I don’t. I’m just the person that gets left back. Maybe they don’t realize that I get
left, that I’m there, but it happens all the time.”
“It was a Sunday. All the stores were closed. Jason, a friend, had to go to his aunt’s.
I decided to call on Jamie, but no one was home. I went to turn on the TV and only
church stuff was on. I went upstairs to play, but it was so boring. The dog was behind the
couch so I didn’t want to bother him. Mom was sleeping. My sister was babysitting. It
wasn’t my day. There was no one to talk to or play with, nothing to listen to.”
“I was very lonely when I was little, so I used to make-believe myself a lot of friends.
I used to stare up into the sun or lightbulbs to get the colorful splotches in my eyes.
I thought this was them. When they faded away, I was sad.”

Nonaggressive-rejected children and adolescents typically feel lonelier than

aggressive-rejected children (Parkhurst & Asher, 1992; Woodhouse et al., 2012).
The major reason that rejected adolescents are lonely is lack of peer acceptance
(Vanhalst et al., 2014; Woodhouse et al., 2012). However, it helps to have at least
one friend. Rejected children who have a stable friendship with even one other
child are likely to feel less lonely than totally friendless children (Parker & Asher,
1993; Sanderson & Siegal, 1991). As well as feeling lonely, children whose peers
reject them tend to have difficulties in school; they have poorer-quality relation-
ships with their teachers and more trouble with their grades (Parker & Asher, 1987;
Rubin et al., 2009). They are less active and cooperative in the classroom (Ladd
et al., 2008) and more likely to drop out of school entirely and to develop patterns
of criminal activity (Nelson & Dishion, 2004). They are likely to develop behavioral
and emotional problems, including anxiety, embarrassment, guilt, depressive symp-
toms, and low self-esteem (Hoglund et al., 2008; Klima & Repetti, 2008; Leary, 2015;
Nesdale & Lambert, 2008; Pedersen et al., 2007). They can even develop physical
health problems (Brendgen & Vitaro, 2008).

esearch Up Close: When “Love Thine Enemy” Fails

Mutual antipathy is the feeling one antipathetic relationship at any given time
people have when they dislike or (Card, 2010). In a study of 5,000 children in the
even hate each other. This kind of Netherlands, 5th and 8th graders nominated the
mutual dislike can be the result classmates they liked least. Boys were more likely
of many factors including than girls to have mutual dislikes with same-­
perceived insults, slights, conflicts, unresolved gender peers; children with same-gender antipa-
disputes, and relationships that have gone sour thies were likely to be antisocial, to fight and bully,
and ended badly (Rubin et al., 2015). About one or to be victimized (Abecassis et al., 2002). Not
in three children and adolescents have at least surprisingly, rejected and controversial children
318  Chapter 8 Peers

are more likely to be involved in these kinds of adjustment and academic performance
relationships than popular and average children (Hembree & Vandell, 2000). Having enemies in
(Rodkin & Hodges, 2003). Moreover, antipathies preadolescence foreshadows later problems in
are often specific to pairs of individuals. For adolescence: Boys who had same-gender mutual
example, children who bully another child are antipathies at age 10 were more likely to have
often disliked by the target or victim of their problems with substance addiction and delin-
bullying behavior and vice versa, although the quency in adolescence; for girls, same-gender
rest of the peer group may not actively dislike the antipathies predicted lower achievement
bully or victim (Hafen et al., 2013). Just as we will (Abecassis et al., 2002).
see below in the case of close friendships, Antipathetic relationships differ in terms of their
mutual enemies are often between two spe- relationship histories. A substantial number of
cific children. antipathies are between former friends; others
Children with mutual antipathies expect the are between peers who never liked each other.
worst from their disliked peers: 10-year-olds in a Antipathetic relationships between former friends
study in Estonia, for example, attributed more involve features such as violations of intimacy
hostility and expected more hostile responses rules (e.g., divulging confidential information)
when their partner was an enemy rather than a and efforts at reconciliation; antipathetic relation-
neutral peer (Peets et al., 2007). Mutual antipa- ships between children who were never friends
thies can also have negative effects on children’s may arise from rivalry or competition and involve
development: The more numerous the child’s features such as annoyance and frustration
antipathies, the poorer the child’s social-­emotional (Casper & Card, 2010).

Splash News and Pictures/Newscom

Occasionally peer rejection can have short-term negative
consequences and long-term positive consequences. In mid-
dle school, George Clooney developed Bell’s palsy, a debili-
tating condition that partially paralyzes the face. His left eye
closed and he was unable to eat or drink properly, earning
the nickname Frankenstein. “That was the worst time of my
life,” he says. “You know how cruel kids can be. I was mocked
and taunted, but the experience made me stronger.”

nsights from Extremes: From Rejection to Revenge?

On April 20, 1999, at Columbine 9-millimeter semiautomatic pistol, they killed
High School in Littleton, Colorado, 12 students and a teacher and wounded
two high school seniors, Eric 23 others before committing suicide. Their plan
Harris and Dylan Klebold, carried was to plant bombs in the cafeteria and shoot
out one of the worst massacres survivors of the blast as they escaped. This plot
in U.S. history. Using home-made bombs, sawed- was planned for more than a year. Why did these
off shotguns, a semiautomatic rifle, and a boys plot, plan, and execute this attack?
 Peer Status  319

According to some observers, Eric and Dylan watching violent films, such as Natural Born
were isolated, excluded from school cliques, and Killers (Block, 2007). Most significantly, the boys
bullied (Kass, 2000). When one Columbine also suffered from mental health problems. A
student, an athlete, was asked how the school journalist’s examination of the boys’ diaries
treated the two shooters, his reply pointed to (Cullen, 2009) characterized Dylan as an angry,
peer rejection: “Sure, we teased them. But what erratic depressive and Eric as a sadistic psycho-
do you expect if you come to school with weird path who dehumanized their peers as “robots,”
hairdos? It’s not just jocks; the whole school was “zombies,” and “sheep” and designed their
disgusted with them. They’re a bunch of homos, massacre to demonstrate their own innate
grabbing each other’s private parts. If you want superiority.
to get rid of someone, usually you tease ’em. So A number of insights have been gained from
the whole school would call them homos, and this tragedy and other mass shootings on high
when they did something sick, we’d tell them, school campuses. School administrators and
‘You’re sick and that’s wrong’” (Gibbs & teachers have learned that they need to pay
Roche, 1999). more attention to students’ interactions, and
But the Columbine massacre was not simply more school programs have been developed
the result of peer rejection leading to revenge. to reduce and prevent bullying (Juvonen et al.,
Brooks Brown, one of the survivors of the massa- 2003). Schools have instituted zero-tolerance
cre, suggests that there was a perfect storm of policies against weapons on school grounds.
factors at the school leading to the attack, Parents have learned that they should look for
including students who were bullies, teachers warning signs in their children’s activities and
who were bullies, teachers who allowed bullies, behavior. Advocates have pleaded for stricter
and a school administration that did nothing gun-control laws and increased control over
about it (Simon, 1999). In addition, Eric and violent media fare. Researchers have con-
Dylan had access to guns and bomb-making ducted studies on the destructive role of peer
components and spent many hours playing rejection, the results of which inform
violent video games, such as Doom, and this chapter.

Can peer status change? In general, children’s peer status is quite stable over
time. Popular children do sometimes lose their high status, and neglected chil-
dren occasionally gain some social acceptance, but rejected children are unlikely
to change their social status (Coie & Dodge, 1983). In part, this stability is the
result of reputational bias, the tendency of children to interpret peers’ behavior
on the basis of past encounters and impressions (Hymel et al., 1990). When chil-
dren are asked to judge peers’ negative behavior, they are likely to excuse a child
whom they earlier liked, giving that child the benefit of the doubt, but they do not
excuse a peer whom they didn’t like. Reputation colors children’s interpretations
of peers’ actions and helps account for the stability of children’s status across time
(Denham & Holt, 1993; Hymel, 1986). However, reputation is not the only con-
tributor to stability of peer status. The behavior and characteristics of the children
themselves also contribute. Proving this point, when researchers brought boys
together and assigned them to new social groups, the boys tended to attain the
same peer status as they’d had before—even though the boys in their new groups
had no knowledge of their earlier reputations (Coie et al., 1990). Boys who had
been widely accepted before were popular again; boys who’d been rejected con-
tinued their depressing isolation.
320  Chapter 8 Peers

Promoters of Peer Acceptance

Clearly, it would be a good idea if psychologists could figure out a way to help chil-
dren with low social status improve their social skills and gain acceptance among
their peers. It would also be good to figure out how to encourage popular children
to be more inclusive of socially inept peers. Some people believe that early training
in social skills can help children find ways to celebrate each other’s strengths and
offer support for each other’s weaknesses. Parents, teachers, and peers are possible
sources of such training.

Parents as Promoters of Peer Acceptance

Parents can help their children develop better peer relationships in a variety of ways
(McDowell & Parke, 2009; Parke & O’Neil, 2000). They can be teachers, coaches,
and social arrangers for their children’s peer interactions. They can also interact
with their children in ways that demonstrate and promote positive social behaviors.

Parents as positive partners Researchers have documented strong links between

children’s relationships with their parents and their relationships with peers, sug-
gesting that when mothers and fathers are trusted partners, children are more likely
to acquire social-interaction skills (McDowell & Parke, 2009; Parke et al., 2004).
When relationships with parents are full of mutual warmth, acceptance, reciproc-
ity, and agreeableness, children are more prosocial and empathic with their peers
and—as a consequence—are better liked; when relationships with parents are nega-
tive and controlling, children are less liked by their peers and have lower peer status
(Clark & Ladd, 2000; Feldman et al., 2013; Grimes et al., 2004). These findings are
evident in a variety of countries such as Israel, Great Britain, Australia, and the Neth-
erlands (Feldman & Masalha, 2010; Kretschmer et al., 2016). Children who have
emotionally secure attachments to their parents are more socially competent and
develop better friendships with peers (Groh et al., 2014; Lindsey et al., 2009; Lucas-
Thompson & Clarke-Stewart, 2007; McElwain et al., 2008). They are less lonely and
have better social problem-solving skills (Raikes & Thompson, 2008).
In one study, children who were securely attached when they were 1 year old
were more socially competent with peers in elementary school; this forecast more
secure relationships with close friends at age 16, which, in turn, predicted less nega-
tive affect in conflict resolution and collaborative tasks with romantic partners in
adulthood (Simpson et al., 2007). Latino American children from homes high in
familism (i.e., strong family-oriented values) are less negatively influenced by devi-
ant peers than children from less-family-oriented homes (Roosa et al., 2011).
Withdrawn children’s parents are often overprotective, overcontrolling, and
intrusive (Coplan et al., 2004; Lieb et al., 2000; Parke et al., 2004; Rubin et al.,
2015). These parenting behaviors are thought to reinforce children’s feelings of
insecurity, resulting in a transactional cycle of hopelessness and helplessness in the
children and overcontrol and protection from the parents (Rapee, 1997; Wood
et al., 2003). A similar transactional process would account for reciprocal relations
between aggressive-rejected children and their parents (Dodge, Coie, et al., 2006;
Rubin et al., 2015).
The specific social skills that children learn through interactions with their par-
ents include encoding and decoding emotions, regulating emotions, making accu-
rate judgments about people’s intentions and behavior, and solving social problems
 Promoters of Peer Acceptance  321

(Eisenberg et al., 2010; Ladd, 2005; McDowell & Parke, 2005; Parke et al., 2006).
The ability to encode and decode emotional signals is acquired to some extent
in the context of parent–child play, especially arousing physical play (Parke et al.,
2004). Through physically playful interaction with their parents, especially fathers,
children learn how to decode social and emotional signals and how to use emo-
tional signals to regulate other people’s behavior. This ability to decode and encode
emotional expressions is related to children’s social competence with peers (Castro
et al., 2016; Halberstadt et al., 2001). Children’s ability to regulate their own emo-
tional arousal is also related to their social competence with peers (Eisenberg et al.,
2010; Parke et al., 2006; Rogers et al., 2016). Attentional abilities, which are critical
for noticing and tracking interactive partners’ social cues, constitute a third set of
skills acquired in the family. Children of socially responsive and warm parents have
better attentional abilities and, in turn, higher peer competence in first and third
grades (NICHD Early Child Care Research Network, 2009).
Children also learn how to interact with their peers by observing their parents’
interactions. Children whose parents have a more loving, intimate spousal rela-
tionship express these qualities in their own best friendships (Lucas-Thompson &
Clarke-Stewart, 2007). Adolescents whose parents are frequently in conflict are less
likely to be accepted by their peers, have fewer friends, and express negative quali-
ties in their best friendships (Vairami & Vorria, 2007). They also express more hos-
tility in their romantic relationships (Stocker & Richmond, 2007).

Emma, age 19, offered this reflection: “My boyfriend, Ben, and I fight a lot, just like
my mom and dad did, and Ben’s parents always argued too before they split up. I guess
that’s where we learned how to deal with our issues.”

However, if parents model constructive strategies for resolving spousal conflict,

such as reasoning, calm discussion, backing up arguments with information, and
bringing in someone else to help resolve their problems, their children develop
less-conflicted relationships with their peers and even have more affectionate and
satisfying romantic relationships when they are 20 years old (Miga et al., 2012).
How do children transfer the strategies they acquire in the family to their inter-
actions with peers? Some psychologists have suggested that they develop internal
mental representations that guide their behavior, referred to as working models
(Bretherton & Munholland, 2016), scripts, or cognitive maps (Grusec & Ungerer,
2003). In one study, researchers found that children with more affectionate, respon-
sive parents had more positive mental models (consisting of positive goals, construc-
tive problem-solving strategies, and nonhostile attributions in response to dilemmas
about their parents and peers), and these children were better liked than children
with less positive mental models (Rah & Parke, 2008).

Parents as coaches and teachers No one is more eager for children to learn
social skills than their parents. Thus, it is not surprising that parents also promote
their children’s social abilities and peer acceptance by direct instruction. Parents
can prepare their children for successful and satisfying social relationships through
specific coaching and teaching (Ladd & Pettit, 2002; Lollis et al., 1992). They can
reinforce children’s social behavior by praising and rewarding their best attempts
and suggesting alternative approaches when their efforts fail. They can teach chil-
dren a general concept or strategy, give examples of successful behaviors, and then
guide the child through multiple rehearsals of a particular action. They can review
the child’s rehearsals and show the child how to evaluate his or her own behavior.
322  Chapter 8 Peers

In this way, parents can advise their children about helpful approaches for interact-
ing with peers, direct them to the most useful social strategies, and support them as
they try out new ideas.
Of course, this kind of coaching works only when parents themselves are socially
skilled or are following a prepared script. In an Australian study, researchers found
clear differences between the coaching methods used by mothers of children with
high peer status and mothers of children with low peer status (Finnie & Russell,
1988; Russell & Finnie, 1990). Mothers of high-status children generally suggested
positive social strategies, for example, that children propose alternative actions
when they couldn’t agree with another child. These mothers also suggested more
rule-oriented strategies, for example, that children propose turn-taking instead of
fighting over toys. In contrast, mothers of low-status children tended to suggest
avoidance strategies, for example, that children ignore peers’ unfriendly behavior,
or they suggested nonspecific tactics, such as just “getting to know” the other child
or “staying out of trouble.” When they actually joined in the children’s activities,
the two groups of mothers showed different levels of social skill. The mothers of
high-status children encouraged communication among the children generally and
actively helped their own child join in conversation. The mothers of low-status chil-
dren often took control of a game, disrupted the children’s play, or simply avoided
supervising the group.
Equally important for promoting children’s social abilities and peer acceptance
are the behaviors parents model when they interact with other adults and children.
Children observe everything their parents do and say, and they pick up on their
parents’ social ways. They watch as their parents demonstrate polite requests and
ask interested questions or make rude interjections and egocentric demands. It’s
easy for parents to forget this; they have to be “on” all the time if they expect their
children to imitate their positive social behaviors, not their negative “mistakes.”

Parents as social arrangers and monitors Another way parents can promote
their children’s relations with peers is by giving them opportunities for peer interac-
tion (Ladd, 2005). The first step may be selecting housing in a neighborhood where
children can find suitable playmates and there are good facilities for children’s play.
This does not necessarily mean the richest neighborhood in town. In one study,
researchers discovered that children’s peer relations were not as easy or abundant
in an affluent neighborhood as they were in a low-income neighborhood (Berg &
Medrich, 1980; Medrich, 1981). In the well-to-do community, children lived so far
apart that their parents had to chauffeur them around to preplanned social events,
and many children had only one or two friends. In the low-income urban neigh-
borhood, peers were plentiful and lived nearby, play tended to be more spontane-
ous and frequent, and each child typically had four or five close friends. In violent
communities, however, children are deficient in their emotion-regulation skills and
more likely to be rejected by their peers (Kelly et al., 2008). If children live in unsafe
neighborhoods, parents need to act as social arrangers by monitoring their chil-
dren’s activities and choice of playmates (Brody et al., 2001; Leventhal et al., 2015;
O’Neil et al., 2001).
Being good social arrangers is particularly important for parents of very young
children. It’s up to them to schedule play dates, enroll their children in organ-
ized activities, and send them to child care. This effort pays off. Comparing the
social activities of children whose parents were good arrangers with those of chil-
dren whose parents did not facilitate peer contacts, Gary Ladd and his colleagues
found that the boys whose parents initiated peer contacts for their sons had a clear
 Promoters of Peer Acceptance  323

advantage: They had a larger range of playmates, had more frequent play compan-
ions outside school, and were better liked by their peers than boys whose parents
did not make these efforts (Ladd & Golter, 1988; Ladd & Pettit, 2002). Continued
efforts by parents to arrange social opportunities for their children may also be
valuable. Involvement in religious institutions is one way parents can provide their
older children with opportunities to gain valuable experiences with peers. In one
study, adolescents who were involved in church in the eighth grade had better peer
relationships in the 12th grade (Elder & Conger, 2000).

Being a social arranger can be a time-consuming task. As Aiden’s mother lamented, “If
a mother’s place is in the home, how come I spend so much time in the car. Sometimes,
I feel more like a chauffeur than a mother.”

Each of the three parental strategies we have discussed—having positive parent–

child interactions, giving good advice, and arranging social events—is important,
and all three strategies taken together provide the strongest prediction of children’s
social competence and social acceptance (McDowell & Parke, 2009).
One final way that parents can promote their children’s positive peer relations
is by monitoring their activities. Researchers have found that school-age children
whose parents monitored their social activities became less rejected by their peers
(Sandstrom & Coie, 1999), and if their parents were well informed about the chil-
dren’s peer relationships and activities, the children had closer and more stable
peer relationships (Krappmann, 1986). In adolescence, parents’ monitoring shifts
from direct involvement to more remote checking in, but it continues to be impor-
tant. Adolescents whose parents fail to monitor their activities with peers are more
likely to engage in delinquent behavior and have poorer mental health (Hair et al.,
2008; Tilton-Weaver et al., 2013). They are more likely to associate with deviant
peers (Knoester et al., 2006).
Monitoring children’s activities is not just the parents’ job, though; it is a shared
responsibility (Kerr & Stattin, 2000; Laird et al., 2003). Parents’ ability to monitor their
children relies on the extent to which the children are willing to share information
about their activities and companions (Mounts, 2000; Smetana, 2008). In one study
of high-risk adolescents, researchers found that these young people often actively
thwarted their parents’ monitoring attempts (Schell, 1996). For example, they misled
their parents about where they were going, making it difficult for the parents to track
their activities. Parents are more likely to know about their children’s activities if the
children are sociable and expressive (Crouter et al., 1999). For parental monitor-
ing to be successful, parents must be realistic about their children’s abilities to take
responsibility and regulate their impulses, and children must see the parents’ supervi-
sion as fair. In fact, when parents are too restrictive, prohibiting their children from
associating with certain friends, their efforts may be ineffective or worse, transform-
ing forbidden friends into forbidden fruit (Tilton-Weaver et al., 2013). When Dutch
mothers and fathers clamped down on their teenagers’ friendships, the teens’ contact
with deviant peers increased and they engaged in more delinquent behavior (Keijsers
et al., 2012). Being too restrictive can sometimes backfire.

When parents fail: peer rejection of abused children Parental abuse of chil-
dren is likely to interfere with children’s development of good peer relationships.
Researchers have found that chronically abused children are more likely to be
rejected by their peers, and the more extensive the abuse, the greater the rejec-
tion (see Figure 8.4; Bolger & Patterson, 2001; Cicchetti & Toth, 2015). Abused
324  Chapter 8 Peers

Percent of children
Never rejected
80 Rejected during 1 year
Rejected during 2 or more years

60

40

FIGURE 8.4 Abused children are often rejected, and

the longer the abuse continues, the more likely and 20
lengthy is the rejection.
Source: Bolger, K. E., & Patterson, C. J. (2001). Developmental
pathways from child maltreatment to peer rejection. Child
Development, 72, 549–568. Reprinted with permission 0
of the Society for Research in Child Development and
Not abused Up to 5 years 5 or more years
Wiley-Blackwell.
of abuse of abuse

children have difficulty forming and maintaining friendships, especially if the abuse
occurred in the preschool years. Children who are physically abused are likely to
be rejected because they are aggressive. Abused children are also often unable to
regulate their emotions (Cicchetti & Ng, 2014), and this too leads to peer rejection
(Shields et al., 2001). Being abused increases the likelihood that peers will victimize
children, especially boys, just as their parents have (Schwartz et al., 1997). Children
who are neglected by their parents are also more likely to be neglected by their
peers (Bolger et al., 1998; Garbarino & Kostelny, 2002).

Researchers as Promoters of Peer Acceptance

Researchers can help children who are lonely, socially awkward, or withdrawn
improve their social skills and increase their acceptance among their peers
(Bierman & Motamedi, 2015; Bierman & Powers, 2009). In one study, Ladd and his
colleagues taught preschoolers and 3rd graders to use three methods of communi-
cation with their peers: asking questions in a positive tone, offering useful sugges-
tions, and making supportive statements (Ladd, 2005; Mize & Ladd, 1990). Over a
3-week period, children participated in eight sessions, each about an hour long, in
which the adult coach offered instruction and guidance, let the children practice
on their own, and then reviewed the practice sessions with them. Immediately after
these sessions and 4 weeks later, the children’s classroom behavior had improved
and their popularity had increased.
Another way researchers have helped children improve their social skills is by
increasing their self-efficacy. When researchers asked children to explain “what hap-
pened” after their efforts to begin a new relationship with a peer were rebuffed, some
children said there had been a misunderstanding or they simply hadn’t tried hard
enough and expressed confidence that they could succeed the next time (Dweck,
2006, 2017; Goetz & Dweck, 1980). Other children said it was just hard for them to
make friends. The first group of children saw the problem as temporary and fixable;
the second group thought it reflected their lack of ability. To prevent this defeat-
ist thinking, the researchers focused children’s attention on trying out new things
 Promoters of Peer Acceptance  325

rather than viewing failure as a measure of their inability to perform (Erdley et al.,
1997). They divided the children into two groups—a learning-goal group and a
performance-goal group—and told them they were trying out for membership in a
pen pal club. The researchers then told the learning-goal group that the important
thing was that the task would help them “practice and improve” their ways of mak-
ing friends. “Think of it as a chance to work on your skills, and maybe learn some
new ones.” The researchers told the second group that they were interested in “how
good” children were at striking up new friendships: “Think of it as a chance for you
to see how good you are at making friends.” The children given the learning goal
were more persistent and ultimately more successful than the children given the
performance goal. This is consistent with Bandura’s social self-efficacy theory, which
we discussed in Chapter 1, and with other research showing that children who have
higher social self-efficacy are more likely to persist even when they face initial rejec-
tion and failure (Ladd, 2005).
Researchers also can teach children who are not accepted by their peers how
to cooperate, be responsive communicators, support or validate other children’s
ideas and actions, and play games and sports (Asher & Hopmeyer, 2001). Rejected
children need to be taught specific social skills because they are not likely to know
how to interact with others or to try very hard to do so. They are generally not very
prosocial, helpful, or cooperative in their peer interactions and tend to be negative,
withdrawn, and unresponsive. Anxiety and fear of rejection may prevent them from
risking friendly overtures. Games and sports offer useful contexts for teaching chil-
dren these skills and a chance to develop and display the kinds of competence that
can gain them social acceptance. Here is an example of a research coach teaching a
child about cooperation in a game (Oden & Asher, 1977, p. 500):
Coach: 
Okay, I have some ideas about what makes a game fun to play with another person.
There are a couple things that are important to do. You should cooperate with the
other person. Do you know what cooperation is? Can you tell me in your own words?
Child: Ahh . . . sharing.
Coach: 
Yes, sharing. Okay, let’s say you and I are playing the game you played last time.
What was it again?
Child: Drawing a picture.
Coach: 
Okay, tell me then, what would be an example of sharing when playing the picture-
drawing game?
Child: I’d let you use some pens, too.
Coach: 
Right. You would share the pens with me. That’s an example of cooperation. Now let’s
say you and I are doing the picture-drawing game. Can you also give me an example
of what would not be cooperating?
Child: Taking all the pens.
Coach: Would taking all the pens make the game fun to play?
Child: No.
Coach: 
So you wouldn’t take all the pens. Instead, you’d cooperate by sharing them with
me. Can you think of some more examples of cooperation? [The coach waited for a
response.] Okay, how about taking turns. . . . Let’s say you and I [the coach gives
examples]. Okay, I’d like you to try out some of these ideas when you play [a particu-
lar new game] with [another child]. Let’s go and get [the other child], and after you
play, I’ll talk to you again for a minute or so and you can tell me if these things seem
to be good ideas for having fun at a game with someone.
Researchers trying to improve children’s social acceptance can increase their
effectiveness by following a multifaceted approach, including assistance with
326  Chapter 8 Peers

children’s poor attentional and self-regulatory skills and academic difficulties,

because these problems often accompany peer rejection (Bierman & Motamedi,
2015).

Peers Can Help Too

Peers also can help children improve their social skills and experience increased
peer acceptance. Unpopular children are likely to find it easier to gain acceptance
when they interact with younger, less-threatening children. Harlow first observed
this phenomenon: He found that the negative effects of being isolated from other
monkeys early in life could be reversed by sustained contact with younger monkeys
(Suomi & Harlow, 1972). This finding led researchers to examine the effect that
contact with younger peers had on withdrawn 4- and 5-year-old children (Furman
et al., 1979). As the primate research predicted, the withdrawn children became
more sociable.
Interacting with children of both sexes is another way peers can help. Cross-
gender and same-gender play can introduce boys and girls to a broader range of
behavioral styles and activities. It can expand unpopular children’s pool of potential
friends and promote a better understanding of qualities that both sexes share. In
one study, researchers demonstrated that 3rd and 4th graders who had both cross-
gender and same-gender friendships were more socially skilled and accepted than
children whose only friendships were with peers of the other gender (Kovacs et al.,
1996). Similarly, children may gain peer acceptance when they make the transition
to middle school because it offers them the opportunity to interact with a larger
number and variety of peers (Rubin et al., 2009).

When Peers Become Friends

“We’ll be Friends Forever, won’t we, Pooh?” asked Piglet. “Even longer,” Pooh answered.

Our discussion so far has focused on how well children are accepted by their peers,
typically their classmates. Another important aspect of peer relations is the par-
ticular friendships children form with a few peers. These two kinds of peer rela-
tions are somewhat independent. A child can be rejected or neglected by his or her
classmates but still have at least one friend; another child can be widely accepted by
classmates but lack a close friend (Parker & Asher, 1993).

Age Changes in Friendship

In this section, we discuss how children’s friendships and concepts of friendship
change with age (see Table 8.1 for an overview of developmental changes in
friendships).

Earliest friendships Even 1- and 2-year-old children form rudimentary friendships.

They have preferences for particular playmates, which they express in their positive
and negative give-and-take exchanges (Ross et al., 1992). A clear sign of early friend-
ship formation is that not just any other child will do to hold the doll or pound the
plastic peg. These young children know who their friends are and seek interactions
with these specific peers. Moreover, their preferences are not fleeting: 50 to 70 percent
 When Peers Become Friends  327

of early friendships last more than a year (Howes, 1996), and in some cases several
years (Dunn, 2005).
During the preschool years, children form friendships based on similarities of
age, gender, and even ethnicity and become friends with peers who show behavior
tendencies similar to their own (Barron, 2011). Highly active children seek each
other out, and quieter children pal around. This tendency to associate with similar
others is called homophily, which means “love of the same” (Ryan, 2001). Even at
this young age, children behave differently with friends and nonfriends: They direct
more social overtures to friends, cooperate more with them, and show more posi-
tive behaviors toward them (Dunn, 2005; Dunn et al., 2002). Their friendships are
marked by support and exclusivity (Sebanc, Kearns, Hernandez, & Galvin, 2007).

When Matt’s best friend, another 3-year-old boy, left the day care group, Matt was weepy
for several days every time he thought about it. He had to be reassured often that he
could still play with his friend—“my Robbie”—on weekends.

Older preschoolers are more likely than younger preschoolers to participate in

reciprocated friendships. However, as many as one-quarter of children do not form
friendships in the preschool period (Dunn, 1993; Sebanc et al., 2007). Children who
are more successful in forming friendships have more advanced social-­cognitive
abilities, including perspective-taking ability, understanding of other people’s social
intentions, ability to read other peoples’ emotions, and regulation of their own
emotional states. Although relationships in the preschool period do not carry the
same psychological meaning as later friendships do, they may lay the groundwork
for friendships throughout childhood (Dunn, 2005; Ladd, 2005).

Changing friendship goals As children grow up, the goals and processes
involved in forming friendships change (see Table 8.4; Parker & Gottman, 1989).
Although across development youths’ friendship choices are guided by homophily

TABLE 8.4

Developmental Changes in Friendship Concerns

Main Processes and ­Purposes
Age Primary Concerns of Communication Emotional Development
Early childhood To maximize excitement, To coordinate play, escalate and To learn to manage arousal
(3–7 years) entertainment, and enjoyment de-escalate play activity, talk during interaction
through play about activities, and resolve
conflicts
Middle To be included by peers, avoid To share negative gossip with To acquire rules for
childhood rejection, and present oneself others ­showing feelings
(8–12 years) to others in a positive way
Adolescence To explore, know, and define To disclose oneself to others and To integrate logic and emo-
(13–17 years) oneself to solve problems tion and understand the
implications of emotions
for relationships

Source: Gottman, J. M., & Mettetal, G. (1986). Speculations on social and affective development: Friendship and acquaintanceship through adoles-
cence. In J. M. Gottman & J. G. Parker (Eds.), The conversations of friends (p. 237). New York: Cambridge University Press.
328  Chapter 8 Peers

in that they are attracted to peers who are similar to themselves, the criteria chil-
dren use to define which peers are similar shift in ways that reflect the attributes
youth value in peers at different ages. For children ages 3 to 7, the goal is coordi-
nated play, and all of the children’s social processes are organized to promote suc-
cessful and fun playful interactions. For children ages 8 to 12, the goal changes to
concern about being accepted by same-gender peers. Children want to know the
norms of the group so they can figure out which actions will lead to acceptance and
inclusion and which to rejection and exclusion. The most salient social process is
negative gossip, which involves sharing negative information about another child.
When this works well, the partner responds with interest, more negative gossip, and
a feeling of solidarity. For example, here are two girls, Erica and Mikaila, gossiping
about another girl, Katie (Gottman & Mettetal, 1986, p. 204).
Erica:  Katie does lots of weird things. Like, every time she makes a mistake, she says, “Well,
sorry.” (Sarcastic tone)
Mikaila: I know.
Erica: And stuff like that.
Mikaila: 
She’s mean. She beat me up once. (Laughs) I could hardly breathe she hit me in the
stomach so hard.
Erica: She acts like . . .
Mikaila: She’s the boss.
Often gossip is used as a way to establish the norms for the group, and as this
example shows, it is important not to be too aggressive or bossy. In adolescence, the
focus of friendship shifts to self-understanding. Self-exploration and self-disclosure
are the principal social processes, and intense honesty and problem solving accom-
pany them. Adolescents begin to grapple with understanding the meaning of emo-
tions in relationships, especially as dating and romantic relationships become more
common.

Changing friendship expectations Children’s expectations about relationships

with friends also change as they get older (see Table 8.5; Berndt, 2004; Bigelow, 1977;
Schneider, 2000; Smollar & Youniss, 1982). When children are about 7 or 8 years
old, they expect friends to be demographically like them, to provide stimulating

TABLE 8.5

Developmental Changes in Expectations of Friends

Stage Description
Reward–cost stage (grades 2–3) Children expect friends to offer help, share common activities, provide stimulating
ideas, be able to join in organized play, offer judgments, be physically nearby, and
be demographically similar to them.
Normative stage (grades 4–5) Children expect friends to accept and admire them, bring loyalty and commitment to
the friendship, and express similar values and attitudes toward rules and sanctions.
Empathic stage (grades 6–7) Children begin to expect genuineness and the potential for intimacy in their friends;
they expect friends to understand them and be willing to engage in self-disclosure.
They want friends to accept their help, share common interests, and hold similar
attitudes and values across a range of topics.

Source: Bigelow, B. J. (1977). Children’s friendship expectations: A cognitive-developmental study. Child Development, 48, 246–253.
 When Peers Become Friends  329

ideas, offer help, give judgments, share common activities, and be able to join them
in organized play. When they are 9 or 10 years old, children think friends should be
nice to one another and help each other. They expect loyalty and trust. They expect
that friends will accept and admire them, will be committed to the friendship, and
will express values and attitudes toward rules that are like their own. They continue
to expect friends to offer judgments and share common activities. At age 11 or 12,
children still expect friends to accept and admire them, enhance their sense of self-
worth, and be loyal and committed, but they also begin to expect genuineness and
the potential for intimacy. They expect friends to understand them and to be willing
to self-disclose; they want friends to accept their help, share common interests, and
hold attitudes and values like theirs across a range of topics, not just rules. Beyond
age 12, adolescents continue to expect genuineness, the potential for intimacy, and
common interests in their friends, but they also think that it is important for friends
to provide emotional support.

“Trust is everything in a friendship. You tell each other things that you don’t tell any-
one else, how you really feel about personal things. It takes a long time to make a
close friend, so you really feel bad if you find out that she is trying to make other close
friends, too.”
“My best friend and I promised to tell each other about everything—including sex.”

Children in other cultures differ somewhat in their friendship expectations. The

role of friendship in promoting self-worth is less salient in many non-Western cul-
tures where the development of the self is not considered a major developmental
task. Children seldom report the enhancement of self-worth as an important func-
tion of friendship in China (Chen et al., 2004) and Indonesia (French et al., 2005)
or if they have an Arab or Caribbean background (Dayan et al. 2001). Another
cultural difference is that emotional intimacy may be a more common aspect of
friendship expectations in affluent Western cultures; in cultures with subsistence
economies, expectations of instrumental support are more common (Beer, 2001;
Keller, 2004).
Finally, it is important to remember that friendship expectations have conse-
quences not only for the quality of friendships but also for socio-emotional adjust-
ment as well. In a study of 3rd graders who were followed until fifth grade, higher
friendship expectations were found to be associated with more positive friendship
adjustment and better socio-emotional functioning (MacEvoy et al., 2016). Clearly
setting high standards for their friends is adaptive and beneficial for children’s
social lives.

Interactions with Friends

To find out how children actually interact with their friends, John Gottman and
his colleagues conducted studies of children ranging in age from 3 to 7 years
(Gottman, 1983; Parker & Gottman, 1989). They set up tape recorders in chil-
dren’s homes and listened while children played with their best friends or with
unfamiliar children on three different days. Friends had more positive exchanges,
communicated more clearly, established common ground more easily, exchanged
more information, disclosed more about themselves, and were able to resolve
conflicts more effectively than strangers. Other studies confirmed these find-
ings. Children express more positive affect in their interactions with friends than
with nonfriends (Hartup, 1996; Ladd, 2005; Schneider, 2000). They share more
330  Chapter 8 Peers

nsights from Extremes: When Children Love

and Protect Each Other
During World War II, many young children lost his gloves, and another child loaned
Jewish children were spirited out him gloves without complaining about the cold.
of Nazi Germany and its occu- In scary situations, the children were able to
pied territories and brought to overcome their fears and help or comfort each
Great Britain for safety. From December 1938 to other. Once, when a dog approached, the
September 1939, about 10,000 children traveled children were terrified. In spite of her fear, Ruth
by train and ferry in the Kindertransport. Anna walked bravely over to Peter, who was screaming,
Freud observed six of these children who had and gave him her toy rabbit for comfort. Later, on
been rescued when they were 4 years old and the beach, Ruth was throwing pebbles into the
taken to Bulldog Banks, a small English country water. When he saw a big wave coming, Peter
home that had been transformed into a nursery overcame his fear and rushed over to Ruth,
(Freud & Dann, 1951). The children had been torn calling out: “Water coming, water coming,” as he
from their families and kept in concentration dragged her back to safety.
camps from the time they were infants. When These children’s circumstances were clearly
they got to Bulldog Banks, the children ignored or unusual. Being at Bulldog Banks was the first time
were actively hostile to their adult caretakers, they had lived in an environment where all adults
biting, spitting, or swearing at them, calling them were kind. It was not surprising, therefore, that
bloder ochs (“stupid fools”). With each other, they initially reacted to the adults with suspicion
however, they formed intense, protective relation- and negativity. What is more surprising is the
ships and resisted being separated even for extent to which they formed close bonds with
special treats like pony rides. When one child was each other. Their behavior demonstrates the
ill, the others wanted to remain with her. They intensity of relationships that can develop
showed little envy, jealousy, rivalry, or competition. between young children and the ways such
Their level of sharing and helping was remark- relationships can contribute to children’s emo-
able. On one occasion, the children were eating tional survival. Although most childhood friend-
cake, and John began to cry because there was ships are not this intense, this extreme example
no cake left for a second helping. Ruth and provides a useful lesson about how children’s
Miriam, who had not yet finished their cake, gave friendships can provide comfort and care as well
him theirs. On another occasion, one of the as fun and games.

with friends (Berndt, 2004), although when friends are tough competitors, shar-
ing decreases (Berndt, 1986, 2004). Being friends does not mean that children
never disagree (Hartup, 1996; Laursen et al., 1996). In fact, friends disagree
more than nonfriends, but their conflicts are less heated, and the children are
more likely to stay in contact after an argument (Hartup et al., 1988). Friends
are more likely to resolve conflicts in an equitable way and ensure that the reso-
lution preserves their friendship (Hartup, 1996; Laursen et al., 1996). They are
more self-­disclosing than acquaintances (Berndt, 2004; Berndt & Perry, 1990;
Simpkins & Parke, 2001) and more knowledgeable about each other: They know
each other’s strengths and secrets, wishes and weaknesses (Ladd & E ­ merson,
1984; Schneider, 2000). And they have similar ways of interpreting their social
world (i.e., similar social information processing styles in addressing issues in
their relationship), which may, in part, account for the success of their friendship
relationship (­Spencer et al., 2013).
 When Peers Become Friends  331

The specific ways friendship is expressed vary somewhat in individualistic and

collectivist cultures. Although mutual assistance is a common aspect of friendship
(French et al., 2005), for children in individualistic Western cultures, assistance usu-
ally consists of giving advice and cognitive support; in collectivist cultures, instru-
mental and material support is more important (Chen et al., 2004; D. C. French
et al., 2005, 2006; Gonzalez et al., 2004). Intimacy also varies across cultures; in
a number of collectivistic cultures, including South Korea, Cuba, and Israeli kib-
butzim, friendships are more intimate than in individualistic cultures such as
the United States and Canada (D. C. French et al., 2006; Gonzalez et al., 2004;
Sharabany, 2006). However, the path to intimacy may differ across cultures too.
For example, whereas youth in the United States value self-expression and disclo-
sure within the friendship, norms and values in China lead friends to be sensitive
and responsive to each others’ needs without directly stating or discussing them;
in China, this sort of relationship is referred to as a “heart-to-heart” friendship
(­Gummerum & Keller, 2008).

Friendship Patterns
Friendships are not always smooth. Fights occur, friends hurt each other, and friend-
ships sometimes end. Children lose and replace friendships, sometimes within days
or weeks, sometimes over a span of years. To examine children’s friendship patterns,
researchers in one study observed 8- to 15-year-olds at a summer camp (Parker &
Seal, 1996). They identified five different friendship patterns. In the rotation group,
children readily formed new relationships, but their social ties showed little stability.
These children were playful teasers. They were always up on the latest interesting
gossip, but they were also aggressive, bossy, and untrustworthy. The growth group
consisted of children who added new relationships and kept the existing ones.
These children were neither bossy nor easily pushed around. In the decline group
were children whose friendships broke up and were not replaced. These children
were caring, shared with others, and, like those in the rotation group, engaged
in playful teasing; they were often judged to be “show-offs.” Children in the static
group maintained a stable pool of friendships and added no new ones. They were
less apt to tease others, but they were also less caring; the girls in this group were
known for their honesty. Finally, children in the friendless group made no friends
at all throughout the summer. Others perceived these children as timid, shy, and
preferring to play alone. They couldn’t deal with teasing and were easily angered.
In addition, they were rated as less caring, sharing, and honest than their peers. As
would be expected, these children were the loneliest. Clearly, children’s friendship
patterns demonstrate wide variation.
Gender also impacts children’s friendship patterns (Rose & Asher, 2017). In many
ways, girls’ friendships seem especially strong. They tend to involve more intimacy
and self-disclosure than boys’ friendships, which are more focused on sports and
games. However, the intimacy in girls’ friendships may be a double-edged sword. In
girls’ friendships, there is more co-rumination—conversation in which the friends
talk together at length about their personal problems and negative feelings (Rose,
2002). They expect to feel cared for and understood when talking about their prob-
lems, whereas boys expect to feel “weird” and like they are wasting time (Rose et al.,
2012). Although girls’ propensity to focus on problems in their conversations leads
to more positive friendships over time, it also increases girls’ depression and anxi-
ety (Rose et al., 2007; Schwartz-Mette & Rose, 2012). In part, this is because of the
increase in empathic distress accompanying co-rumination (Smith & Rose, 2011).
332  Chapter 8 Peers

In fact, over time there is a close correspondence in depression levels between

both male and female best friends (Giletta et al., 2011). In addition, the greater
intimacy in girls’ friendships also may help to explain why girls are more troubled
by transgressions that violate friendship expectations; girls, strongly endorse nega-
tive interpretations of the friend’s action, and are more angry and sad than are boys
(MacEvoy & Asher, 2012). This may contribute to girls having more difficulty than
boys in terms of forgiving friends’ transgressions (Rose & Asher, 2017), which is
unfortunate given that forgiveness is an important aspect of healthy relationships
(van der Wal, Karremans, & Cillessen, 2017).

The Pros and Cons of Friendship

For most children, having a friend is a positive experience. Friends provide support,
intimacy, and guidance. Children with good-quality friendships even improve their
social skills over time: Having such a friendship predicts greater use of emotion-
ally engaged and socially competent strategies, such as talking about the problem
when confronted by a social dilemma (Glick & Rose, 2011). Children with friends
are less lonely and depressed (Berndt, 2004; Furman & Rose, 2015). Even rejected-­
aggressive and withdrawn children often develop friendships in spite of their diffi-
culties gaining or maintaining acceptance by the wider peer group (Pedersen et al.,
2007; Rubin et al., 2009), and friends can buffer these children from loneliness, sad-
ness, and other psychological problems (Laursen et al., 2007; Markovic & Bowker,
2017) and even reduce physiological dysregulation associated with peer exclusion
(Peters et al., 2011). Children with lots of friends can deal with getting low grades
without becoming depressed (Schwartz et al., 2008). The presence of a best friend
can alleviate the effects of routine negative experiences, such as an argument with
a peer or criticism from a teacher, on self-esteem and physiological stress response
(Adams et al., 2011). Long-term outcomes are better, too. In one study, researchers
found that 5th graders who had a reciprocated best friendship were better adjusted
when they reached adulthood (Bagwell et al., 1998). Compared with young adults
who had been friendless in fifth grade, they were less depressed, were less likely to
be involved in delinquent activities, and had better relationships with both their
families and their peers.
But not all friendships are supportive and beneficial. Some pose risks rather than
offering protection (Furman & Rose, 2015). Withdrawn children’s friends are likely
to be withdrawn and victimized themselves (Rubin, Wojslawowicz, et al., 2006; Rubin
et al., 2009), and these friendships provide less fun, help, and guidance than other
friendships (Rubin et al., 2015). Similarly, rejected children’s friendships are likely to
be with other rejected children and to be characterized by conflict rather than inti-
macy (Poulin et al., 1999); these children often encourage each other’s deviant behav-
iors, such as cheating, fighting, and using drugs (Bagwell, 2004; Dishion & Dodge,
2006). It is important to consider the nature and quality of the relationship when
weighing the value of friendship. When children have poor-quality friendships, they
are more depressed (La Greca & Harrison, 2005) and more likely to be victimized,
especially if they have been rejected by their larger peer group (Malcolm et al., 2006).

Romantic Relationships
Adolescence is the time when romantic relationships first develop (Collins et al.,
2009). However, many people, including parents and teachers, underestimate the
 When Peers Become Friends  333

significance of these relationships. In this section we discuss three of the most com-
monly held myths about adolescent romance.

Teenage love affairs really do matter

Myth 1: Adolescent romantic relationships are rare and brief. Reality: Adolescent
romantic relationships are neither uncommon nor transitory. By middle adoles-
cence, most youth have been involved in at least one romantic relationship. In
one study, 36 percent of 13-year-olds, 53 percent of 15-year-olds, and 70 percent of
17-year-olds reported having a specific romantic relationship within the preceding
year and a half, and 60 percent of the 17- to 18-year-olds said that their romantic
relationships had lasted 11 months or more (Carver et al., 2003). High school stu-
dents have more frequent interactions with romantic partners than with parents,
siblings, or friends (Laursen & Williams, 1997).
Myth 2: Adolescent romantic relationships are unimportant. Reality: Adolescent
romances are significant for adolescent functioning. On the negative side, ado-
lescents in romantic relationships report more conflicts, have more mood swings,
and, when the relationship breaks up, experience more symptoms of depres-
sion than adolescents who do not have romantic relationships (Harper & Welsh,
2007). Depression also accompanies a romantic relationship with negative quali-
ties (Harper & Welsh, 2007; La Greca & Harrison, 2005; Zimmer-Gembeck et al.,
2001, 2004), or negative romantic experiences (Davila et al., 2004; Harper & Welsh,
2007). On the positive side, adolescents in romantic relationships have higher self-
worth, experience less social anxiety, and feel more part of their peer group than
adolescents without romantic partners (La Greca & Harrison, 2005; Pearce et al.,
2002; Zimmer-Gembeck et al., 2001). The mixed picture in terms of adjustment
outcomes may reflect the fact that adolescents’ romantic relationships often involve
both positive and negative features, including high levels of support but also high
levels of negative interactions, control, and jealousy (Lantagne & Furman, 2017).
Adolescent romantic relationships can have long-term consequences as well.
Researchers in a German study found that adolescents with positive, intimate
romantic relationships formed more committed relationships in young adulthood
than adolescents who lacked romantic relationships (Seiffge-Krenke & Lang, 2002).
In another study, researchers found that adolescents who dated few partners stead-
ily were better off in their early adulthood relationships than adolescents who dated
a large number of different partners casually (Collins, 2003; Collins & van Dulmen,
2006). Moreover, quality matters. Having fewer and better-quality romantic relation-
ships in adolescence is related to having higher-quality romantic relationships in
adulthood (Madsen & Collins, 2011). Nonetheless, it also is important to note that
long-term consequences of adolescent romantic ties have not emerged in all studies
(Roisman et al., 2004). Although the short-term significance of adolescent romance
is quite clear, more research on long-term consequences is needed.
Myth 3: Romantic relationships simply mirror other social relationships. Reality: It
is true that adolescents’ romantic relationships are related to their other rela-
tionships. Adolescents who have close relationships with their parents tend to
have closer romantic relationships (Conger et al., 2000). If they can successfully
resolve conflicts with their parents, they can do so with their romantic partners
(Cui & Conger, 2008; Donnellan et al., 2005); if their parents are harsh, they are
likely to behave aggressively with their romantic partners (Kim et al., 2001). Ado-
lescents’ relationships with romantic partners are also related to their relation-
ships with friends. Friendships serve as models and sources of social support for
334  Chapter 8 Peers

romantic relationships (Connolly et al., 2004). Children with better-quality friend-

ships or representations of friendships develop closer romantic ties in adolescence
(Collins & Sroufe, 1999; Furman & Shomaker, 2008; Furman et al., 2002). Ado-
lescents who have hostile relationships with peers express more hostility in their
romantic relationships (Leadbeater et al., 2008; Stocker & Richmond, 2007). And
finally, adolescents’ commitment to both their parents and their friends and their
perceptions about parents and friends are related to their commitments to and per-
ceptions of romantic partners (De Goede et al., 2012; Furman & Collibee, 2018).
However, despite all these associations, relationships with parents and peers are
clearly different from relationships with romantic partners and satisfy different
needs for adolescents. Parents are valued for their educational and career advice,
friends for style tips and gossip, and romantic partners for emotional intimacy and
sharing future plans (Furman, 2002). In addition, adolescents have more conflicts
when they are observed interacting with a romantic partner than with a close friend
(Furman & Shomaker, 2008).

Changes in romantic dynamics over time Romantic relationships change

quite dramatically between early and late adolescence (Furman & Rose, 2015). The
frequency of romantic involvement increases and so does the length of time in a
relationship (Carver et al., 2003). The peer group plays a major role in partner
choice in early adolescence. Peer group networks and romantic relationships, in
fact, probably support each other: Peer group networks support early romantic pair-
ings, and romantic pairings facilitate connections between peers in the network
(Connolly et al., 2000; Furman, 2002). Young adolescents date partners that their
peer group network approves of or views as cool. Appearance, clothes, status, and
other superficial features guide young adolescents’ choices. Older adolescents focus
more on characteristics that underlie intimacy and compatibility, such as personal-
ity, values, and particular interests (Zani, 1993). They have more interdependence
with their romantic partner (Laursen & Jensen-Campbell, 1999) and are more likely
than younger adolescents to compromise with their partners as a way of solving
problems.

Same-sex relationships More than ever before, adolescents in North America,

Europe, and in other parts of the world who are attracted to same-sex roman-
tic partners are openly expressing their sexual orientation and engaging in rela-
tionships with same-sex romantic partners (Russell, Watson, & Muraco, 2012).
Still, adolescents with same-sex partners are more likely to keep their relation-
ships secret than those with other-sex partners. In fact, many adolescents who are
attracted to same-sex peers have relationships with other-sex partners in order
to disguise their sexual orientation. What life is like for adolescents attracted to
same-sex partners also may depend on where they go to school. Although ado-
lescents attracted to same-sex peers are socially marginalized if they attend small
high schools with mostly European American students, they have fewer peer
problems in larger schools with more racial diversity (Martin-Storey, Cheadle,
Skalamera, & Crosnoe, 2015).

Interaction in Groups
Children and adolescents form hierarchical groups with common goals and
rules.
 Interaction in Groups  335

Dominance Hierarchies
Beginning at the end of the first year, infants have a rudimentary understanding of
the concept of social dominance. When exposed to a conflict between a larger and
a smaller foe, 11- to 13-month-old infants recognize that the smaller combatant is
more likely to submit and withdraw than the larger one (Thomsen et al., 2011). By
1½ to 3 years of age children in a group form a dominance hierarchy, or “pecking
order” (Hawley, 1999; Rubin et al., 2015). At this age, dominant children are likely
to be strong, cognitively mature, and persistent, and girls often dominate boys. After
age 3, boys more often take the dominant roles. For the next few years, dominance
is based on children’s ability to direct the behavior of others in the group, lead them
in play, and physically coerce them. In middle childhood and early adolescence,
dominance becomes based on leadership skills, attractive appearance, academic
performance, athletic prowess, and pubertal development.

Carpenter, Dave/CartoonStock

Preschool children’s dominance hierarchies are simpler and more loosely dif-
ferentiated than older children’s, and they tend to perceive their own positions
in the pecking order as a bit higher than they really are; as children mature, they
become increasingly accurate at judging their position (Hawley, 2007). Regardless
of age, dominance hierarchies emerge quickly. In one study, researchers found that
unacquainted primary school boys began to develop a coherently organized social
structure within the first 45 minutes of contact (Pettit et al., 1990).
Group hierarchies serve a number of important functions. One is to reduce lev-
els of aggression among group members. In fact, aggression is rarely seen in a group
with a well-established hierarchy. All it takes is for a high-ranking member to use a
threatening gesture to keep lower ranking group members in line. A second func-
tion is to divide the tasks of the group, with lower-status members taking worker
roles and with director roles going to the more dominant members. Third, domi-
nance hierarchies determine the allocation of resources (Hawley, 2002). In a study
of adolescents at summer camp, researchers found that the dominant teens often
ate the biggest pieces of cake, sat where they wanted to, and slept in the preferred
336  Chapter 8 Peers

sleeping sites (Savin-Williams, 1987). Clearly, rank has its privileges for individuals
of all ages. Finally, dominance has biological roots with individuals—humans and
animals-with higher levels of testosterone more likely to be dominant than their less
testosterone rich peers (Eisenegger et al., 2011).

Cliques, Crowds, and Gangs

In middle childhood, children can form a clique, a group based on friendship and
shared interests (Brown & Braun, 2013; Brown & Klute, 2006; Chen et al., 2003;
Kwon et al., 2012). Cliques range in size from three to nine children, and members
usually are of the same gender and race. By the time children are about 11 years old,
most of their interaction with peers occurs in the context of the clique. Membership
in a clique enhances children’s psychological well-being and ability to cope with
stress. Cliques are evident in adolescence as well, but across the high school years,
they decline in importance as a result of degrouping or loosening clique ties.
The clique is replaced by the crowd—a collection of people who share attitudes or
activities that define a particular stereotype: jocks, brains, populars, nerds, skaters, stoners,
freaks, goths (Shrum & Cheek, 1987). They may or may not spend much time together,
but crowd members say that the crowd provides support, fosters friendships, and facil-
itates social interaction (Brown & Klute, 2006). Identifying with a crowd in the first
year of high school predicted better adjustment in the third year of high school in
one study (Heaven et al., 2008), and in another study adolescents who affiliated with
a peer crowd were less likely to have feelings of social anxiety (La Greca & Harrison,
2005). Of course, the particular crowd also makes a difference: Adolescents were bet-
ter adjusted if they were affiliated with a high-status peer crowd such as jocks, brains,
or populars, and they were less well adjusted if they associate with nonconventional
crowds such as stoners, gangstas, or freaks (Doornwaard et al., 2012; Heaven et al.,
2008; La Greca & Harrison, 2005). Interestingly, though, adolescents may perceive
crowds to be more cohesive and their behavior to be more stereotypical and extreme
than it really is. For example, adolescents perceive jocks and populars as engaging in
more health risk behaviors, such as drinking and taking drugs, than they really do,
which increases the chances of their engaging in those behaviors themselves (Helms
et al., 2014, Choukas-Bradley, Widman, Gilletta, Cohen, & Prinstein, 2014).

“You could always tell the ‘brains’ because they took the seats right up in front near the
teacher’s desk. The ‘freaks’ always fought for the seats way in back.”

In the late adolescent years, crowds tend to disband, and the importance of
crowd affiliation declines (Brown et al., 1986) as adolescents focus instead on close
dyadic friendships and romantic relationships.
A gang is a group of adolescents or adults who form an allegiance for a common
purpose. The gang may be a loose-knit group or a formal organization with a leader
or ruling council, gang colors, gang identifiers, and a gang name. Formal gangs are
often involved in criminal activity. Being in a gang thus can lead to delinquency and
other negative activities. Being part of a gang can also restrict adolescents’ social
contacts. Belonging to a gang makes it difficult for adolescents to change their life-
styles or explore new identities because they are channeled into social ties with
individuals who share their values and identities (Brown & Braun, 2013; Brown &
Klute, 2006). Gangs also encourage stereotyping; adolescents are biased in their use
of reputational or stereotypic information about members of other gangs, especially
in ambiguous situations (Horn, 2003).
 Interaction in Groups  337

Young people join gangs for a variety of reasons. Boredom is one; if young people
have nothing else to occupy their time, they sometimes turn to mischief to entertain
themselves. But this is not the most important reason. Many young people gravitate
to gangs out of a need to belong to something (Rizzo, 2003). A gang gives them an
identity and offers them love from a new “family.” The need for attention and the
desire for material goods are also reasons to join a gang. Many gangs exist mainly
as moneymaking enterprises, committing thefts and dealing drugs. Another reason
young people join gangs is for the power and protection it provides from other
gangs and threats. Gangs also give young people instant recognition and reputation
(“rep”), respect from their gang “homeboys,” and power to retaliate if “gangbang-
ers” from a rival gang disrespect (“dis”) them.
Adolescents join gangs because they are recruited but also because they are at an
age when they are particularly susceptible to peer pressure. If they live in a gang-
dominated area, go to a school with a strong gang presence, or live with a gang
member they are likely to find that many of their friends are joining gangs and
they also join (Gilman et al., 2014). Not surprisingly, researchers have found that
gang members are more likely to come from poor and dysfunctional families, to
have neglectful parents, and to live in communities where they are surrounded by
poverty, drugs, and gangs. They see no chance of getting a decent job, leaving their
poor neighborhood, or getting an education, so joining a gang seems like the road
to riches. Members also usually have problems long before they join the gang; in
elementary school, their peers reject them and they fail in their classwork and act
in antisocial ways (Dishion et al., 2005). Adolescents with low self-esteem are likely
to join gangs at an earlier age than those with a stronger sense of self (Dmitrieva
et al., 2014). Their teachers and peers rate them as more aggressive than nongang
members (Craig et al., 2002).
The consequences of being in a gang are dire. Gang membership results in changes
in emotions, attitudes, and lessened social controls (Melde & Esbensen, 2011) which,

nto Adulthood: What Happens When Jocks, Brains,

and Princesses Grow Up
You probably remember from different high school crowds, was popular, and
your high school days the the students were asked to pick which type of
athletic jocks who dominated crowd fit them best: jocks, brains, criminals,
the sports teams, the brains who princesses, or basket cases. The researchers
were preoccupied with good grades, and the described criminals as tough, rebellious, and
princesses who ran the pep squad and almost hated by their peers and adults; princesses were
everything else. Maybe you referred to them by well liked, influential, and had high social status;
different names, but chances are your high brains were into good grades even at the
school had its versions. What happens when expense of popularity; jocks were the sports
these adolescents grow up? To find out, team players; basket cases were loners who
researchers Bonnie Barber, Jacquelynne Eccles, isolated themselves from the rest of their peers.
and Margaret Stone (2001) followed 900 adoles- Of the students in the study, 28 percent identified
cents from 10th grade into adulthood. When the themselves as jocks, 40 percent as princesses,
study began, the coming-of-age movie The 12 percent as brains, 11 percent as basket cases,
Breakfast Club, which depicted students in and 9 percent as criminals.
338  Chapter 8 Peers

When they were 24 years old, former jocks Why did crowd identity in 10th grade have
and brains exhibited the most success and such lasting predictive effects? The most likely
criminals and basket cases exhibited the least reason is that adolescents identified with crowds
success. Criminals and basket cases were the that fit their preferred behavioral patterns and
most depressed and worried and reported the personalities (Brown, 1989), and these patterns
lowest levels of self-esteem; 25 percent of the of behavior carried forward into adulthood. As
basket cases had been treated by a psycholo- young adults, jocks joined athletic clubs, where
gist compared with only 6 percent of the jocks. they made successful business contacts and then
Jocks had their problems, though; they and the went out for drinks; brains pursued their interest in
criminals drank the most and were most likely education and volunteer work (Raymore et al.,
to be in alcohol recovery programs. Criminals, 1999); criminals and basket cases continued to
especially men, used marijuana most and have mental health problems. The links across age
were least likely to have graduated from reflect both self-selection into crowds and partici-
college (only 17 percent compared with about pation in activities associated with crowds that
30 percent of the basket cases, jocks, and help consolidate the person’s identity and provide
princesses and 50 percent of the brains). Jocks, opportunities for acquiring new skills and expand-
particularly the women, were earning more ing social contacts with other like-minded peers
money than any other group. (Barber et al., 2001).

in turn, facilitates delinquent behavior, violence, and drug use (Gatti et al., 2005;
Snyder & Sickmund, 2006) and promotes continued serious offending in young adult-
hood (Stouthamer-Loeber et al., 2004). It increases the likelihood that gang mem-
bers will be victims of violence (Taylor et al., 2007) and suffer psychological distress
(Li et al., 2002). Gangs can harm members in more subtle ways as well, cutting them
off from people and opportunities that could help them with the transition to adult-
hood and disrupting their lives even after they have moved beyond the gang. Young
adults who have been in gangs are more likely to end their education prematurely,
have children early, suffer poorer general health, abuse drugs more, fail to establish
stable work lives and more likely to be on welfare—all of which are associated with
an increased likelihood of being arrested as adults (Gilman et al., 2014; Snyder &
Sickmund, 2006). To illustrate, youth who joined gangs were 30 percent less likely to
graduate from high school and 58 percent less likely to earn a four-year degree than
their nongang members (Pyrooz, 2013). Fortunately, gang membership is often short-
lived with 1 year being the average length of membership in both North America and
Europe (Weerman et al., 2014).
One gangbanger who is in prison for shooting a member of a rival gang offers
strong advice to would-be gang members (http://www.gangsandkids.com/).
According to him, nothing good comes from being a gang member. True, he says,
you have some good times, hanging out with your homies and homegirls drinking,
getting high, fighting rival members, and committing crimes. But in the end you
wind up going to a lot of funerals or visiting a lot of prisons. “If that’s your idea of a
life then the gang scene is for you. But you should ask yourself: Do you really want to
spend your life in prison under the control of someone else 24/7, dodging bullets
every time you walk to the store, or burying someone you know every other week?
The gang life is for people who don’t care about life,” he says. He came to realize
that “gangbangin’ is B.S.” and misguided loyalty to his gang family was a waste of
time when, during the 24 years he spend in prison, not one of his homeboys or
homegirls wrote him a letter, sent him a care package, or even came to pay him a
visit. The only one who was there for him was his mother.
 Interaction in Groups  339

eal-World Application: Youth Gangs

Gangs have been around for In general, youth gangs consist of a loosely
hundreds of years. Pirates organized group of individuals who engage in
operated as gangs. In the 19th criminal activity to provide funding for their
century, gangs of immigrants— activities and to further the gang’s reputation on
Irish, Italian, Polish—protected the street (Snyder & Sickmund, 2006). Gangs
their neighborhoods in cities such as New York. identify themselves with a common name or
Youth gangs began in Los Angeles (L.A.) in 1969 sign. They dress similarly or wear the gang’s
with the formation of a black street gang called colors—the Crips wear blue, the Bloods wear red.
the “Cribs,” a term that referred to their youthful- They mark their turf with graffiti in their colors,
ness. The initial intent of this gang was to con- displaying their gang symbols. Many gangs also
tinue the revolutionary ideology of the 1960s and adopt certain types of hairstyles and communi-
act as community leaders and protectors of their cate through the use of hand signals. When new
local neighborhoods, but the revolutionary members join a gang, they must usually go
rhetoric did not last. The Cribs began to commit through an initiation. The most common initiation
robberies and assaults. They were renamed the involves “jumping in,” in which the young person
“Crips” after they were described by the victims is given a beating by all of the gang members.
of one assault as young cripples carrying canes. Most gang members (94 percent) are male
Crip gangs soon multiplied in L.A., and other (Snyder & Sickmund, 2006), but gangs that
gangs formed. Today the Crips and their most accept female members sometimes rape them
notorious rivals, the Bloods, have franchise gangs as their initiation. Getting a tattoo with gang
operating in cities across the country. It is esti- symbols may be another part of the initiation
mated that the United States has about 25,000 (Deschesnes et al., 2006). Sometimes the new
youth gangs involving over 1,100,000 members. gang member must also participate in a mission.
Eighty-six percent of cities with over 10,000 This can be anything from stealing a car to
residents report gang activity so it is clearly a engaging in a firefight with a rival gang. Some
national problem in the United States (Statistic gangs don’t consider anyone a full member until
Brain Research Institute, 2017). that person has shot or killed someone.

earning from Living Leaders: Steven R. Asher

Steven Asher is Professor of Psychology and
Neuroscience at Duke University (http://fds.duke.
edu/db/aas/pn/faculty/asher). He went to
college at Rutgers University thinking he would
major in history and become a lawyer, but he
became a psychology major after he was
inspired by his introductory psychology class.
Courtesy of Steven R. Asher

When a faculty member suggested that he go to

graduate school, his reaction was, “What’s that?”
He knew about law schools but nothing about
PhD programs. Soon, though, he found out, and
went to the University of Wisconsin, where he
received his degree under the mentorship of
Ross Parke, the coauthor of this textbook.
340  Chapter 8 Peers

After graduation, Asher established himself as Gary W. Ladd

an expert on children’s peer relationships. He
developed a number of innovative methods for
assessing children’s loneliness, friendship quality,
and sociometric standing, and he showed that
children with low sociometric status and few
peer friendships suffer serious social-emotional
consequences. He also advocated and
designed social skills training programs to help

Courtesy of Gary W. Ladd

improve the lives of rejected and neglected
children. He realized how special friends are
even in young children’s lives when he over-
heard his son Matt, then 4 years old, talking to
his best friend Jessica (a year older): “Jessica, if
you and I had been born the same day we
could play together every day until we die.” Matt
spoke these words with great tenderness and a
sense of regret that their different ages had Gary Ladd is Cowden Distinguished Professor of
deprived them of a full year of time together! Family and Human Development and Associ-
According to Asher, anyone who watches ate Director of the School of Social and Family
children closely will be struck by the emotional Dynamics at Arizona State University. His interest
power of their friendships. He believes that the in peer relationships began in an earlier career
most pressing issue today is to find out what as a school psychologist when he found that
skills children need to be successful in children’s social problems in classrooms, on
friendships. playgrounds, and on the school bus were more
Asher is coeditor of The Development challenging than their academic problems. This
of Children’s Friendships and Peer Rejection realization led him to study strategies that could
in Childhood and has written many articles be used to help neglected and rejected children
about children’s peer relations. He is a Fellow of improve their relationships with classmates. He
the American Psychological Association, the found that a combination of coaching and mod-
Association for Psychological Science, and the eling was effective, and his work led to changes
American Educational Research Association in classroom practices and educational policies.
and has served on the Governing Council of the Ladd also studied the effects of experiences in
Society for Research in Child Development. He the family on children’s peer relationships. He
has this message for students: “There aren’t discovered that when parents provided opportu-
many courses that have the potential to enrich nities for their children to interact with peers, this
your life as a parent, a friend, a mentor, and a was an important way to help children form
caring and scientifically minded citizen. This is social ties. In the Pathways Project, Ladd followed
one of those courses. So dig in, have fun with children from before they entered school until
the course, and ask the tough questions that they were in high school. He found that children’s
will help you, your classmates, and your early behavioral dispositions in combination with
teacher to grow.” their social experiences, such as peer rejection
or acceptance, predicted later developmental
Further Reading outcomes and mental health.
Asher, S. R., Guerry, W., & McDonald, K. L. (2014). Children Ladd is editor of the Merrill Palmer Quarterly, a
as friends. In G. B. Melton, A. Ben-Arieh, J. Cashmore, journal devoted to understanding children’s
G. S. Goodman, & N. K. Worley (Eds.), The SAGE
handbook of child research (pp. 169–194). Newbury development. He has been a Fellow at the
Park, CA: Sage. Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral
 Chapter Summary  341

Sciences at Stanford University, a Spencer Psychiatric Hospital and received a master’s

Foundation Fellow, and a recipient of awards for degree in clinical child psychology from George
excellence in teaching. For him, the most press- Peabody College of Vanderbilt University. As a
ing issue in social development is how to provide result of his work with autistic and severely
children access to safe, socially supportive, and retarded children during his time at Vanderbilt,
academically challenging school environments he became convinced of the great need for
regardless of their gender, race, ethnicity, or research on child and adolescent psychopa-
national origin. He encourages research that will thology and its treatment. His earlier work
increase understanding of peer relations in focused on treatment programs for socially
different cultures and document the effects of withdrawn children and children who were not
ethnic and political violence on children. well liked by peers. Furman also become inter-
ested in close peer relationships including
Further Reading friendships and romantic relationships. Over the
Ladd, G. W., Ettekal, I., Kochenderfer-Ladd, B., Rudolph, K. D., past 15 years, he has mostly focused on study-
& Andrews, R. K. (2014). Relations among chronic peer ing adolescents’ romantic relationships, includ-
group rejection, maladaptive behavioral dispositions,
and early adolescents’ peer perceptions. Child Devel- ing the risks and benefits of these relationships.
opment, 85, 971–988. This work has included following a sample of
adolescents and their friends and family for over
10 years. Furman’s work has been funded by the
Wyndol Furman W.T. Grant Foundation, the National Institute of
Mental Health, and National Institute of Child
Health and Human Development. Among his
many awards are the Distinguished Scientific
Contribution Award from the International
Courtesy of Dr. Wyndol Furman

Society of Behavioral Development (ISSBD) and

the John P. Hill Memorial Award from the Society
for Research in Adolescence. In terms of an
important direction for future research, Furman
notes “Not only are their striking differences
among different people’s relationships, but the
same person often has had very different
relationships with different people. We need to
have a better understanding why.” And to
Wyndol Furman is the John Evans Professor and students, Furman advises “Doing science is lots
Director of Clinical Training at the University of of fun, but hard at times. Study something you
Denver. Before earning his doctorate at the are passionate about. You’ll do better work and
University of Minnesota in clinical child psychol- have more fun.”
ogy, Furman was an undergraduate at Duke
University, originally majoring in mathematics Further Reading
and then in philosophy. Furman became Furman, W., & Collibee, C. (2018). The past is present:
Representations of parents, friends, and romantic
interested in clinical psychology after working in partners predict subsequent romantic representation.
the summers in the South Carolina State Child Development, 89, 188–204.

Chapter Summary
Peer Interactions
• Children’s interactions with peers are briefer, freer, and more equal than inter-
actions with adults. These interactions facilitate interpersonal exploration and
growth in social competence.
342  Chapter 8 Peers

Developmental Patterns of Peer Interaction

• Infants interact with peers by vocalizing and touching.
• Toddlers exchange turns and roles during interactions with peers; major
achievements include sharing meaning with a peer and engaging in mutual
pretend play.
• Children increase their preference for interacting with peers rather than adults
as they grow.
• Companionship with peers of the same age increases over the school years.
• Children are likely to choose same-gender play partners.
• In adolescence, gender segregation lessens as dating begins. Peer relationships
are used to explore and enhance identities.
Peers as Socializers
• Peers act as models of social behavior, reinforce and punish each other, serve as
standards against which children evaluate themselves, and provide opportuni-
ties for developing a sense of belonging.
• Peers have a stronger influence than parents on adolescents’ lifestyle
choices.
• Patterns of peer interaction and influence are different in different
cultures.
Peer Status
• Peer status is assessed with sociometric techniques by having children identify
peers they like and don’t like; peer acceptance is assessed with ratings of how
much children like or dislike each classmate. Children are classified as popu-
lar, rejected, neglected, controversial, or average.
• Peer status depends on children’s abilities to initiate interaction, communi-
cate effectively, respond to others’ interests and behaviors, and cooperate in
activities.
• Popular children engage in prosocial behavior and help set the norms for
the group. Nonaggressive-rejected children tend to be withdrawn and lack
social skills. Aggressive-rejected children have low self-control and exhibit
problem behaviors. Neglected children are less talkative and more shy and
anxious. Controversial children are liked by many peers and disliked by
many others.
• According to social-cognitive information-processing theory, children attend to
the cues in a social situation, interpret other children’s behavior, decide what
their own goals are and how to achieve them, decide to take certain actions,
and act on their decisions.
• Children may not always respond to social situations in a reflective and thought-
ful way; sometimes their behavior is impulsive or automatic.
• In comparison to unpopular and socially unsuccessful children, those who
are popular and socially successful have more positive goals and strategies,
have more self-confidence and persistence, can try a new approach when
another has been unsuccessful, are more attractive, and blend in with other
children.
• Being unpopular can lead to short-term problems such as loneliness and low
self-esteem and long-term problems such as depression. Having at least one
friend can reduce loneliness.
 Key Terms  343

• Social status tends to remain stable across time and situations, especially for
rejected children.
Promoters of Peer Acceptance
• Parents serve as partners from whom children acquire social skills, act as social
coaches, and provide opportunities for children to have peer interactions.
• Researchers can help children improve their social skills by coaching.
• Peers themselves can help rejected children improve their social skills and
experience more peer acceptance.
When Peers Become Friends
• Children develop close friendships with only a few peers.
• The goals and expectations of friendship change with age.
• Friends communicate more clearly and positively, disclose more about them-
selves, exchange more information, establish more common ground, and are
able to resolve conflicts more effectively than nonfriends.
• Boys’ same-gender friendships are less fragile than those of girls because they
are often embedded in a larger group of relationships.
• Friends provide support, intimacy, and guidance. However, some friendships
encourage deviant behavior, such as cheating, fighting, and using drugs.
• Withdrawn and aggressive children have friends with characteristics similar to
their own.
• Romantic relationships in adolescence are an important and distinctive form
of social relationship.
Interaction in Groups
• Children form hierarchically organized groups with common goals and rules
of conduct.
• In middle childhood, children form cliques, which enhance their well-being
and ability to cope with stress.
• In high school, children may be thought of by their peers as belonging to a
specific crowd.
• A gang is a group of adolescents or adults who form an allegiance for a com-
mon purpose. The gang may be a loose-knit group or a formal organization;
organized gangs are often involved in criminal activity.

Key Terms
aggressive-rejected children homophily pretend play
associative play mutual antipathy rejected children
average children negative gossip reputational bias
clique neglected children self-disclosure
controversial children nonaggressive-rejected children social comparison
cooperative play parallel play social sensitivity
crowd peer group networks sociometric technique
dominance hierarchy perceived popularity
gang popular children
344  Chapter 8 Peers

At th e M ov i e s

Friendship themes are common in movies. In The Kite no support or helpful coaching, and her little sister makes
Runner (2007), two boys, Amir and Hassan, form a deep deprecating comments. This movie has no happy ending,
friendship, playing and kiting on the streets of Kabul, but it will help you empathize with young teens who suffer
Afghanistan, in the 1970s. Hassan defends Amir from a from peer rejection and pass on their anger and frustra-
violent older boy, demonstrating his loyalty. But when Amir tion to other children who are even less popular. That’s
witnesses Hassan being beaten and raped by the older boy What I Am (2011) is a coming-of-age story that illustrates
and does not help him, the friendship comes to an end. peer cruelty in middle school in 1965. We may be more tol-
This film offers a moving illustration of the persistent guilt erant of gay teachers at present, but peer rejection hasn’t
and regret that can result from a violated friendship. In changed much.
Son of Rambow (2007), two British 11-year-olds who seem Other movies offer insights into additional aspects of
to have nothing in common meet in the hallway at school. peer relations discussed in this chapter. Clueless (1995) is a
One boy is there because he comes from a strict religious movie about high school cliques, friendships, and romances;
family and is not allowed to watch a movie; the other boy it focuses on three self-absorbed, fashion-obsessed teens who
is there because he has been causing trouble again. Both are almost pulled apart by jealousy over boys but find that
boys are isolated at home and at school, and despite their friendship wins out in the end. Scores of movies have been
superficial differences, they have much in common and made about teen romances, but three that are especially
form a deep friendship. This movie takes you inside the good at portraying the intensity and poignancy of young
world of childhood, reminds you what it’s like to be a child, love are Romeo and Juliet (1968), David and Lisa (1962),
and convinces you of the importance of lasting friendship. and Moonrise Kingdom (2012). In David and Lisa, David is
The Mighty (1998) offers a moving portrayal of a childhood an obsessive who cannot bear to be touched, and Lisa is
friendship between two seriously handicapped boys. a schizophrenic who speaks only in rhymes. Affection and
Kevin’s medical condition has twisted his body and stunted kindness are not cures for mental illness in real life as they
his growth; Max has a large body but his mind is slow. appear to be in this movie, but the film’s portrayal of young
Through their friendship, the boys overcome their com- love is strikingly tender. In Moonrise Kingdom, also, the pro-
plementary mental and physical limitations, stand up to tagonists are drawn together by their isolation, loneliness,
bullies, and defend the vulnerable. This movie provides a and mental health issues. Crips and Bloods: Made in America
clear demonstration of the benefits of a close friendship. (2009) is a documentary that tells the story of the two most
Welcome to the Dollhouse (1996) is a dark comedy about an infamous African American gangs in South Los Angeles and
awkward 7th grader who is taunted and put down by her chronicles the decades-long cycle of destruction and despair
peers because of her physical appearance. Her parents offer that defines modern gang culture.
 CH AP TE R 9

Schools, Mentors, and Media

Connections with Society

Matt, who is 3, loves to watch Dora the Explorer

on TV. He watches Dora’s adventures and
repeats the words in Spanish that she teach-
ers her young viewers. Abby, age 4, can’t get
enough of Thomas [the Tank Engine] & Friends.
She watches intently as the train engines learn
Ranald Mackechnie/Getty Images, Inc.

what it is to be a Really Useful Engine, and as

she watches, she is exposed to lessons about
responsibility, helping, the value of encourage-
ment, and the importance of treating others
with kindness. For Aiden, who is 5, Sesame Street
is a favorite. It combines entertainment with
education and not only teaches him about
the alphabet but also imparts prosocial les-
sons about sharing and honesty. These three
television shows are among the most popular
programs for preschool children today—but do
In this chapter, we discuss how children are influ- they influence children’s social development?
enced by sources of socialization beyond the family The answer is revealed in this chapter, which
and peers, specifically by schools, mentors, and the focuses on input from schools, mentors, and
electronic media, including television, video games, electronic media.
and the Internet. Television is part of children’s
lives from an early age, and by the time they are 4 or
5 years old, many children also spend substantial amounts of time playing video
and computer games. They have often started school by this age, too, and as the
years go by, school activities fill more and more of their time. During after-school
hours, children participate in sports, clubs, and community and religious activities,
where they encounter coaches and other important adults. These activities fill much
of children’s waking time, and it would not be surprising to find that, like parents
and peers, these media and mentors have a significant effect on children’s social
development.

345
 346  Chapter 9 Schools, Mentors, and Media

The Role of the School in

Social Development
Children today spend more time in school than ever before—more hours each
day and more days each year. U.S. children now go to school an average of
5 hours a day, 180 days a year. In 1880, children in the United States attended
school only 80 days a year. Not only are children spending more hours and days
in school, but they are also beginning school at younger ages and staying until
they are older.
Although the primary purpose of schools is to instruct children in academic
subjects, schools offer much more than places to learn to write, solve math prob-
lems, and locate Zimbabwe on a map. Schools have another, informal, agenda as
well: teaching the rules, norms, and values children need to get along in society
and helping them develop the skills they need to interact with other people.
On their way to learning math and language, children learn about social expec-
tations, emotional self-regulation, and standards and codes of conduct. Thus,
schools are important contexts for socialization. They are also venues in which
children interact with peers in settings from classrooms to cafeterias and play-
grounds to practice fields. During these interactions, children develop social
skills and advance their social understanding. Some schools do a better job of
promoting children’s social development than others. In this section, we dis-
cuss features of the school environment that affect how well schools foster social
development.

As Abby told her mom, “I know you tell me that school is all about learning math and
reading and stuff like that but I really like school cuz that’s where I make new friends.
And yes I am learning to solve math problems but that’s an extra. Friends are the cool
part of school.”

Schools as Social Communities

Schools are not merely classrooms, or buildings, or playgrounds.
Children develop a sense of community in their schools when
they, their teachers, and the school staff share goals and values,
support each others’ efforts, and believe that everyone makes
an important contribution to school life (McDevitt & ­Ormrod,
2007). When children attend schools in which they have a strong
sense of community, they do better socially, are less emotionally
distressed, are more prosocial, and are less likely to ditch or
drop out of school (Osterman, 2000).
The mechanism through which these positive effects of a
sense of community are achieved is probably “collective efficacy,”
Bacall, Aaron/CartoonStock

which, as we defined in Chapter 1, refers to people’s shared

beliefs in their collective power to achieve a goal or produce
a desired result (Bandura, 2006). When a sense of community
exists, teachers, students, and administrators are more likely
to share goals and believe that they can achieve these goals
through collective and cooperative action. In a study of collec-
tive efficacy at 79 elementary schools, researchers found that
 The Role of the School in Social Development  347

student achievement was better when teachers believed in their collective efficacy
to motivate and educate the students (Bandura, 1993). Collective efficacy was also
a significant positive predictor of students’ academic performance in high school
(Goddard et al., 2004) and is linked with less bullying behavior in high school as well
(Olsson et al., 2017). Although researchers have not yet linked collective efficacy
directly to children’s social behavior, they have shown that children who do better
academically are likely to exhibit better social behavior (Reid et al., 2002). Moreo-
ver, they have found that the emotional climate in elementary school classrooms
is more positive when teachers report having more influence on school policy and
feelings of efficacy (Pianta et al., 2007). Therefore, promoting collective efficacy is
likely to improve both student achievement and classroom climate and children’s
social behavior as well.

School Size and Organization

From an outsider’s point of view, a large school might seem to have more going for
it with its substantial exterior dimensions, its specialized classrooms, and its crowd
of students. The small school with its less-imposing edifice, fewer rooms, and fewer
students might seem less impressive. But appearances can be deceiving.

Big school; Small school Research shows that students suffer if schools have
more than 600 students (Weiss et al., 2010). Much of a school’s benefit comes
through extracurricular activities such as clubs and sports, car washes, and bake
sales. You might think that large schools offer students a wider variety of these
extracurricular activities: band and orchestra, football and soccer, French Club and
Japanese Club, Painting Club and Digital Arts Club, Students against Land Mines
and Young Democrats for Social Justice. However, in one classic study of school
size, researchers found that large and small schools did not differ much in the vari-
ety of activities they offered, and more importantly, students’ participation rates
in extracurricular activities were actually higher in the smaller schools (Barker &
Gump, 1964). In smaller schools, students had more opportunities to join teams
and clubs because there were more positions than students to fill them. Students
also felt a greater obligation to play an active role in the small school and devel-
oped a stronger sense of belonging. Large schools had too many students for the
limited number of positions available so many students were reduced to spectator
roles. More recently researchers have also found that larger school size is associated
with less extracurricular participation and less student attachment to the school
(Crosnoe, 2011; Crosnoe et al., 2004). The reduced sense of identification and
involvement of students in larger schools may be part of the reason that dropout
rates tend to be higher in large schools than small schools (Wood et al., 2017).
Participation in extracurricular activities is linked to a number of positive out-
comes. Students who participate in these activities have better school attendance,
higher self-esteem, and higher achievement motivation (Child Trends, 2008). They
are less likely to get involved in delinquent behavior, become pregnant, experience
depression, or commit suicide (Barber et al., 2014; Mahoney, 2000). Students who
participate in school sports are especially likely to be part of a positive peer group,
which is related both to academic achievement and to stronger sense of belonging
to the school (Hughes et al., 2016; Simpkins et al., 2006). Participation in extra-
curricular activities—especially high school arts clubs—also promotes current and
new friendships (Schaefer et al., 2011). Importantly, in multi-ethnic schools, stu-
dents who participate in extracurricular activities with peers of different races and
348  Chapter 9 Schools, Mentors, and Media

ethnicity are more likely than other students to form friendships across racial/eth-
nic lines, which, in turn, leads to students having more positive attitudes toward
their classmates from different races or ethnicities (Juvonen & Knifsend, 2016). In
contrast to the view that extracurricular activities are unimportant—a view often
held by budget-minded school officials—these findings suggest that clubs and sports
actually help children and adolescents navigate their school years successfully.
Despite the advantages of smaller schools, the size of schools in the United States
has been steadily increasing (Mitchell, 2000). Educators have suggested that even
in these larger schools, creating smaller “schools within schools” can provide behav-
ior settings in which students can develop a sense of belonging that might prevent
them from dropping out of school and enhance the likelihood of positive socioemo-
tional outcomes (Seidman & French, 1997).

Age groupings in schools The way that different grades are organized also
affects children’s development. Traditionally, school was separated into two age-
based segments: the first 8 years and the next four. Today, a different organizational
scheme is popular. In this arrangement, often the first 6 years of elementary school
are grouped together, followed by 3 years of junior high or middle school (grades 7
to 9), followed by 3 years of high school (grades 10 to 12). Research suggests that
this organizational change was not a positive one for children. Most notably, stu-
dents who go to middle school and enter a new school for seventh grade are likely
to experience more social and academic problems than children who stay in their
familiar elementary school setting for seventh grade. Their self-esteem drops, they
tend to be less involved in activities and clubs, and they perceive themselves as less
integrated into their school and peer group than children who do not make the
shift to a secondary school (Eccles & Roeser, 2003; Wigfield et al., 2015).
What is the reason for these negative consequences? Compared with elemen-
tary schools, middle schools are larger, causing students to feel more alienated and
anonymous. Students are less likely to become involved in school activities, and this
reduces their sense of belonging and their sense of social competence. Instruction
patterns change, too, from a single classroom with one teacher in elementary school
to a variety of teachers and classes for different subjects in middle school. Students
are less likely to form close supportive relationships with middle school teachers
than with elementary school teachers. In middle school, children’s friendship net-
works are disrupted as a result of attending classes with children from different
elementary schools, and competition among peers is fiercer because of this change
and more stringent grading policies. Together, these changes make the transition to
middle school a challenge for younger students, and, not surprisingly, may under-
mine their social competence and lead to an increased likelihood of dropping out
(Wigfield et al., 2015).

Moving into middle school was really hard on Emma because it took a long time for
her to get used to new things. It didn’t help that she was going through puberty at the
same time. For children like Emma, too many changes all at once can make coping a
real challenge.

Shifting to a middle school is also likely to have a negative effect because pre-
adolescents are undergoing other transitions as well. The shift to a new school at
this age does not provide a good stage–environment fit. Researchers have found
that children—especially girls—who experience more transitions in this age period,
including the onset of puberty and the beginning of dating, have less self-esteem,
 The Role of the School in Social Development  349

participate in fewer extracurricular activities, and have lower grades than children
who do not undergo so many transitions at once (Mendle et al., 2007; Simmons
et al., 1987). The implications seem clear: If change comes too suddenly, is too early,
or occurs in too many areas at once, children are likely to suffer. They do better in
terms of self-esteem and behavioral coping if they have some “arena of comfort” in
their lives.
Although most attention has been given to the transition from elementary school
to middle school, the shift from middle school to high school can also be a chal-
lenge. For many students, entry into high school exposes them to a fully compart-
mentalized curriculum, more academic tracking, and an even more impersonal
social climate, in part, simply because of school size. These students may experience
a drop in their grades and an increase in social isolation; girls are particularly likely
to have adjustment problems such as loneliness and anxiety when they make the
transition to high school (Barber & Olsen, 2004; Barber et al., 2014). The ethnic
balance of the high school affects how well minority youth manage the transition.
Latino American and African American youth are more negatively affected when
their high school has fewer students from their ethnic group than when the school
offers the same ethnic balance as their middle school (Benner & Graham, 2009).
At the same time, some children fare better with school transitions than others.
Children who perceive that they have control or maintain their sense of importance
during this time are likely to experience less stress and depression than children
with more negative perceptions (Rudolph et al., 2001). In fact, for some youth,
there are benefits of the transition. For example, parents’ advice on how to handle
challenges during the transition is related to the youth becoming better liked by
peers across the transition (Gregson et al., 2017). In addition, some youth may ben-
efit from the restructuring of peer groups across the transition. This appears to be
the case for solitary anxious youth, namely, adolescents who would like to interact
with peers but spend a lot of time alone because they feel shy or anxious in social
interactions. Although solitary anxious youth are at greater risk for being excluded
or victimized by peers overall, this risk decreases across the transition to middle
school (Shell et al., 2014), perhaps because they developed better social skills with
age and have a new peer group with whom to interact.
In addition, according to educational organizations such as the Carnegie Foun-
dation and the National Middle Schools Association, there are ways that secondary
schools can be reformed to reduce the negative impact of school transitions. They
have suggested increasing teacher awareness of the special needs of young adoles-
cents and providing advising and counseling for all students. They also suggest cre-
ating small learning teams of students. This approach has tradeoffs in that it creates
a greater sense of community for most students but increases risk of victimization
for students who are not well liked (Echols, 2015). Overall, though, students in
schools that have implemented these reforms have higher self-esteem, fewer behav-
ior problems, and less fear about bad things happening to them at school than stu-
dents whose schools have not (Felner et al., 1997; MacIver et al., 2002).

Coeducational versus same-sex schools The question of whether single-

gender schools for girls and boys or coeducational schools with both boys and girls
attending are better for children’s development has long been debated. In 1972, a
law was passed in the United States making coeducation in public schools obliga-
tory. However, given that many girls do not meet their educational and professional
potential, it was suggested that girls might do better in educational contexts without
boys. As a result, in 2002, the law mandating coeducation was revoked and single-sex
350  Chapter 9 Schools, Mentors, and Media

schools became a legal option. Since 2002 the number of public schools offering
same-gender classes increased from 11 to 750 in 2014.
Some researchers were enthusiastic about the idea that girls might achieve
more and have higher career goals if they were educated in same-sex schools.
In addition, some scholars thought that without distractions from the other sex
(e.g., “flirting” with classmates), behavior in class would be better and both girls
and boys would experience greater achievement in schools. Although some have
argued that the research indicates that girls achieve more and have greater career
aspirations in all-girl schools (e.g., Sax, 2005), others argue that the evidence is
mixed at best (Halpern et al., 2011). Still others, such as Pahlke and her colleagues
(2014), found no support for gender differences in social or academic outcomes
in single-sex or coed classrooms based on a meta-analysis of nearly 1,700,000 stu-
dents in 21 countries. Even when youth in same-sex classes perform better than
youth in mixed-sex classes, evidence suggests that this is because highly skilled
and motivated students and teachers seek out this unique learning context (Halp-
ern et al., 2011; Pahlke et al., 2014). In other words, these same children, with
the same teachers, may have performed just as well in mixed-sex classes. Educa-
tors also are mixed in terms of their perceptions of same-sex classes (Fabes et al.,
2015). Although some educators perceive that same-sex classes allow both girls
and boys to focus better and allow girls to thrive academically, others do not think
that there are academic differences between children educated in same-sex ver-
sus mixed-sex classes and feel that same-sex education does not prepare youth to
function in the real world.
In fact, the strongest evidence for differences between youth in same-sex ver-
sus mixed-sex classrooms is found for social outcomes. Specifically, for children
in same-sex classrooms, gender differences become even more salient (Halpern
et al., 2011). For example, one study found that, for every hour of the school
day that 7th graders spent in same-sex classes, the likelihood that they held
gender-stereotypical views that girls are better at language and boys are better at
math increased (Fabes et al., 2013). Clearly same sex classes and schools do not
provide clear benefits in spite of early claims about their social and academic
advantages.

Class Size and Organization

Not only are children’s social experiences and development affected by differences
in school size and organization; they are even more strongly influenced by varia-
tions in class size and organization.

Advantages of small classes Being in a small class, like being in a small school,
is beneficial for children’s social development, particularly in the early grades.
Research in the United States and other countries, including the United Kingdom
and Israel, has demonstrated that in small classes teacher–child contacts are more
frequent and personalized and children are better behaved, interact more with their
peers, and are less likely to be victimized (Blatchford et al., 2011; Finn & Pannozzo,
2004; Khoury-Kassabri et al., 2004). Students in small classes contribute more to
class activities, pay more attention in class, are less likely to “fool around” and be
disruptive, and exhibit less antisocial behavior and more prosocial behavior (Finn
et al., 2003). Small class size is also associated with a more positive emotional climate
in elementary school classes (Pianta et al., 2007). Smaller classes appear to promote
an atmosphere in which students are more supportive and caring about each other.
 The Role of the School in Social Development  351

Not surprisingly, teachers in smaller classes are more satisfied as well (Blatchford,
2005). Notably, researchers and educators have expected that the impact of smaller
class sizes on the social and emotional climate of the classroom (e.g., greater student
engagement, less time managing problem behavior) should also result in greater
academic achievement. Although students’ academic achievement is somewhat bet-
ter in small classes versus big classes, this difference is very small, and there is debate
about whether these academic gains are worth the financial costs of having small
classes (Hattie, 2016). Educators also should consider whether there are larger and
long-lasting effects of smaller classes on students’ social and emotional develop-
ment that would further justify the expense of smaller classes.

Benefits of open classrooms, cooperative learning, and flipped class-

rooms Teachers can organize their classrooms and class activities in different ways.
They can stand in front of the class and lecture, or they can have students move
around, work in small groups, help each other with projects, and participate in
decision making. This is referred to as an open classroom. Moreover, as opposed
to lecturing, teachers can use a flipped classroom model of instruction. Flipped
classrooms are classrooms in which students spend most of their time engaged in
interactive learning activities, such as debates or peer reviews, with teachers helping
as needed and giving personalized feedback (Bishop & Verleger, 2013).
Many of these activities are considered cooperative learning activities. Coopera-
tive learning involves small groups of students, often representing different abilities
and backgrounds, working together (see photo). No child is singled out to be the
leader; the goal is to maximize the learning of all students and create relationships
among diverse children. Both open classrooms and flipped classrooms are designed
to promote students engaging actively in their own learning rather than passively lis-
tening to the teacher spout knowledge. Although researchers have not always found
that children learn better in open classrooms, they do develop more positive atti-
tudes toward school, show more self-reliant and cooperative behavior, and have more
varied social relationships and fewer disciplinary problems (Minuchin & Shapiro,
1983; Rothenberg, 1989; Shield et al., 2010). Furthermore, flipped classrooms have
been shown to increase students’ critical thinking skills and academic achieve-
ment (Bishop & Verleger, 2013), even in students as young as elementary school
(Aidinopoulou & Sampson, 2017). Less is known, though, about the social impact of
flipped classrooms. Nonetheless, given that flipped classrooms tend to involve coop-
erative learning activities, and cooperative learning increases children’s concern
Boogich/iStockphoto

Students in a coopera-
tive learning situation
work together, here
doing a science
experiment.
352  Chapter 9 Schools, Mentors, and Media

about peers and willingness to help each other (Slavin & Cooper, 1999), it is reason-
able to suspect that flipped classroom approaches also promote high-quality social
relationships.

Peer tutors Teachers sometimes arrange for peer tutoring in which an older,
experienced student tutors a younger or less capable child. Peer tutors can teach
children social skills as well as improving their math and reading abilities. For
example, in one study, 9- to 13-year-olds improved the social skills of special edu-
cation students by implementing a social skills curriculum (Blake et al., 2000).
Although both tutors and tutees can benefit in a variety of ways, tutors usually gain
more socially; they increase in self-esteem and status and derive satisfaction from
helping others (Dansereau, 1987; Miller et al., 2010). Many students, including
low achievers of all ethnic backgrounds and children with psychological disabili-
ties, can benefit from peer tutoring both socially and academically (Cochran et al.,
1993; Leung, 2015).

et You Thought That . . .: Homeschooled Children

Were Socially Disadvantaged

“It’s back to school time, or as or social problems such as the inability to

home-schoolers call it, stay-where- get along with peers. As one mother put it,
you-are time.” (Stephen Colbert)
“It seemed to me that several of my friends
Educating children at home is an increasingly who had been homeschooled had a very
popular alternative to formal schooling. In the hard time developing socially.”
United States, more than 1.6 million children are
homeschooled (Redford et al., 2016). In 2015, Was this parent right to worry? If you think so,
over 27,000 children were homeschooled in think again. Research suggests that concern
Canada, a 26 percent increase since 2007 (Van about homeschooled children’s social develop-
Pelt, 2017). Parents select this option for many ment is unwarranted (Ray, 2013, 2015; Shaw,
reasons: religion (33 percent), a better learning 2008). When trained counselors watched vide-
environment (30 percent), objections to what otapes of mixed groups of homeschooled and
schools teach (14 percent), or a belief that their schooled children playing, they observed that the
children are not being challenged (11 percent) homeschooled children exhibited fewer behavior
(Princiotta & Bielick, 2006; Redford et al., 2016). problems, not more (Shyers, 1992). In another
Research supports the parents’ choice. study, researchers found that homeschooled
Homeschooled students perform better on children were better adjusted, happier, and more
standardized tests than children who attend sociable than traditionally schooled peers
schools (Basham, 2001; Ray, 2013, 2015). However, (Moore, 1986). Homeschooled children in a third
as we have pointed out, school involves more study had higher self-perceptions in the areas of
than academic learning; it provides valuable academic achievement and socialization than
opportunities for children to associate with peers schooled children (Taylor, 1986). The long-term
and learn social skills. A major criticism of home- effects of homeschooling seem to be positive as
schooling is that it deprives children of experi- well. In one study, 71 percent of adults who had
ence with peers, especially those of different been homeschooled participated in community
ethnic and religious backgrounds, and this can services such as coaching or volunteering
result in feelings of social isolation and loneliness compared with 37 percent of traditionally
 The Role of the School in Social Development  353

­ ducated adults (Ray, 2003). They were also more

e of homeschooling families also sometimes join
involved in civic affairs, voted more than twice as together to create homeschool co-ops that meet
often, and claimed to be happier. regularly so the children can interact with peers
Why do homeschooled children thrive and form friendships. Some states even have
socially? For one thing, they are not socially laws permitting homeschooling families to take
isolated (Ray, 2013, 2015). Homeschooling advantage of public school resources so the
parents often take advantage of social opportu- children can participate in sports teams or
nities for their children at museums, community school band and take art classes with other
centers, athletic clubs, after-school programs, children. In addition, homeschooled children are
churches, science preserves, and parks. Groups likely to have siblings.

The Teachers’ Impact

Teachers play several roles in the classroom: instructor, social model, evaluator, and
disciplinarian, to name a few. How teachers manage each role can affect children
in a variety of ways.

Keeping control: classroom discipline and management Teachers spend a

good deal of their time trying to manage their class and disciplining unruly children.
The techniques they use can have significant effects on children’s social behavior.
Some teachers use poker chips or candies (so called “token economies”) to encour-
age children to behave and to learn their school work. Others use verbal approval,
systematically praising children’s appropriate behavior. Teachers’ attempts to apply
operant reinforcement principles to classroom control have been quite success-
ful. Numerous studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of systematic reinforce-
ment for controlling children’s behavior (Chang, 2003; Kazdin, 2000; Maggin et al.,
2011). Today it is common for teachers to set up the classroom so that children
accumulate points, tokens, or gold stars that they can then exchange for material
rewards such as candy or toys. In addition, children may pool their rewards for spe-
cial treats such as parties or field trips.
Using operant conditioning principles is clearly better for children than having
teachers shout at them or let the class go wild. Using these tangible rewards has a
downside, however. Under some circumstances, material rewards can undermine
the teacher’s agenda and children’s progress. Activities that are intrinsically interest-
ing to children may lose their appeal if the children are rewarded for doing them
(Lepper & Henderlong, 2000). For example, rewarding children for helping other
students has been shown to undermine the children’s internalized sense of moral
obligation (McLean, 2003). Token programs have a place in the classroom, but
teachers need to exercise care in choosing the target activities and in applying the
reward system. Not only does classroom management depend on the type of system
implemented, it also depends on who implements the system. In order words, some
teachers are more effective classroom managers than others. For example, teachers
who offer their students high levels of emotional support in the form of positive
affect, awareness of students needs, and responsiveness have lower rates of disrup-
tive student behavior in the classroom (Shih & Ryan, 2016). In addition, disruptive
behavior is less likely to “spread” across friends when teachers are supportive. So
when teachers are not supportive, friends of disruptive students are especially likely
to become disruptive themselves. This does not happen in classes in which teachers
are supportive.
354  Chapter 9 Schools, Mentors, and Media

Classroom management also is more effective when teachers’ decisions reflect

an understanding of the students’ cultural backgrounds. When teachers of Latino
American children appreciate that collectivistic cultures value helpfulness and adjust
their classroom practices accordingly, discipline problems decrease (Rothstein-Fisch
& Trumbull, 2008). Without this awareness, teachers often assign individual chil-
dren to classroom roles, such as chalkboard cleaner and attendance monitor. When
friends help each other, these teachers admonish them, saying, “That’s Marco’s job.
You have your own job to do!” They construe the students’ helping not only as
off task and unproductive but also, worse, as cheating. When teachers appoint two
children to each task or allow children to help one another, however, cleanup time
becomes pleasant. This type of management in which teachers support children for
being helpful instead of punishing them for interfering with a classmate’s responsi-
bility increases efficiency, task completion, and classroom harmony.

Teacher expectations and children’s success

A lot of people have gone farther than they thought they would because someone else
thought they could. (Unknown)

Although most teachers would deny it, early in the school year they form impres-
sions about how well new students will do. These impressions affect the children’s
classroom performance. In a classic study, Robert Rosenthal and Lenore Jacobson
(1968) planted expectations about certain children in the minds of some elementary
school teachers. They told the teachers that these students—whom the researchers
had chosen randomly—were “rapid bloomers” who would show unusual gains dur-
ing the school year. Eight months later, the bloomers showed a significantly larger
increase in IQ scores than other students. These results—dubbed the Pygmalion
effect after the Greek myth of Pygmalion, a sculptor whose statue of a woman came
to life—were an impressive demonstration of a self-fulfilling prophecy. Believing
that certain students were exceptionally bright, the teachers treated them differ-
ently: They gave them more chances to participate in class and more time to answer
questions; they praised them more often for correct answers and criticized them less
frequently for wrong ones. By giving the children special treatment, the teachers
reinforced the expected patterns of behavior (Brophy, 1998).
Subsequent research suggested that Pygmalion effects were also due to changes
in children’s expectations; when teachers thought children would do well, the
children adopted a similar set of elevated expectations, which in turn resulted in
increased achievement (Kuklinski & Weinstein, 2001). Research has demonstrated
self-fulfilling prophecies like these at work in Head Start classes, in programs for
children who have an intellectual disability, and in institutions for adolescents,
as well as in regular classrooms (Kuklinski & Weinstein, 2001). A meta-analysis of
479 studies indicated that Pygmalion effects are nontrivial in size (mean r = .30;
Rosenthal, 2006). Although most of these studies focused on children’s academic
success, some suggested that teachers’ expectations of children’s social behavior
affect their social success as well. Notably, these variations in teachers’ expectations
may contribute to the differential success rates of minority and majority students.
Teachers hold the highest expectations for Asian American students and the lowest
expectations for Latino American and African American students (Tenenbaum &
Ruck, 2007). Even for teachers in schools in which the students’ performance
mirrors these expectations, the expectations are problematic because they don’t
apply to every student of any given ethnic group. Some good news, though, is that
research suggests that when an ethnic group is in the numerical minority (e.g., mak-
ing up only 10–20 percent of the class), teachers’ perceptions of their achievement
 The Role of the School in Social Development  355

are actually more accurate as compared to their perceptions for the students in the
ethnic majority (Kaiser et al., 2017). The achievement of students may simply be
more memorable when the students are in the numerical minority in the classroom.

Teacher–Student relationships The quality of the relationships that children

form with their teachers is an important contributor to the children’s social and
academic success. Children whose relationship with the teacher is full of conflict
don’t like school much and are not very cooperative in the classroom; they become
less helpful and cooperative and more aggressive and depressed over time. Chil-
dren who have an overly dependent relationship with the teacher also have problems;
they are less engaged in school activities and more aggressive or socially withdrawn
with their peers. Especially in elementary school, children whose relationship with
the teacher is close and warm, however, have a high level of school adjustment, have
high self-esteem, and are more likely to be accepted by their peers. These associa-
tions have been observed in the United States and in other countries, such as China
(Birch & Ladd, 1997; Hughes & Kwok, 2006; Jia et al., 2009; Lee & Burkam, 2003;
Pianta, 1999; Yang, 2001).
The teacher–student relationship may be especially important for the social adjust-
ment of minority children. In one study, aggressive African American and Latino
American children who formed positive relationships with their second- or third-
grade teachers were observed to be less aggressive 1 year later; the association was not
as strong among European American children (Meehan et al., 2003). One reason
that European American children were less affected may be that teachers are gener-
ally more supportive of them anyway, so when teachers are more positive it has less
impact for European American children than for minority children. Teachers do tend
to use more positive and less negative speech with European American children than
with African American and Latino American children (Tenenbaum & Ruck, 2007).
Teachers are also more positive in their interpretations of European American
children’s misbehavior (Hill & Bromell, 2008). They see this misbehavior as indicat-
ing that the children are bored and infer that they should give them more interest-
ing materials. However, when teachers see African American children misbehaving,
they interpret it as indicating that the children are not engaged in learning and
infer that they are not good students.
Another reason that the quality of the teacher–student relationship matters more
for minority children may be that their parents are from a collectivist culture that
values personal relationships between teachers and students more than parents
from the individualistic majority culture (Greenfield, Suzuki, et al., 2006). Regard-
less of the specific reason, a positive relationship with a teacher can be a protective
factor for children at risk for later adjustment problems in school.

School–Family Links
Schools and classrooms are important contexts for promoting children’s self-esteem
and social skills. But how effective they are depends to some extent on how comfort-
able and welcome the children and their parents feel at the school.

School culture; Home culture Children from lower socioeconomic levels and
minority ethnic groups generally have a more difficult time in school because their
culture at home is different from their culture at school (Hill, 2010, 2015). School
is a middle-class institution based on middle-class values and staffed by middle-
class teachers, and, in the United States, strongly influenced by the individualistic
orientation of European Americans (Greenfield, Suzuki, et al., 2006; Hill, 2010;
356  Chapter 9 Schools, Mentors, and Media

Wang et al., 2014). These differences between poor and minority children and
middle-class teachers can lead to misunderstandings. In one study, European
American and Latino American children, their parents, and their teachers were asked
to reflect on several common school scenarios. For example (Raeff et al., 2000, p. 66):

It is the end of the school day, and the class is cleaning up. Denise is not feeling well,
and she asks Jasmine to help her with her job for the day, which is cleaning the black-
board. Jasmine isn’t sure she will have time to do both her own job and Denise’s. What
do you think the teacher should do?

Teachers responded to this scenario in an individualistic fashion, suggesting that

the teacher should find another child to clean the blackboard and not endanger
Jasmine’s ability to complete her task. However, children and parents gave responses
that depended on their cultural backgrounds. European American children and
their parents echoed the teachers’ responses. Immigrant Latino children and espe-
cially their parents were likely to endorse a collectivistic response and suggest that
Jasmine should help her sick classmate with her job. For these children, there was
a clear discontinuity between the orientation of the school and the orientation of
the family. Research on parent–teacher conferences with Latino parents provides
further illustration of this culture gap. When teachers praised a child’s individual
achievement, Latino parents were uncomfortable because the focus was on the indi-
vidual rather than the group (Greenfield et al., 2000).
These findings do not mean that lower-class and minority-group parents believe
their children’s education is unimportant. African American and Latino American
mothers placed a higher value on their children’s education than European Ameri-
can mothers did in one study of elementary school children (Steinberg et al., 1992),
and in a study of nearly 8,000 San Francisco Bay area adolescents and their parents,
African American parents were clearly concerned about their children’s education
(Steinberg et al., 1991). In a third study, Latino parents, especially immigrants,
such as Mexican Americans, were also concerned about their children’s education,
although they were less directly involved than European American parents, perhaps
because of language barriers and their own limited formal education (Greenfield,
Suzuki, et al., 2006). Thus, parents and teachers share a concern about children’s
education although they do not see eye to eye on children’s behavior in the class-
room (Hill, 2010, 2015). It is clear that any program aimed at improving the school
experience of poor and minority children requires that teachers be exposed to mul-
ticultural values and ideas so they have a better understanding of the cultural back-
ground of their students.

ultural Context: Matching Classroom Organization

to Cultural Values and Practices
School is a cultural setting, and activities. In the typical class in the United States,
children’s success there depends teachers instruct each child, either individually or
to a great extent on the match as part of the class, or students work alone at
between the classroom’s social their desks. For most European American stu-
organization and the child’s expectations. dents this arrangement works well. But it may not
Awareness of students’ cultural backgrounds is work as well for students from other cultures.
critical when teachers plan their classroom Researchers have found that children from
 The Role of the School in Social Development  357

Native American communities, for example, Kamehameha Early Education Program (KEEP)
experience a clash between the social rules of for kindergarten and primary school children
the classroom and the social rules and routines encouraged children’s collaboration and
at home (Phillips, 2001; Wiesner, 2017). At home, cooperation. Among the features of the program
they have a high degree of autonomy in decid- were peer-learning centers in the classroom;
ing when and whether they will talk, and they small-group classroom organization so that
often interact in groups. At school, they are less children worked in independent groups of four
willing to speak in front of the class or to respond or five students, with the teacher moving from
when called on by the teacher than are group to group to offer intensive instruction;
European American children. and encouragement of children’s cooperative
Researchers in Hawai’i have tried to reduce responses, for example, by having them co-narrate
the home–school mismatch for their students stories. Hawai’ian children did much better in this
(Tharp, 1989; Tharp & Gallimore, 1988). In the type of classroom organization than in traditional
traditional classroom arrangement, Hawai’ian classes. Not only were their academic scores
children tend to pay little attention to the teacher higher but also their social behavior was better;
and instead look for attention from their class- there was less disruption in the class, more
mates, which fits with their cultural emphasis on cooperation, and more positive relationships with
cooperation and collaboration. The classmates and the teacher.

Parents’ involvement in schools According to one estimate, about 70 percent

of U.S. school children have parents who attend at least one school or class event
during the school year (Herrold & O’Donnell, 2008). However, many parents never
participate in school activities, especially when their children are in the higher
grades (Epstein & Sanders, 2002; Herrold & O’Donnell, 2008). When parents are
involved in school activities and attend parent–teacher conferences, join the PTA,
or volunteer in the classroom, their children tend to do better both academically
and socially, according to a meta-analysis of 50 studies (Hill & Tyson, 2009). In
another study parents’ involvement was related to a decline in children’s problem
behavior and an improvement in social skills from first to fifth grade (although no
difference in achievement was observed; El Nokali et al., 2010). Moreover, although
mothers tend to be involved with their children’s schools more than fathers, pater-
nal involvement is related to positive school outcomes for their children just as
strongly as is mothers’ involvement (Sung won & Hill, 2015). However, not all forms
of parents’ involvement are equally effective according to these studies. Relegating
parents to the playground committee rather than having them participate in school
decision making is less beneficial for children (Pena, 2000). Parents’ involvement
is more effective if it allows parents to communicate their expectations to teach-
ers and show their children that they value education (Hill, 2015; Hill & Tyson,
2009). Kindergarten children whose parents were involved in these ways were more
cooperative, prosocial, and self-controlled than children whose parents were not
involved (McWayne et al., 2004). Kindergarten children whose parents and teach-
ers had particularly close relationships were more likely to improve their behavior
(Serpell & Mashburn, 2012).
What determines how much parents are involved in their children’s school activi-
ties? Parents are usually less involved if they are busy, stressed, or marginalized; for
example, if they are single, poor, have limited education or from a minority group
(Adler, 2004; Baeck, 2010; Epstein & Sanders, 2002; Jeynes, 2011). School practices
also influence parents’ involvement. When schools welcome all parents and provide
information about how they can become involved, parents respond with increased
participation (Sanders et al., 1999). Recent immigrants and even members of more
358  Chapter 9 Schools, Mentors, and Media

established ethnic minority groups such as African Americans often feel unwelcome
at school because of language barriers or cultural differences (Adler, 2004; Garcia
Coll et al., 2002; Hill, 2015). In a qualitative study of family–school interactions,
researchers found that Latino American parents with lower education levels had
interactions with school personnel that left them feeling inferior, embarrassed,
helpless, and ashamed (Auerbach, 2002). These parents are often less knowledge-
able about schools and how they work, which in turn leads them to participate less
in school activities (Greenfield, Suzuki, et al., 2006; Vega et al., 2005).
Several programs to increase the involvement of minority parents in children’s
schooling have proved successful. In these programs, teachers communicate how
parents can help their children in school, and parents communicate their goals,
values, beliefs, and practices. In a project in Los Angeles to increase teachers’ cul-
tural understanding, researchers found that teacher–parent as well as teacher–child
relationships improved (Trumbull et al., 2003). Teachers grew closer to minority
families because they were able to understand their cultural perspective. As one
teacher said (Trumbull et al., 2003, p. 57):

“I understand them better and am less judgmental and more sympathetic about why the
children are absent—‘We had to go to Tijuana because grandmother is sick’—or why
they come to class with the whole family. I was open before, but now I understand why
they do these things.”

Teachers also adopted a more personal and informal style of interacting with the
families. They designed new classroom activities that demonstrated their under-
standing of families’ cultural values and increased the number of parent volunteers
in the classroom. They changed parent–teacher conference schedules to accommo-
date parents’ needs and initiated group parent conferences, which Latino parents
found more comfortable than one-on-one meetings. They provided the parents
with a better appreciation of school goals and values. Finally, they functioned as
more effective advocates for students and families within the school system. As a
result of these changes, communication improved and respect increased on the
part of both parents and teachers. In the final analysis, children benefit when the
culture gap between their family and their school is reduced (Collignon et al., 2001;
Duran et al., 2001; Wang et al., 2014).

School as a buffer for children When children are exposed to deficiencies at

home, the school environment can buffer them against failure. Buffering occurs
even in preschool when children with an insecure attachment to their mother are
better adjusted if they develop a secure attachment to a preschool caregiver (Howes &
Spieker, 2008). In school, too, a supportive classroom environment can buffer chil-
dren from the negative effects of an unsupportive family. Gene Brody and his col-
leagues (2002) explored this issue in a sample of African American mothers and
their 7- to 15-year-old children. Children whose mothers were not involved in their
activities and provided minimal monitoring did better if their teachers provided
clear rules, their classrooms were well organized, and their classmates participated
extensively in class activities. These children had more ability to regulate their emo-
tions and were less aggressive, depressed, and delinquent than children whose
mothers and schools were both unsupportive.

As 21-year-old Jackson recalled: “Things were not too good at home but luckily I had a
great teacher who was like a parent to me. She always made sure I had my head screwed
on and my homework done. Without Miss Zax, I don’t think that I would have made it
through high school.”
 The Role of the School in Social Development  359

Given this benefit of positive school experience, perhaps it’s not surprising that
students who are at risk (e.g., due to their ethnicity or socioeconomic status) suf-
fer the most when excluded from school. Specifically, African American students
who experience discipline that involves removal from school (e.g., suspensions)
tend to feel lower levels of belonging in their schools and have more adjustment
problems (Bottiani et al., 2017). Removal from school is not associated with these
problems among European American students. Clearly, being in a good school
environment can give children from deficient families a protective edge and
allow them to succeed even though their home context is not supportive.

School Integration
Few topics have generated as much controversy in the United States as racial
segregation of schools. In 1954, the Supreme Court mandated an end to seg-
regated education, asserting that separate educational facilities are inherently
unequal (Brown v. Board of Education, 1954). Desegregation was expected to
improve ­African American students’ self-esteem and achievement levels; it was
also expected to lead both African American and European American students
to view each other more positively and to prepare them to live in an increasingly
multiethnic society.
If the criterion for judging the success of this grand national experiment is
improved self-esteem and achievement for African American students, the results
are mixed. Although some studies have reported increased self-esteem and aca-
demic achievement among African American children in integrated schools,
not all studies have documented these advantages (Wells, 1995). However, if the
criteria are increased opportunities for African American students and more
positive interracial attitudes, studies are more consistently positive (Pettigrew,
2004). Compared with those from segregated schools, African American chil-
dren from integrated schools are more likely to attend and graduate from pre-
dominantly European American colleges, more likely to work with European
American coworkers, and more likely to have good jobs. They are more likely to
live in interracial neighborhoods, have European American friends, and express
more positive attitudes toward European Americans. European Americans from
integrated schools also have more positive attitudes toward African Americans
than do European Americans from segregated schools. A meta-analysis showed
that 94 percent of 515 studies supported the hypothesis that intergroup con-
tact in integrated schools would reduce racial prejudice, especially when the
school gave groups equal status and fostered cooperation and discouraged
competition among them (Pettigrew & Tropp, 2006). A more recent analysis
(Johnson, 2015) confirmed the positive effects of school desegregation on adult
outcomes. For African Americans, school desegregation significantly increased
both educational and occupational attainments, college quality and adult earn-
ings, reduced the probability of incarceration, and improved adult health sta-
tus; desegregation had no effects on European Americans across each of these
outcomes. The mechanisms through which school desegregation led to ben-
eficial adult attainment outcomes for African Americans include improvement
in access to school resources reflected in reductions in class size and increases in
per-pupil spending.
Racial integration in the classroom is also associated with feelings of safety and
social satisfaction. In a study of sixth-grade classrooms, researchers found that
African American and Latino American students felt safer and less lonely in school,
360  Chapter 9 Schools, Mentors, and Media

were less harassed by their peers, and had higher self-worth when they were in ethni-
cally diverse classrooms rather than classrooms with a single ethnic group (Juvonen
et al., 2006). A similar pattern was observed at the school level: In more ethnically
diverse schools, students felt safer and less lonely and victimized. Many efforts have
been made to improve cross-group relationships among students in integrated
schools. In one project, for example, 830 1st and 2nd graders were given a series of
sessions over 4 weeks to help them widen their acquaintances to include children
from other groups. The program led children to be more inclusive in selecting their
most preferred playmate (Houlette et al., 2004).
Unfortunately, residential segregation and, therefore, school segregation have
increased in the United States over the past few decades (Orfield & Gordon, 2001).
In many cities, school desegregation programs have ended because there are not
enough European American children living in the city to integrate the schools,
because parents don’t want to have their children bused to integrated schools, and
because courts no longer mandate integration. Even in schools that are integrated,
class enrollments can create de facto segregation. In many such schools, African
American and Latino students are enrolled in lower-level classes than European
American students, and there are few opportunities for them to interact. Peers may
further reinforce segregation in integrated schools, especially among minority stu-
dents. For example, one study found that African American youth who wanted to
be well liked developed more positive relationships with other African A ­ merican
students and less positive relationship with European American students over the
school year (Wilson et al., 2014). Still most American parents of all races con-
tinue to support school integration (Pettigrew, 2004), and perhaps, in the future,
integration policies along with new and creative ways to implement them will be
reinvigorated.

After-School Programs
Because both parents often work full time, children may need somewhere to go
after school. Approximately 15 percent of 6- to 12-year-olds in the United States are
latchkey children, who let themselves into their homes after school and look after
themselves until their parents get home (Rajalakshmi & Thanasekara, 2015). Not
surprisingly, self-care increases as children get older, and most adolescents are in
self-care at least some of the time. On the positive side, self-care places demands
on children for responsibility and maturity (Belle, 1999). But it has a downside as
well. These children are at higher risk for problems such as antisocial behavior, poor
grades, heightened stress, and substance abuse (Belle, 1999; Lord & Mahoney, 2007;
Rajalakshmi & Thanasekara, 2015), because children are most likely to become vic-
tims or participate in antisocial behavior during after-school hours (see Figure 9.1).
The risks of leaving children alone are not lost on parents. As one mother fretted
(Belle, 1999, p. 87):

“It puts more pressure on me worrying about what she’s doing in the afternoon. From
3 p.m. on I can’t be totally relaxed. I’m thinking about whether she’s home doing her
homework.”

Parents can reduce the risks associated with self-care by distal monitoring, in which
they check in by phone, and by establishing clear rules and expectations about per-
mitted activities, friends, and places to go (Belle, 1999).
 Mentors Supporting Social Development  361

Percent of all violent victimizations in age group

12%
Violent crime
10%
Under age 18
8%
FIGURE 9.1 Children younger than 18 years experience
6%
a spike in violent victimization right after the end of the
4% school day.
Age 18 and older Source: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
2% (1999). Violence after School. Juvenile Justice Bulletin: 1999
National Report Series. Washington, DC: U.S. Department
0% of Justice. Retrieved from http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/
6 AM 9 AM 12 PM 3 PM 6 PM 9 PM 12 AM 3 AM 6 AM ojjdp/178992.pdf

After-school programs provide an alternative to self-care. Since legislation in

support of after-school programs in 1998, the number of children in self-care
showed a sharp drop (Rajalakshmi & Thanasekara, 2015). They offer activities
that help children learn new skills—for example, computer, academic, and art
skills. High-quality after-school programs are characterized by physical and psy-
chological safety, supportive relationships with adults and peers, opportunities to
belong to a group, and positive social norms (Spencer & Rhodes, 2014; Vandell
et al., 2015). Elementary school children enrolled in such programs benefit in
many ways. They have better emotional adjustment, better peer relationships, and
better conflict-resolution skills than other children; they also have better grades
and are less likely to use drugs or engage in delinquent behavior (NICHD Early
Child Care Research Network, 2004a; Mahoney et al., 2007; Vandell et al., 2015).
Parents whose children are in high-quality after-school programs feel better, too
(Belle, 1999, p. 88):

“Justin’s after-school program relieves me of the fear of him being caught on the streets
unattended. He’s playing with a selected group of kids. He’s not strapped to the TV. I
feel so comfortable with the program and teachers.”

Poorly supervised and disorganized after-school programs, however, can be detri-

mental to children’s development (Vandell et al., 2015). Parents need to be careful
to choose high-quality after-school care.

Mentors Supporting Social Development

When successful adults who have overcome difficult life circumstances are asked
to reflect on the major influences in their lives, many recall a caring adult whose
presence during their youth made all the difference. This “very important per-
son” might have been an aunt or uncle, a neighbor or friend, a teacher or coun-
selor, a pastor or rabbi, a coach or club leader, a “Big Brother” or “Big Sister.”
It was someone who served as a mentor, someone who played an important role
supporting the child’s or adolescent’s social development. Their relationship
may have developed naturally in the course of daily events, or they may have
met through a school or community program designed to match up mentors
and mentees.
362  Chapter 9 Schools, Mentors, and Media

Natural Mentors
Natural mentors include extended family members, family friends, neighbors,
teachers, coaches, after-school program staff, and religious group leaders (Schwartz
et al., 2013). The relationship with the mentor may be longstanding, spanning
many years, or more short-term, with brief encounters at critical junctures leaving
a lasting impression. Natural mentor relationships are far more common than
the formal ones that are put together in programs. In a nationally representative
study of American adolescents, three-quarters of the youth had a natural mentor.
Of these mentors, 43 percent were family members (grandmother, grandfather,
older sister, older brother, aunt, or uncle); 23 percent were informal nonfamily
mentors (coach, employer, coworker, neighbor, or friend’s parent), and 35 per-
cent were “professional” mentors (teacher or guidance counselor, minister, priest,
rabbi, doctor, therapist, or social worker). The average duration of mentoring
relationships was 9 years (DuBois & Silverthorn, 2005; Erickson et al., 2009).
Youths with many resources were more likely than disadvantaged youth to have
natural mentors.
Researchers have documented a range of benefits from having a naturally occur-
ring mentor. Children with more frequent and high-quality contact with a men-
tor have fewer behavior problems (Rishel et al., 2005). Urban adolescents with a
mentor have more positive attitudes toward school, more school engagement and
more prosocial attitudes (Schwartz et al., 2013) and are less likely to be involved
in nonviolent delinquency (Zimmerman et al., 2002). Mentors in after-school
programs promote urban youths’ self-esteem (Hirsch, 2005). Religious mentors pro-
tect young people against depressive symptoms (Carleton et al., 2008). Teacher
or counselor mentors increase the likelihood that students will graduate and pur-
sue further education (Ahrens et al., 2010; DuBois & Silverthorn, 2005; Erickson
et al., 2009), promote students’ self-esteem (Ahrens et al., 2010), and decrease
students’ problem behavior such as substance use and violence (Ahrens et al.,
2010; Black et al., 2010; DuBois & Silverthorn, 2005). Natural mentors promote
African American adolescents’ long-term educational attainment by increasing
their positive racial identity and belief in the importance of doing well in school
(Hurd et al., 2012).
Adolescents come to reflect the characteristics of their mentor: If the mentor
has a high level of education, the mentee is likely to aspire to high education; if
the mentor is a dropout, the mentee may be at risk for low educational attainment
(Chang et al., 2010). If the mentor’s characteristics include high self-esteem, posi-
tive mood, social competence, and involvement in his or her culture, the mentee’s
characteristics are likely to reflect these (Chen et al., 2003; Haddad et al., 2011; Lam
et al., 2012).

As one single mother reflected, “Having a male mentor for my teenage son made a big
difference in his life. His mentor was not just a role model but a friend and confidant
too. My son stayed out of trouble and worked hard at school. I think that his mentor
was a lifesaver.”

The importance of mentors and the links between mentors and mentees have
been observed in other cultures, such as China, as well as in the United States (Chen
et al., 2003; Lam et al., 2012).
 Mentors Supporting Social Development  363

Mentor Programs
Inspired by personal accounts and research reports such as these suggesting that
natural mentors provide important support for children’s development, psychol-
ogists, educators, community workers, and social workers have made concerted
efforts to establish formal mentoring programs. Currently, more than 5,000 men-
toring programs serve an estimated 4.5 million youths in the United States (Bruce &
Bridgeland, 2014). These programs have provided opportunities for more system-
atic exploration of the effectiveness of mentors.
A meta-analysis of 73 independent evaluations of mentoring programs conducted
over the past decade provides a useful summary of what researchers have learned
(DuBois et al., 2011). Overall, findings document the effectiveness of mentoring
programs for improving social, emotional, behavioral, and academic development.
The most common pattern of benefits is for mentored youth to exhibit positive
gains and for youth without mentors to exhibit declines. Benefits are apparent from
early childhood to adolescence, across multiple domains simultaneously. However,
gains have been modest (equivalent to about 9 percentile points). Programs are
more effective when youth have preexisting difficulties, such as behavior prob-
lems, or are from disadvantaged backgrounds; when evaluation samples include
more boys; when there is a good fit between the backgrounds of the mentors and
the goals of the program; and when mentors and youth are paired based on simi-
larity of interests. Additional studies suggest that there may also be an advantage
when mentors and mentees are of the same ethnicity (Rhodes et al., 2007; Syed
et al., 2012), when mentors are consistent in their attendance (Karcher, 2005),
when mentors and mentees form a relatively close relationship (Bayer et al., 2015;
Rhodes & DuBois, 2008; Thomson & Zand, 2010); and when the mentor–mentee
relationship lasts for a long time (Rhodes et al., 2008; Schwartz et al., 2013).
Mentor–mentee pairs meeting together in groups has proven especially effective for
increasing trust and other relationship outcomes among adolescent girls (Deutsch
et al., 2017). Finally, programs that facilitate youth actively recruiting their own
mentors from their community are showing promise as a new approach to this issue
(Schwartz et al., 2013; Spencer et al., 2016).
A model of mentoring created by Jean Rhodes (2002) suggests how mentor-
ing supports children’s social-emotional development. A strong and meaning-
ful personal connection is forged between the young person and the mentor, for
instance in the context of working together on goal-oriented tasks, which is some-
times referred to as “instrumental help.” A positive interpersonal foundation then
catalyzes developmental processes in social-emotional and identity-related areas.
By modeling caring and providing support, mentors challenge negative views that
youth hold of themselves and demonstrate that positive relationships with adults are
possible. In this way, the mentoring relationship becomes a “corrective experience”
for youth who have experienced unsatisfactory relationships with parents or other
caregivers. Also, by serving as a sounding board and providing a model of effective
adult communication, mentors help youth understand, express, and regulate their
emotions, and in doing so, they facilitate youth coping, helping them approach
even negative experiences as opportunities for growth and learning. Positive social-
emotional experiences with mentors then generalize, enabling the youth to interact
with others more effectively. Mentors can also help shift youths’ conceptions of their
current and future identities by introducing them to new activities, resources, and
educational or occupational opportunities.
364  Chapter 9 Schools, Mentors, and Media

Electronic Media and Children’s

Social Lives
Electronic media—television, video games, online videos, smartphones, the
Internet—are also important in children’s lives from a very early age, and most
children spend more time with them than they do either at school or with a mentor.
Moreover, over 95 percent of families with children have at least a television set and
a mobile device, such as a tablet or a smartphone (Common Sense Media, 2017). In
addition, over 80 percent of families have Internet access at home and video game
consoles, such as an Xbox or Playstation (Common Sense Media, 2017; Rideout
et al., 2005).

Screen Media: Television and Digital Media

A generation ago, most families had one or maybe two televisions and if more than
one family member wanted to watch TV, the program choice had to be negotiated
and family members typically watched together. Since then, the landscape of screen
media has changed dramatically. Children still spend considerable time watching
TV at the time it is programmed, but they can also watch prerecorded shows (e.g.,
using a DVR or On Demand), they can watch DVDs on the TV, a computer, or hand-
held DVD player, and they can watch recorded programs or stream video on a TV,
computer, tablet, or smartphone. Today, it is not uncommon for a family of four to
simultaneously be watching four separate programs on four separate devices. There
are both benefits and concerns related to these new developments.
Most children start viewing screen media in infancy or toddlerhood. On aver-
age, children under 2 years old watch about 30 minutes of TV or other screen
media each day (Common Sense Media, 2017). Previously, the American Academy
of Pediatrics recommended that children under 2 years old have no screen time
at all (American Academy of Pediatrics, Committee on Education, 2001). How-
ever, given the potential benefits of some types of screen time and of educational
programing, the recommendations have been loosened somewhat. Now the
­American Academy of Pediatrics recommends only video chatting (e.g., Skyping
with grandparents) for children until 1½ years old and that high-quality, educa-
tional programming be chosen for children older than 1½ years old. Older children
and adolescents typically watch an average of 2.5 hours of screen media per day
(Figure 9.2; Common Sense Media, 2015, 2017; Loprinzi & Davis, 2016), with some
children watching many more hours each day (Romer et al., 2013). How much
screen media children watch is related to their family characteristics as well. Chil-
dren watch more screen media if they are from African American or Latino families
(Child Trends, 2012c; Rideout et al., 2010). However, to some extent, these findings
may be explained by socioeconomic status. Children under 8 years old from low-
income families watch about twice as much screen media as children from higher
income families.

Positive Effects of Screen Media

Educational TV programs have been shown to have positive effects on children’s cog-
nitive and language development (Calvert, 2015; Comstock & Scharrer, 2006). But
does TV have a positive effect on children’s social development? Researchers have
 Electronic Media and Children’s Social Lives  365

Differences in media use by age

Average amount of time young people spend per day. . .
Playing video games Listening to music Using computers Watching TV
4 hours

3 hours

2 hours

1 hour

0 hours
8–10 11– 14 15 – 18 8 – 10 11 – 14 15 –18 8 – 10 11 – 14 15 – 18 8 – 10 11 – 14 15 – 18
Years
FIGURE 9.2 Children’s use of media. As children get older, they watch less TV and spend less time playing
video games; they spend more time listening to music and using the computer.
Source: Rideout et al., 2010. Report Generation M2: “Media in the Lives of 8 to 18 Year Olds,” (#8010) The Henry J. Kaiser
Family Foundation, January 2010. This information was reprinted with permission from the Henry J. Kaiser Family Founda-
tion. The Kaiser Family Foundation is a non-profit private operating foundation, based in Menlo Park, California, dedicated
to producing and communicating the best possible analysis and information on health issues.

assessed the impact of watching Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood on young children’s proso-
cial behavior. This program, still seen in reruns, along with its spin-off Daniel Tiger’s
Neighborhood, focuses on understanding feelings, expressing sympathy, and helping
others. The children who watched Mister Rogers not only learned the specific prosocial
content shown in the program but were able to apply that learning to other situa-
tions involving their peers (Anderson et al., 2001; Mares & Woodward, 2012; Singer
& Singer, 2001). Similarly, shows such as Sesame Street, which also encourages proso-
cial behaviors such as sharing and cooperating, increase prosocial actions in young
viewers (Mares & Woodard, 2012). This is especially true among young children from
middle- and upper-class families whose parents watch the programs with them and
encourage their altruistic behavior. Positive effects of prosocial TV programs have been
found in many different cultures. Watching Rechov Sumsum or Shara’a Simsim, which
are Sesame Street programs designed to promote respect and understanding among
children in Israel and in the West Bank and Gaza, was linked to Israeli and Palestin-
ian preschoolers’ increased use of prosocial justifications for resolving conflicts and
increased use of positive attributes in describing members of the other group (Cole
et al., 2003). A meta-analysis of 34 studies revealed that watching prosocial TV con-
tent was consistently related to children’s having higher levels of social interaction
and altruism and lower levels of aggression and stereotyping (Mares & Woodard, 2005,
2012). And these effects appear to endure through adolescence (Lee & Huston, 2003).

Potential Negative Effects of Screen Media

Children watch a variety of programs on TV including cartoons, situation come-
dies, family-oriented programs, and educational shows such as Sesame Street. They
also watch regular programming enjoyed by their parents and older siblings.
366  Chapter 9 Schools, Mentors, and Media

Unfortunately, in a number of ways the content of these programs is not suitable for
children. In particular, there are concerns regarding aggressive and violent content,
sexual content, and representations of minorities.

Aggression and violence First, many of these programs contain a great deal
of violence—violence that is apparently increasing in frequency, despite efforts
of advocacy groups to curb it. An examination of prime-time programs on the six
major broadcast networks between 1998 and 2006 revealed that violence during the
8 p.m. “family hour” increased by 45 percent (from 1.61 instances per hour to 2.34
instances per hour), violence during the 9 p.m. hour increased by 92 percent (from
2.41 to 4.63 instances), and violence during the 10 p.m. hour increased by 167 per-
cent (from 3.53 to 9.43 instances) (Schulenburg, 2007). Worse still perhaps, analysis
of before-school, after-school, and Saturday-morning programming across the net-
works and cable channels uncovered an average of 7.86 violent incidents per hour
(Fyfe, 2006)—more even than during prime time. The violence was ubiquitous,
often sinister, and in many cases, frighteningly realistic. Even children’s programs
are not immune from exhibitions of aggression; a content analysis of children’s live-
action sitcoms revealed that characters in them treated other humans as inferior for
the sake of a laugh, and examples of such cruelty and mean-spiritedness averaged
34 per hour (Starsen, 2011).

What are the consequences of children’s exposure to violence on

screen media? One of the most serious negative effects of TV on children’s
social development is increased aggression. Viewing violence on screen media
can affect children’s attitudes and behavior, leading them to view violence as
an acceptable and effective way to solve interpersonal conflict (­ Bushman &
­Huesmann, 2012; Calvert, 2015). This effect of TV violence has been documented
not only in the United States but also in other countries including A ­ ustralia, Fin-
land, Great Britain, Israel, the Netherlands, and Poland. The effect of TV viewing
on children’s aggression is discussed in more detail in Chapter 12, “Aggression.”
One of the reasons why viewing violence on screen media may lead to aggression
involves desensitization. That is, frequent viewers of violence tend to become desen-
sitized to violence and, in turn, show less of an emotional response to violence and
aggression (Cantor, 2000).

Gender and sexual content Notably, girls and women are underrepresented
on TV; they account for only 43 percent of series regulars on prime-time broad-
cast TV—although they make up more than half of the U.S. population (GLAAD,
2011). But that’s not the main problem. Worse is the way they are portrayed in
certain programs—programs that children and adolescents often watch. In real-
ity shows, women are often depicted as subservient, vindictive, materialistic,
money-grabbing, and ultimately existing for nothing but for the approval of one
man—think The Bachelor (Pozner, 2010). A content analysis of the most popular
prime-time cable reality shows among 12- to 17-year-olds during the 2011 TV
season—including Jersey Shore, Real World, Teen Mom 2, and 16 and Pregnant—revealed
a disturbingly unrealistic portrayal of “reality,” where outlandish behavior was
rewarded and where degrading, sexualized language was encouraged (Parents Tel-
evision Council, 2011). Women were routinely the recipients of denigrating lan-
guage, but they also were more likely than men to be negative about themselves
and to other women. Only 24 percent of what women said about themselves was
 Electronic Media and Children’s Social Lives  367

positive. Although the terms men used for each other were often viewed as com-
plimentary (big man, dawg, superhero), the language women used when talking
about other women was degrading (bitch, cunt, skank, slut). This trash talking is
repulsive. It’s also not really “reality.” Nicole “Snooki” Polizzi told GQ Magazine that
the positive material in Jersey Shore was edited out by the producers, so reality
television isn’t even reality by the time it leaves the edit room. It also lacks anything
positive or inspiring for children and adolescents. Nor is the picture changing. A
recent analysis of prime-time TV programming involving 89 programs and 1,254
characters revealed that not only women continue to be underrepresented but ste-
reotypes of dominant men and sexually provocative women have persisted (Sink &
Mastro, 2016).
Moreover, the sexuality and sexual appeal of women and girls, at increasingly
young ages, is highlighted, often to the exclusion of any other traits. The sex-
ualization of girls is apparent even for very young girls, with programs such as
­Toddlers & Tiaras, in which young female children strut their bikini-clad bodies,
vying for a beauty pageant crown, wearing wigs, false eyelashes, fake nails, and
spray tans. Preschool girls are shown playing with Bratz dolls that sit in hot tubs
and mix drinks. Elementary school girls are shown visiting salons to have their
legs waxed. Victoria’s Secret advertises its “Wild in Bed” pink clothing line for
young adolescents. A content analysis of prime-time TV shows conducted by the
Parents Television Council (2010) demonstrated the tendency of screen media to
objectify, fetishize, and sexualize young girls, and a report prepared by an Amer-
ican Psychological Association Task Force on the Sexualization of Girls (2010)
revealed that the media incessantly encourages girls and young women to appear
as sex objects, making repeated attempts, in the form of advice about hairstyles,
cosmetics, clothing, diet, and exercise, to shape them as objects of male desire. As
sociologist Gail Dines pointed out in 2010:

“Most of the images we see in pop culture are pornified. Miley Cyrus gained fame as
sweet young Hannah Montana before her handlers carefully plotted her career path to
include music videos as a 16-year-old performing pole and lap dances in various stages of
undress. If she wanted to stay visible in our culture, she had to adopt these porn images.”

Professor Dines certainly demonstrated insight into the trajectory of Cyrus’

image, which became even more sexualized after 2010.
As a result of viewing the consistent sexualization of girls on TV, real girls may
come to see their value as stemming primarily from their sexuality (Parents Tel-
evision Council, 2010). This likely heightens their need to be seen as fitting the
media ideal of attractiveness (Dines, 2010). Unfortunately, most girls will realize
they can never measure up to expectations—for example, over the past few dec-
ades the ideal body image standard has shrunk from size 6 to an unrealistic size 0
(Clark, 2008). According to the American Psychological Association Task Force on
the Sexualization of Girls (2010), sexualization and objectification undermine girls’
confidence in and comfort with their own bodies. In fact, 40 percent of American
9- and 10-year-olds have tried to lose weight, and 30 percent have already developed
an eating disorder such as bulimia or anorexia. The problems of TV and sexuali-
zation may extend beyond girls, too: Exposure to narrow ideals of female sexual
attractiveness may make it more difficult for men to find an “acceptable” partner
or to fully enjoy intimacy with a female partner. Boys also are not exempt from
these trends toward an ideal body type for themselves. However, for males it often
means adding muscle and bulking up in order to meet the expectations of male
368  Chapter 9 Schools, Mentors, and Media

images in the media (Cruz, 2014; Field et al., 2014). According to a meta-analysis,
there was a significant relationship between exposure to muscular media images
and men’s negative self-images (body dissatisfaction, low body esteem, and low self-
esteem; Barlett et al., 2008). “The media has become more of an equal opportunity
discriminator. Men’s bodies are not good enough anymore either” (Lemberg, cited
by Cruz, 2014).
The amount and nature of sexual content on screen media likely impacts youths’
sexual experiences in other ways as well. The sexually explicit content in TV pro-
grams is high and increasing (Calvert, 2015; Comstock & Scharrer, 2006; Fyfe, 2006).
Young people see nearly 14,000 sexual images or messages on screen media in a
year (Strasburger & Wilson, 2002). Sexual content is a standard feature of situation
comedies, soap operas, and prime-time programs aimed at older children and ado-
lescents as well as adults. In a survey of 900 TV programs airing between 7 a.m. and
11 p.m., researchers found that 66 percent contained sexual messages, with a rate of
four sexual references per hour (Kunkel et al., 2001). Even in the Family Hour, over
half of programs contained sexual content (Parents Television Council, 2007).
Importantly, the sexual content on screen media, which often conveys unhealthy
sexual messages on TV, may affect youth negatively (Furman & Rose, 2015). Tel-
evision emphasizes a “recreational” orientation to sex, often outside a committed
relationship, with little reference to contraception, pregnancy prevention, or sexu-
ally transmitted infections (Kunkel et al., 2003). In the Parents Television Council
(2010), content analysis of prime-time TV shows popular among teens, for example,
98 percent of the sexual incidents involving underage female characters occurred
outside of a committed relationship. In one study, researchers found that high
school students who were more frequent viewers of sex-laden prime-time program-
ming supported recreational sex (Ward & Friedman, 2006). This could have been
because they already had formed attitudes about sex and chose to watch TV shows
that validated them rather than having attitudes created by TV. The researchers,
therefore, conducted an experiment in which they showed the students clips from
dramas and sitcoms that were popular at the time, such as Seinfeld and Friends, that
showed sex as recreation, women as sex objects, and men as sex driven. Adolescents
in the control group saw clips of nonsexual scenes from the same programs. The
adolescents who saw the sexual clips were more likely to agree that women are sex
objects than adolescents in the control condition. Likewise, the more adolescents
watch TV, especially with heavy sexual content, the more likely they are to assume
that their peers are sexually active, to engage in sexual intercourse, to initiate sex
earlier, and to get pregnant (Brown, 2011; Chandra et al., 2008; Collins et al., 2011a, b;
Eggermont, 2005).
Television does have the potential to be a positive influence on sexuality. For
example, a depiction of date rape followed by a rape-crisis hotline number in a
popular teen program resulted in an increased number of calls after the episode
(Folb, 2000) and heightened exposure to contraception advertisements was associ-
ated with increased awareness of safe sex practices (Agha, 2003). However, given the
current content of screen media, the impact on the development of young people’s
sexual attitudes and behavior is more likely to be negative than positive.

Stereotypes of minority groups Screen media also may bias children’s attitudes
toward minority groups (Greenberg & Mastro, 2008). The diversity of charac-
ters’ ethnicities and sexual orientations is still not an accurate reflection of the
American population (GLAAD, 2011; Lowry, 2013). Regular characters on prime-
time broadcast TV are overwhelmingly likely to be European American; Latino
Americans and African Americans are underrepresented (6 percent rather than
 Electronic Media and Children’s Social Lives  369

16 percent and 10 percent rather than 13 percent, respectively; GLAAD, 2011).

Similarly, Asian Pacific islanders represent only 4.3 percent of actors in TV shows
(Chin et al., 2017). Only 2.9 percent of regular characters are gay, lesbian, bisex-
ual, or transgender—significantly lower than most estimates of the LGBT commu-
nity in the U.S. population. Nevertheless gay characters on TV are more likely to
be shown in sexual situations than are straight characters—fulfilling a stereotype
of the sexual lifestyle (Netzley, 2010). Similarly, Latinos on TV are more likely to
play domestic workers or criminals than to have professional jobs such as doctor
or judge (Children Now, 2004). Even in reality shows, African Americans often fit
racial stereotypes (Tyree, 2011), and even in Spanish-language telenovelas broad-
cast in the United States, the majority of characters are light-skinned and those who
have darker skin portray extreme characters, reflecting the same stereotypes as are
seen on English-language TV (Rivadeneyra, 2011). Finally, Asian Pacific Islanders
continue to be depicted in unrealistic ways as model minorities, emasculated men,
exoticized women, or Kung fu fighters (Chin et al., 2017).
Not surprisingly, children of all ethnic groups associate European American
characters on TV with being rich, intelligent, and well educated and ethnic minor-
ity characters with breaking the law, being economically stressed, and acting lazy or
goofy (Children Now, 1998) or geeks and overachievers (Park et al., 2015). Studies
of the effects of TV viewing on racial attitudes suggest that children’s prior notions
have a considerable impact on the way TV depictions affect their views (Huston &
Wright, 1998). Rather than producing bigotry, TV may be strengthening existing
negative attitudes. Either way, there is still plenty of reason for concern.

Does screen media impact perceptions? An important question is whether the

information that youth are exposed to via screen media impacts how they see the
world. In fact, TV is an important source of knowledge about other people, and
the more time youth spend “living” in the world of TV, the more likely they are to
report perceptions of social reality that reflect what they see on TV even though
this information is often inaccurate (Calvert, 2015; Gerbner et al., 1980). For exam-
ple, people who view TV extensively tend to overestimate the degree of danger and
crime and bad behavior in the world and underestimate the trustworthiness and
helpfulness of other people (Nan, 2011). Another demonstration of how TV can
bias children’s perceptions about the social world was conducted several years ago
(Mares et al., 2012). Fifth graders were randomly assigned to watch a TV episode
that was either high or low in social conflict and then answered questions about
what they expected their experience would be when they started middle school.
The children who saw high-conflict episodes anticipated more hostility and less
friendliness in their future school and felt more anxious and less positive about
going there than those who saw low-conflict episodes. Clearly, children’s percep-
tions of the world may be impacted by their exposure to screen media, and biased
perceptions of violence, sexuality, and minority groups are likely to be a result.

Do Children Understand What They See?

To understand what they see on TV, children need to be able to distinguish between
fantasy and reality. Displaying what has been called magic window thinking, very
young children may believe that TV images are real (Bushman & Huesmann,
2012; Calvert, 2015). Three-year-olds walk to the TV screen to wave at their favorite
characters or try to touch them (Valkenburg, 2004). Many young children think
that Big Bird is real (Howard, 1998), that Sesame Street is a place where people
370  Chapter 9 Schools, Mentors, and Media

actually live, that TV characters can see and hear them when they are watching
them, and that everything on the screen actually exists inside the TV set (Nikken &
Peeters, 1988; see Table 9.1).
As children get older and their cognitive skills increase, their ability to distin-
guish fantasy from reality improves. Four-year-olds understand that the characters
and objects they see on TV are not actually inside the TV set (Flavell et al., 1990).
Older children understand that most shows are made up, scripted, and rehearsed
(Wright et al., 1994).
Children’s developing cognitive skills also help them understand cause-and-effect
relations in TV shows. The ability to connect an action with its consequence may
protect children from some of the negative effects of viewing TV violence. A number
of researchers have found that if a character in a TV show is punished for aggressive
acts, children are less likely to imitate those acts (Bushman & Huesmann, 2012).
Unfortunately, however, few violent acts on TV are punished or criticized (Center for
Media and Public Affairs, 1999). Moreover, because the complex plots of TV pro-
grams often separate a character’s aggressive action from the consequence of that
action, young viewers have difficulty linking the crime with the punishment. One
researcher showed third-, sixth-, and tenth-grade children an aggressive TV sequence
(Collins, 1983). Some children saw a sequence in which the characters were punished
immediately; others had to wait through a commercial before they saw the punish-
ment. Although the commercial break did not affect older children who have longer
memory spans, 3rd graders who saw the delayed punishment sequence were more
likely to indicate that they would behave aggressively than were 3rd graders who saw
the immediate punishment.
The inability of young children to link actions and outcomes in regular TV pro-
gramming might contribute to the heightened effect of TV aggression on younger
viewers (Bushman & Huesmann, 2012; Calvert, 2015). However, even young

TABLE 9.1

What Young Children Believe About TV

“I was watching Sesame Street once when Mr. Snuffalupagus was walking right behind Gordon and I shouted out ‘he’s
right behind you!!!’ Gordon turned to the camera (me) and replied, ‘Did you say “he’s right behind me?”’ From that
day forward I never sat in front of the TV in my underwear again.”
“I used to believe television was just another window in our house and sesame street characters were my neighbors.”
“I used to think that the people on TV can hear you talking at home, so whenever my parents started talking about
something else i felt bad for the newsreaders, coz i thought that they knew they were being ignored.”
“I used to believe that before color television was invented the world was actually black and white.”
“I used to believe that in films, when the scene changed, the people who were in the previous scene would freeze until it
was their time to talk again.”
“I thought if you turned the TV off while a person was on screen, they would die! I used to wait for ages for a scene with-
out people in to turn it off.”
“When I was a little girl I believed that movies were recorded from cameras in the sky, so I would go around playing like I
was in a movie.”
“When I was little, my family was sitting in the living room watching the news. Operation Christmas Child was on the
report, and when I heard that the kids didn’t get presents, I took one of my presents from under our Christmas tree
and tried to give it to one of the kids on the TV.”
Source: http://iusedtobelieve.com/
 Electronic Media and Children’s Social Lives  371

children can be taught to draw a distinction between what they see on TV and what
is acceptable in the real world. In one study, children participated in small-group
discussions over a 2-year span in which they were taught that TV is an unrealistic
portrayal of the real world, aggressive behaviors are not as common in real life
as they are on TV, and it is inappropriate to behave like aggressive TV characters
(Huesmann et al., 1984). Compared with children who did not participate, chil-
dren in the discussion groups were less aggressive at the end of the 2-year period.
Helping children understand that what they see on TV is not reality (even in reality
shows) can help reduce the harmful effects of ­viewing TV violence.

eal-World Application: Advertising Influences

Children’s Choices
On average, children are and consume more of it (Dixon et al., 2007).
exposed to about 25,000 According to one 6-year-old British boy “I might
commercials every year be in the middle of eating an apple, but if I see
(Desrochers & Holt, 2007). an ad for junk food, I’ll toss the apple and ask
Sugary cereals, fast-food snacks, and expensive my mom for money to buy the unhealthy
and sometimes silly or even dangerous toys are advertised item at the store” (Cancer Research,
often the subjects of advertising directed at UK, 2016).
children (Calvert, 2015; Matthews, 2008). The influence of advertising is also seen in
Television advertising reaches millions of children’s choice of toys. Researchers have
children daily, and 1.2 million children visit food found that when young children write to Santa,
websites each month (Harris et al., 2012). the ones who watch more TV, especially if they
Parents and developmental psychologists are watch alone, ask for more toys in their stockings
understandably concerned because so many (Pine & Nash, 2002) and are more likely to ask
ads advocate items that are not good for specifically for the toys advertised on TV (Pine
children. From about 8 years of age, children et al., 2007). Advertising is also related to older
begin to become more skeptical and critical of children’s requests for toys, CDs, clothes,
advertising—a trend that peaks by age 12 ­computer games, and sports equipment as well
(Bousch, 2001). Nevertheless, ads can influence as to their level of materialism, increasing their
both younger and older children’s preferences. belief that it is important to have a lot of money
Children from ages 4 to 12 years have been and own a lot of things (Buijzen &
found to prefer brands of drinks, snacks, cereals, Valkenburg, 2003).
and sugary foods that they saw advertised on When children are exposed to commercials,
television (Buijzen et al., 2008; Pine & Nash, 2003). they try to influence their parents to buy what
This is unfortunate, given that in 2015, a stagger- they’ve seen advertised (Kunkel & Castonguay,
ing 80 percent of food and beverage ads 2012). Children’s requests and pleadings for
featured unhealthy products classed high in advertised products increase parent–child
saturated fat, sugar, or sodium (Sadeghirad conflicts (Valkenburg, 2004). Thus, commercials
et al., 2016). Not surprising, watching commer- create not only an economic drain on the family
cials was significantly associated with obesity— but an emotional strain as well. Advertising leads
even when researchers controlled for children’s to purchase requests, and purchase requests
family background, earlier weight, level of lead to parent–child conflict and the child’s
exercise, and eating during television viewing disappointment if the request is denied, and
(Sadeghirad et al., 2016; Zimmerman & Bell, disappointment leads to increased dissatisfac-
2010). Children who watch more commercial TV tion with life (see Figure 9.3; Buijzen & Valkenburg,
have more positive attitudes toward junk food 2003). Parents can reduce these undesired
372  Chapter 9 Schools, Mentors, and Media

Materialism

Advertising Purchase Parent-child

exposure requests conflict

Unhappiness: Disappointment

Unhappiness: Life dissatisfaction

FIGURE 9.3 Observed unintended effects of advertising. Being exposed to advertising is related to chil-
dren’s making more purchase requests and having more materialistic attitudes; making more purchase
requests leads to more conflicts with parents and more disappointments.
Source: Buijzen, M., & Valkenburg, P. M. (2010). The unintended effects of television advertising: A parent–child
­survey. Communication Research, 30, pp. 483–503, copyright © 2010. Sage Publications. Reprinted by Permission of
Sage Publications.

effects of television advertising by explaining to always tell the truth; attempts to restrict children’s
their children that the purpose of advertising is to exposure to commercial television content are
sell products and that advertising does not not effective (Buijzen & Valkenburg, 2005).

How Can Parents and Siblings Modify TV’s

Negative Effects?
According to a national survey of more than 30,000 U.S. 6- to 11-year-olds, children
are particularly likely to have behavior problems if they are frequent TV viewers
and their parents are not actively involved in their lives (Mbwana & Moore, 2008).
Children who watched more than 3 hours of TV a day, who did not communicate
very well with their parents, and whose parents knew few or none of their friends
had the highest levels of externalizing problems (acting out) and internalizing
problems (depression and anxiety).
Parents can help diminish the potentially negative impact of screen media on
their children in a number of ways (Hogan, 2012). One is to watch programs with
the children. This message seems to be getting across to parents: The proportion
of time children reported watching screen media with their parents increased
from 5 percent in 1999 to 32 percent in 2004 (Rideout et al., 2005). “Co-viewing”
programs is especially helpful for general audience fare (Troseth et al., 2016).
Watching with Mom or Dad can help children cope with fear aroused when the
programs are scary. In fact, children say that their most common strategy when they
are afraid of what they are watching is to “sit by Mom or Dad” (Huston & Wright,
1998). Children often watch with their siblings as well (Roberts et al., 1999), and
preschoolers who watched a scary show with an older sibling were less upset than
preschoolers who watched the show alone (Wilson & Weiss, 1993).
A second strategy to diminish the negative impact of screen media is for par-
ents to be active mediators and help children understand and interpret the pro-
grams they are watching (Valkenburg, 2004; Wright, Huston, Murphy et al., 2001).
 Electronic Media and Children’s Social Lives  373

Parents can help younger children make connections between actions and their
consequences. When adults help children make these connections, in fact, younger
children’s understanding of the plots of programs is just as good as that of older
children (Collins et al., 1981). Moreover, children whose parents explain events and
clarify information tend to be more imaginative, less aggressive, and less hyperactive
(Singer et al., 1988).
A third strategy to diminish the negative impact of TV is for parents to express
their disapproval of what they see (Anderson et al., 2003). In one study, research-
ers had an assistant watch TV with a child and either approve of the violent
actions they saw—“Boy, he really landed a good one.” “Terrific!”—or disapprove—
“That’s awful.” “He’s really hurting him” (Grusec, 1973). Children who heard the
disapproving remarks were less likely to behave aggressively after the TV show than
children who watched with an assistant who responded approvingly.
A fourth strategy to counteract the negative effects of TV is for parents to encour-
age children to empathize with victims and take their perspective. In one study,
sixth-grade boys who watched an aggressive Woody Woodpecker cartoon were sub-
sequently less aggressive if the adult experimenter asked them to think about the
victim of Woody’s behavior (Nathanson & Cantor, 2000). Boys who watched with-
out the empathic commentary were more aggressive. Unfortunately, parents rarely
explain content, discuss values, or interpret the meaning of TV programs for their
children (Barron et al., 2001).
A fifth strategy parents can use to reduce the negative effects of TV on their
children is to restrict the children’s exposure. It is not clear how common this
practice is (Barron et al., 2001). Parents’ ability to regulate their children’s media
use is decreasing as more TV sets and mobile devices have migrated to kids’ rooms
(Rideout et al., 2005; Valkenburg, 2004). Only about half of the 8- to 18-year-olds
in one national study said that their families had rules about TV (Rideout et al.,
2005).

nto Adulthood: Still Playing Games?

Young adults today are the first for the future of their families—with today’s young
generation to have grown up men “languishing in a playground of drinking,
playing video games. From Atari to hooking up, and playing Halo 3” (Hymowitz, cited
Nintendo to the Xbox, gaming has in Smith, 2008). This view has prompted a pas-
been part of their lives. But what sionate response from adult gamers who claim
happens when they reach adulthood? Do they that gaming is a hobby—nothing more—even
give up games for a job, a marriage, a mortgage, though they confess that they sometimes get up
and children? Apparently not. According to a to play between 4 and 7 a.m. (Smith, 2008).
report by Entertainment Software Association According to a survey of 802 adults, those who
(2017), gamers age 18 or older represent are gamers live a well-rounded life: 93 percent
72 p­ ercent of the video game-playing population read books or daily newspapers, 94 percent
and, the typical gamer today is 35 years old. follow news and current events, 61 percent
So what are the consequences when gamers engage in religious activities, and 50 percent
grow up? Some journalists blame video games spend time painting, writing, or playing an
for the underachievement of modern “child-men.” instrument. On average, they spend three times
They compare young men in the 1960s—who more time each week in these and other “recrea-
were holding down solid jobs, striving to be good tional” activities than they do playing video and
husbands and fathers, and laying property plans computer games (Fahey, 2005).
 374  Chapter 9 Schools, Mentors, and Media

Adult game players differ from adolescent save at the drop of a diaper (Struck, 2007). As
players. In a survey of players of the massively children grow, parents want games they can play
multiplayer online role-playing game (MMORPG) with them or at least in front of them. A study
Everquest, researchers found that the number of released by the Entertainment Software
hours played peaked at age 20 to 22 years Association (2017) found that 67 percent of
(average 29 hours per week) and declined parents play video games with their children at
thereafter (to 23 hours per week by age 30) least once a week. Forty-five percent of these
(Griffiths et al., 2004). Adult gamers were signifi- parents believe that playing has brought their
cantly more likely than adolescents to be female families closer together, and they appreciate that
(20 percent versus 7 percent). They were less as parents they should be involved with whatever
likely to sacrifice their education or work to play their kids are doing, whether it’s baseball or video
the game (7 percent versus 23 percent) and games (Entertainment Software Association,
more likely to sacrifice a hobby (28 percent 2017).
versus 19 percent) or social time with friends It appears that game playing continues into
and family (21 percent versus 12 percent). They adulthood and becomes integrated into family
were less likely to say that violence was their life as parents share their gaming interest with
favorite aspect of the game. Clearly adult their children. The long-term effects this will have
players are more “mature” in their gam- on the next generation will no doubt be influ-
ing activity. enced by how video games themselves evolve
Parents are a growing segment of the adult and mature. In the end, they may turn out to be
gaming population. For them, time is the biggest a more positive context for social development
challenge. When their children are young and than Little League. So stay tuned!
making demands, parents need games they can

Playing Video Games

Another major media past time is playing video games. Youth play games on smart­
phones, tablets, and computers, but serious gamers play on video consoles such as a
Playstation, Xbox, or Nintendo Switch. Even some children 8 years old and younger
play video games but video game use increases with age (Common Sense Media,
2015, 2017). Among older children and teen-
agers, boys play video games at higher rates
than girls (Common Sense Media, 2015); with
one study estimating that 73 percent of 8- to
10-year-old boys play video games for an aver-
Ranald Mackechnie/Getty Images, Inc.

age of 1½ hours a day (Rideout et al., 2005).

In part, this is because most games are male
oriented rather than designed with girls’
interests and tastes in mind (Subrahmanyam &
Greenfield, 2012). Of course, some youth spend
much more time playing video games with
about 10 percent of youth playing over 4 hours
each day (Romer et al., 2013). Young people
who grow up with video game consoles in their
bedrooms spend more time playing than those
Video games become an engrossing activity and important source of enter- without—a difference that remains even when
tainment, information, joy, frustration, and social interaction from an early age, gender, race, and socioeconomic status
age—especially for boys. are held constant (Rideout et al., 2010).
 Smartphones and Social Media  375

A major concern related to video games is the violent content to which youth are
exposed. More than 85 percent of video games have violent content (Subrahmanyam
et al., 2001; Subrahmanyam & Greenfield, 2012). As discussed in regards to other
forms of screen media, viewing video game violence is found to lead to desen-
sitization. For example, frequent players experience a lower physiological reac-
tion (e.g., a lower heart rate) to real-world aggression after playing a violent video
game (Carnagey et al., 2007). Frequent video gamers also have a weaker brain
response to violent images than infrequent gamers (Bailey & West, 2011), and,
even after playing a single violent video game, an infrequent gamer shows this
physiological desensitization (Engelhardt et al., 2011). Frequent violent video gam-
ers are less empathic toward other people (Fraser et al., 2012; Funk et al., 2004),
more numb to the pain and suffering of others (Bushman & Huesmann, 2012).
That said, as with the effects of screen use on aggressive behavior, the size of these
associations tends to be small in magnitude, equivalent to a correlation of about .15
(Ferguson, 2013).

Smartphones and Social Media

Youths’ access to the Internet, especially via smartphones, has increased dramati-
cally over the past several years. About 75 percent of teenagers have smartphones
now (Common Sense Media, 2015; Lenhart, 2015). Many of these phones have
data plans that allow for access to the Internet via LTE (Long-Term Evolution),
but, even if they don’t, they can connect through wireless connections (WiFi) that
are available at no charge in many public places. Youth use these phones for many
purposes, including taking pictures and watching online videos, but the biggest
changes that the availability of the Internet and smartphone have created involve
peer interactions. Youth can now stay in almost constant contact with one another
through texting and instant messaging. They also can post about their activities
and opinions in real time on social media sites such as Instagram and Snapchat.
Nearly continuous access to the Internet and social media has both positive and
negative effects on youth.
Despite the broad use of the Internet, there are some demographic differences
in Internet access and use. The percent of low-income families with Internet access
at home has increased dramatically, from 42 percent in 2011 to 74 percent in 2017
(Common Sense Media, 2017). However, the percent of higher-income families
with home Internet access was 92 percent in 2011 and rose even higher to 96 per-
cent by 2017. There are relatively few gender differences in Internet use. For exam-
ple, girls and boys are spending similar amounts of time browsing the Internet and
downloading music (Gross, 2004). However, as we have already mentioned, boys
play online games more than girls. In addition, girls spent more time on social
media than boys (Common Sense Media, 2015; Lenhart, 2012).

Potential Positive Effects of Smartphones

and Social Media
Some research indicates that using the Internet for social networking is related to
positive psychological adjustment (Mikami et al., 2010). In fact, many teens report
a positive effect of social media use on their emotional well-being (Common Sense
Media, 2012), indicating that using their social networking site makes them feel
less shy (29 percent), more outgoing (28 percent), more confident (20 percent),
more sympathetic to others (19 percent), and better about themselves (15 percent).
376  Chapter 9 Schools, Mentors, and Media

There are likely some benefits both for social relationships and for individual iden-
tity development.

Effects on social relationships Many youth feel that smartphones have improved
the quality of their lives (CTIA, 2009). Parents typically feel safer knowing that they
can contact their child when they are apart and about 80 percent of the youth
themselves said the phone made them feel safer. Researchers studying teenagers in
Israel concluded that, in that hazardous environment, mobile phones were “security
objects” in parent–teen relationships—important because they provided the possi-
bility of contact and communication at all times (Ribak, 2009).
For the most part, though, youth use computers, and especially smartphones, to
communicate with peers; many youth feel that smartphones have improved their
communication with friends by making it a richer experience (CTIA, 2009). They
allow young people to exchange moment-by-moment experiences in their daily lives
with special partners and thus to have a more continuous sense of connection with
friends. On the downside, smartphones are sometimes used to terminate relation-
ships as a way to avoid the discomfort associated with a face-to-face breakup (Forgays
et al., 2014). Although there was initially some suggestion that extended Internet
use led to increased loneliness and decreased real-life social involvement, more
recent evidence has not supported this finding.
Researchers have shown that children use the Internet as a way to make new
friends. In a national survey of teens (13- to 17-years old), 57 percent made a new
friend online with 29 percent of teens indicating that they have made more than five
new friends in online venues. Most of these friendships stay in the digital space; only
20 percent of all teens have met an online friend in person (Lenhart , 2015). In the
majority of cases (69 percent), adolescents who form online friendships have con-
tact with these people outside the Internet (e.g., through phone), but face-to-face
meetings are less common (Mitchell et al., 2001). Most new online relationships
are less intense and less supportive than face-to-face relationships with friends and
relatives (Subrahmanyam et al., 2001). Multiuser domains (MUDs) and massively
multiplayer online role-playing games (MMORPGs) are two sources of online social
relationships. Nearly all adolescents in one study made at least one personal rela-
tionship when participating in MUD games, and most made four or five contacts,
including close friendships (44 percent), friendships (26 percent), and romantic
relationships (26 percent) (Parks & Roberts, 1998). Boys are more likely than girls
to use game platforms to meet others and maintain friendships (Lenhart, 2015).
In sum, the Internet is a venue for maintaining social ties and forming new, albeit
weaker, ties. The Internet is also a way of widening social contacts. In one study, for
example, European American adolescents reported that interaction with people
from other ethnic groups was a salient and influential aspect of their online experi-
ence (Tynes et al., 2008).
Researchers have conducted laboratory experiments to study the formation of
Internet relationships. In these studies, pairs of previously unacquainted adoles-
cents meet each other for the first time either in an Internet chat room or face to
face. Those who meet first on the Internet report that they like each other more
than those who meet first face to face—even when, unbeknown to them, it is the
same partner both times (McKenna et al., 2002). With their online friends, adoles-
cents found it easier to express their “true” selves, those aspects of themselves they
felt were important but private (Bargh et al., 2002). The relative anonymity of the
Internet contributes to close relationship formation by reducing the risks inherent
in self-disclosure.
 Smartphones and Social Media  377

Internet communication can also support and strengthen friendships made off-
line (Reich et al., 2012). Although most social relationships originate in the “real
world,” smartphones can be used to keep in touch as youth can text or instant mes-
sage (IM) friends whom they’ve just said goodbye to in person. Adolescents in a
study in China, in fact, reported that they used IM to improve their interpersonal
relationships in real life (Lee & Sun, 2009). In one survey, half of the teenage social
media users said that using such media had mainly helped their relationships with
friends, compared to just 4 percent who said that social media use had hurt their
offline relationships (Common Sense Media, 2012). In addition, a majority of these
teens said that social media helped them keep in touch with friends they couldn’t
see regularly (88 percent), helped them get to know other students at their school
better (69 percent), and helped them connect with new people who shared a com-
mon interest (57 percent).

Internet identity Exploring and expressing one’s identity is another strong moti-
vator for using the Internet. Adolescents who feel that important aspects of their
identity—for example, their sexual orientation—cannot be expressed in real-life
search for forums in which they can express these characteristics (Long & Chen,
2007; Miller, 2016). In part due to this reason, the LGBTQ community tends to
use the Internet more than their heterosexual counterparts (Miller, 2016). They
explore different identities in multiplayer online role-playing games, and actively
trying to manage how they present themselves on social media sites such as Ins-
tagram and Snapchat. Adolescents use social media to express and explore their
evolving identities (Schmitt et al., 2008; Seargeant & Tagg, 2017), and they seek
fame for their identity on YouTube (Uhls & Greenfield, 2012). The effects of online
identities on youths’ psychological adjustment or development of a real-life self are
just beginning to be explored. However, one study found that lonely adolescents
who used the Internet to experiment with their identities became more socially
competent (Valkenburg & Peter, 2008).

Concerns Regarding Smartphones and Social Media

Despite benefits, there are risks of Internet use as well. These include overuse, risky
sexual interactions, cyberbullying, negative feelings as a result of lurking, and mala-
daptive social support.

Overuse Some young people get so attached to their phones that the attach-
ment can resemble addiction (Walsh et al., 2008). According to a recent survey,
50 percent of teens feel addicted to their mobile devices and 78 percent check
their devices hourly (Common Sense Media, 2016). For example, researchers in
one study found that youth experienced insecurity and stayed up late at night
engaged in messaging; they believed that they could not live without their cell
phone (Kamibeppu & Sugiura, 2005). Others report that excessive smartphone
use is linked with sleep problems; children who use a media device right before
bed are more likely to sleep less than they should, more likely to sleep poorly, and
more than twice as likely to be sleepy during the day (Twenge, 2017). In fact, in
one study researchers asked 1,000 students in ten countries on five continents to
abstain from using all such electronic media for a full day (Moeller, 2012). The
students reported that going without these media made it seem like they had lost
part of themselves. Being tethered to digital technology, 24/7 was not just a habit,
378  Chapter 9 Schools, Mentors, and Media

it was essential to the way they construct and manage their friendships and social
lives. Here are a few quotes from these students about how they felt when they had
to unplug for a day:

“I was itching, like a crackhead, because I could not use my phone.” (U.S.)
“From my lack of social networking I had no idea what people were up to, no idea what was
happening and generally didn’t know what to do with myself. I even often found myself thinking
of status’s I could put if I was to go on.” (U.K.)
“I would feel irritable, tense, restless and anxious when I could not use my mobile phone. When
I couldn’t communicate with my friends, I felt so lonely, as if I was in a small cage in a solitary
island.” (China)
“It was ridiculous when I bought new shoes and I could not phone my mom to say how beautiful
they were. (Slovakia)
“I had to tell my friends and family of the project to not alarm anyone because, for example, it is
very common for my family to call me or send a text message to my cell to see where I am.” (Argentina)
“Even in my dreams I saw myself chatting, using Skype, Twitter, adding people on Face-
book.” (Chile)

Even if the Internet activities a youth is engaging in are appropriate, overde-

pendence on the device can interrupt sleep, interfere with other activities, and
cause anxiety when the device is not available. Compulsive Internet activity is even
linked to real-life problems such as skipping class, poor grades, or missing social
engagements (Kim et al., 2009). Finally, taking a vacation from mobile devices for
as little as 5 days can yield social benefits according to a recent study of sixth-grade
children who attended a summer camp where no mobile devices were allowed
(Uhls et al., 2014). Compared to children who did not attend camp and continued
to have access to their mobile devices, the device-free children improved in their
ability to detect other people’s emotions at the end of the camp period. Perhaps
too much screen time may interfere with social detection of others’ emotions.

Effects of internet sex Although the Internet can be a helpful outlet for some
youth in terms of exploring their sexual identify (e.g., LBGT youth who live in
small, conservative communities), other youth have problematic sexual interactions
or engage in risky behavior via the Internet. Parents often worry about pedophiles
and predators contacting their child over the Internet, though, the frequency of
this kind of threat is relatively low (Berkman Center for Internet and Society, 2008).
A more common phenomenon is adolescents’ exposure to pornography and other
adult sexual material—whether they are looking for it or not (Owens et al., 2012;
Peter & Valkenburg, 2016; Subrahmanyam & Greenfield, 2008). Exposure to por-
nography on the Internet can cause children anxiety and upset. In fact, among 10- to
17-year-olds in one study, 25 percent said that they had unintentionally encountered
sexual material, and a significant number were upset or embarrassed by this type
of content (Mitchell et al., 2003). Exposure to sexual images is not always acciden-
tal; however, as some adolescents, especially boys, seek out sexually explicit images
(Peter & Valkenburg, 2006, 2016).
Another risk is that youth can engage in sexual communication online that
they might not feel comfortable engaging in person and that they may not be
psychologically ready for. As discussed later, this can involve texting or messag-
ing with individual peers and can even include sending sexually explicit pictures.
A major concern about this is that there is a digital record of the interaction that
can be shared with others. Sexual communication also happens in online forums.
 Smartphones and Social Media  379

For example, researchers found that in teen chat rooms, adolescents were, on
average, exposed to one sexual comment every minute and an obscenity every
2 minutes (­Subrahmanyam et al., 2006). In addition, according to a study of nearly
700 students in the Czech Republic, 16 percent of those who used the Internet
had tried cybersex, including talking about sex, exploring sexuality, undressing,
and masturbating, and both boys and girls were equally likely to be cybersex par-
ticipants (Vybíral et al., 2004). And there are real-life consequences. According to
a national survey of adolescents, sharing sexual photos was associated with several
types of sexual behaviors (e.g., oral sex, vaginal sex) as well as some risky sexual
behaviors—particularly having concurrent sexual partners and having more past-
year sexual partners. Adolescents who shared sexual photos also were more likely
to use substances and less likely to have high self-esteem than their demographically
similar peers (Ybarra & Mitchell, 2014a).

Lurking A recently identified phenomena that can cause distress is lurking, or

viewing others’ social media posts. Most people, especially youth, post only care-
fully groomed information and pictures that present their lives in the best possi-
ble light; understandaly, this can make others reflect on and feel bad about their
own experiences (Underwood & Ehrenreich, 2017). Moreover, a specific risk of
lurking is that youth see posts or pictures of social events to which they were not
invited (Przybylski et al., 2013). In fact, over 50 percent of youth have experienced
seeing posts of events to which they were not invited and about 20 percent report
feeling worse as a result of seeing friends’ social media posts (Lenhart, 2015).

Cyberbullying An additional risk of Internet communication is cyberbullying,

which is when someone engages in behavior to hurt someone using digital com-
munication. Cyberbullying can include directly communicating hurtful messages
to another person, sending negative information or opinions about someone to a
large group of peers, or purposefully posting information or pictures with the goal
of hurting someone (e.g., a picture of a cheating boyfriend to hurt the current girl-
friend). (See Chapter 12, “Aggression for a fuller discussion”.) The anonymity of
Internet communications may lead to this sort of inappropriate behavior. Children
and adolescents may feel freer to express their negative opinions when they can-
not be seen and do not have to witness the impact of their words on other people.
A recent national survey found that 49 percent of Internet users ages 15 to
17 had experienced some form of online verbal abuse (being called offensive
names), while 83 percent reported witnessing this type of cyberbullying (­Lenhart
et al., 2016). Another 38 percent reported that “someone purposely tried to
embarrass them” and 78 percent witnessed this form of harassment. Sexual
minority individuals experience online harassment at higher rates than hetero-
sexual Internet users. Those who are harassed report anger, annoyance worry,
and even fear. An earlier national survey of U.S. youth between the ages of 10
and 17 who had been harassed online in the past year (Finkelhor et al., 2000;
Ybarra, 2004) found that one-third of the harassed youth reported feeling very
or extremely upset; one-third experienced at least one symptom of stress fol-
lowing the incident. Boys who were harassed were more than three times as
likely to report a major depression as boys who were not harassed. The con-
sequences of negative online onslaughts have even included suicide. In future
studies, researchers should investigate whether young people report depressive
symptoms in response to negative Internet experiences or whether depression
increases the risk of negative online incidents.
380  Chapter 9 Schools, Mentors, and Media

Risky social support Another way in which the Internet can increase children’s
and adolescents’ mental health problems is by fostering communication between
individuals with problems. Researchers have found that adolescents solicit and share
information about their problems—for example, self-injurious behavior—via online
message boards (Whitlock et al., 2006). These researchers identified more than 400
self-injury message boards, most populated by females who described themselves as
between 12 and 20 years of age. Findings indicated that online interactions clearly
provided social support for otherwise isolated adolescents but also suggested that
online interchanges normalized and encouraged self-injurious behavior and added
potentially lethal behaviors to self-injurers’ repertoires. Others report similar mixed
outcomes for online social support (Best et al., 2014).

esearch Up Close: Role-Playing Games

and Social Life
MMORPGs, such as Rift, Everquest,
and World of Warcraft, offer a
place where players can experi-

Nigel Treblin/AFP/Getty Images Inc

ence teamwork, encouragement,
and fun and where players can express them-
selves in ways they might not feel comfortable
doing in real life because of their appearance,
gender, sexual orientation, or age. To find out how
these online role-playing games affect people’s
social lives, Helena Cole and Mark Griffiths (2007)
surveyed nearly 1,000 players from 45 countries.
The players reported that MMORPGs were highly
interactive environments providing many oppor- computer games, or MMORPGs for 1 month. The
tunities to form friendships and emotional researcher then examined the effects of being
relationships. In fact, the opportunity for social assigned to play these different types of games
interaction was a major contributor to the on participants’ game use, health, well-being,
players’ enjoyment, and a high percentage of sleep, socializing, and academic activities.
them claimed that they had made lifelong MMORPG players differed significantly from the
friends. However, it is difficult to draw conclusions other three groups. They said that they had spent
from a correlational study such as this one in more hours playing the game, had experienced
which participants selected themselves to be more enjoyment while playing, had more interest
part of the project. Perhaps outgoing and in continuing to play, and had acquired more
gregarious people were more likely to choose new friendships. That was the good news. They
such gaming opportunities, and their social also reported that they had experienced worse
predispositions created the highly social atmos- health and sleep quality and more interference
phere of MMORPGs. with their real-life socializing and academic work.
Joshua Smyth (2007) solved this problem by These studies suggest that MMORPGs do provide
conducting an experimental study of the effects social opportunities, but at a cost. The challenge
of MMORPGs on players’ social well-being. One is to find ways to successfully blend new social
hundred 18- to 20-year-olds (73 percent male; opportunities in the world of cyberspace with
68 percent white) were randomly assigned to social relationships in your own real-life
play arcade games, console games, solo community.
 Smartphones and Social Media  381

nsights from Extremes: The Risks of Sexting

On July 3, 2008, Jessica Logan, a picture of his 16-year-old ex-girlfriend to dozens of
teenager from Cincinnati, Ohio, her friends, received 5 years’ probation and was
committed suicide after her placed on the sex-offender registry, a label he will
nude photo, meant for her carry with him until he is 43 (Feyerick & Steffen,
boyfriend, was forwarded to other 2009). He was also kicked out of college, lost
girls at her school (Celizic, 2009). She was the many of his friends, and had trouble finding a job
subject of jokes, taunts, and ridicule for several because of his status as a convicted felon.
months after the incident and “just could not Most teens, at one time or another, make
live it down,” according to her father. This tragic stupid decisions, engage in risky behavior, and
loss of life was the final outcome of “sexting”: test their limits. This is how they learn and grow.
sending sexually explicit messages or photos But with instant gratification just a click away,
electronically, usually between cell phones simple teen thoughtlessness is catapulted onto a
but also over the Internet. Sexting is a growing new stage. Modern technology enables teens to
trend in the United States and other countries make instantaneous errors without reflecting on
including Great Britain, Australia, Canada, and the long-term consequences for themselves
New Zealand. According to a 2009 survey, one or others.
in five teenagers has sent sexually explicit The publicity surrounding tragic outcomes of
photos to another person (Harsha, 2009). sexting, such as the suicide of Jessica Logan or
Although these exchanges are intended to be the sentencing of Phillip Alpert, has raised the
private, the material can be distributed to others. awareness of parents, teachers, and teens about
Some “sexts” have even ended up on forums the perils of this practice. Schools have initiated
used by child sex offenders. educational programs to inform students, and
This distribution of private images does not organizations are developing guidelines to help
only damage the victim; the person who shares parents and teens understand the risks associ-
the image can face serious legal consequences ated with this new social trend (National
for violating the victim’s privacy. In several cases, Campaign to Prevent Teenage and Unplanned
teenagers who have either sent nude pictures of Pregnancy, 2009; Web Wise Kids, 2009). Following
themselves or forwarded revealing pictures of their recommendations might reduce the
others have been prosecuted for child pornogra- practice of sexting and might save the lives of
phy. For example, Phillip Alpert, an 18-year-old boy future Jessicas and prevent the legal conse-
in Orlando, Florida, who sent a copy of a naked quences for others like Phillip.

earning from Living Leaders: Nancy E. Hill

Nancy Hill, an expert on family–school relations,
is the Charles Bigelow Professor of Education
at Harvard University. After her graduate work
at Michigan State University and postdoctoral
Courtesy of Nancy E. Hill

study at Arizona State University, she taught at

Duke University before going to Harvard. Her
primary research interests include understand-
ing family socialization in diverse contexts.
Specifically, she studies how socialization var-
ies across ethnic and socioeconomic groups
382  Chapter 9 Schools, Mentors, and Media

and is influenced by neighborhood processes completing graduate work at Harvard and Boston
and other contexts such as schools. She also University, she taught at the University of Texas at
studies demographic variations in the rela- Dallas and then at the University of Wisconsin
tions between family dynamics and children’s at Madison in educational psychology, human
development. development and family studies, and psychol-
Her recent research includes Project PASS ogy. Her research has focused on three issues:
(Promoting Academic Success for Students), a the effects of early child care and education
longitudinal study that examines family predic- on children’s development; the effects of after-
tors of children’s school performance from school programs and activities on children and
kindergarten through 4th grade. Another study, youth, particularly low-income children of color;
ACTION/ACCIONES, is a multiethnic longitudinal and children’s relationships with peers, parents,
study of parents’ involvement in education at the siblings, teachers, and mentors. Her research
transition between elementary and middle methods include observations, interviews, and
school. She collaborates with the Study Group on surveys, and her work spans ages from infancy
Race, Culture, and Ethnicity, an interdisciplinary to adolescence. Her findings have clear practi-
group of nationally known scholars who are cal implications and have been used as the
developing theories and methods to define and basis for improving the quality of child care
understand the cultural contexts of diverse and after-school programs for children. Vandell
families. She hopes her work will be used to has served on advisory boards and panels for
promote better relations between families and the National Academy of Science, the National
schools, thereby improving the lives of minority Institutes of Health, the U.S. Department of
children who are often at a disadvantage Education, and the National Institute for Early
in school. Education Research as well as several founda-
tions, and she has provided testimony before
Further Reading the U.S. Congress and other federal, state, and
Hill, N. E. (2015). Family-school relationships during adoles- local government bodies. According to Vandell,
cence: Communication and levels of engagement. a big challenge for the field is achieving the
In S. M. Sheridan & E. M. Kim (Eds.), Research on family-
school partnerships: An interdisciplinary examination right balance in posing questions that inform
of the state of the science and critical needs. understanding of fundamental issues underly-
New York: Springer. ing developmental science while providing
practical information to parents, educators,
and policy makers that can be used to sup-
Deborah Lowe Vandell
port healthy child development in very diverse
contexts. She encourages undergraduates “to
expand your learning by going outside of the
classroom to work with your professors on their
research projects and to volunteer in local child-
Courtesy of Michelle Kim/UCI

hood programs and afterschool programs. Take

advantage of opportunities to observe children
with their families and peers in stores, parks, and
other public settings. You can learn so much by
careful observation!”

Further Reading
Vandell, D. L., Larson, R., Mahoney, J., & Watts, T. (2015). Chil-
dren’s organized activities. In R. Lerner (Series Ed.) and
Deborah Vandell is Professor of Education and M. H. Bornstein & T. Leventhal (Volume Eds.), Handbook
of child psychology and developmental science
past founding Dean of the School of Educa- (7th ed.): Vol. 4. Ecological settings and processes in
tion at the University of California at Irvine. After developmental systems. New York: Wiley.
 Smartphones and Social Media  383

Patricia M. Greenfield Lifetime Contribution to Developmental

Psychology in the Service of Science and Society.
She frequently talks to reporters about children
and the new media. Greenfield sees the main
challenge for the field as incorporating theoreti-

Courtesy of Patricia M. Greenfield

cally and empirically the effects of social and
cultural change on human development—that is
to see developmental trajectories as evolving
rather than assuming that they are constant over
historical time. Another challenge is to move
away from methodocentrism—to understand that
each method—from qualitative to experimental
to large-scale quantitative—has its strengths and
weaknesses and that a useful theory or concept
can be explored in multiple ways, all of which
Patricia Greenfield is Distinguished Professor of
contribute to a total picture. She advises students
Psychology and Director of the Children’s Digital
to ”go where your heart leads. If you are consider-
Media Center at the University of California,
ing graduate school in a field relating to children
Los Angeles (www.cdmc.ucla.edu). As a graduate
and you have had some research experience as
student at Harvard University, she was introduced
an undergraduate, ask yourself the following
to cross-cultural research and began a career
question: Are you more interested in your data or
studying how different cultures deal with tech-
your participants? If the former, a Ph.D. in develop-
nological advances and the development of
mental psychology may be a good path for you.
formal education. Over the course of her career,
If the latter, consider a master’s degree in a
she showed how the introduction of new media
hands-on field such as social work, education, or
transforms the ways we communicate, form
marriage and family therapy.“
social relationships, and learn new social roles.
She began studying media effects on children
in the United States when she received a phone Further Reading
call from a local radio station about a new pro- Uhls, Y. T., Michikyan, M., Morris, J., Garcia, D., Small, G.W.,
Zgourou, E., & Greenfield, P.M. (2014). Five days at
gram for children that the station had started to outdoor education camp without screens improves
develop. This led to her 11-year-old daughter’s job preteen skills with nonverbal emotion cues. Computers
as a radio advice columnist for kids and to in Human Behavior, 39, 387–392.
Greenfield’s interest in studying the effects of radio
and television on children. Her interest in computers
Aletha C. Huston
and video games followed from her son’s fascina-
tion with them and his ability to learn to program
much faster than she could. Electronic media
became a family focal point, and the intergenera-
tional process of cultural transmission went in both
Courtesy of Aletha C. Huston,

directions as both her son and her daughter went

into media-related careers. Greenfield’s history
offers an example of how social scientists’ choice of
University of Texas

problems is often influenced by their children’s

interests. It illustrates the point that children influ-
ence their parents as well as the reverse.
Greenfield has received numerous awards for
teaching and research, including an award for
outstanding behavioral science research from Aletha Huston is Professor Emerita of Child
the American Association for the Advancement Development at the University of Texas at Austin.
of Science and the Urie Bronfenbrenner Award for Although she started out as a chemistry major,
384  Chapter 9 Schools, Mentors, and Media

she became interested in social development Contributions to Developmental Psychology

as a result of working with Albert Bandura, the in the Service of Science and Society and the
social-learning theorist, at Stanford University. Nicholas Hobbs award for Research and Child
The goal of her work has been to describe the Advocacy from the American Psychologi-
processes by which observation of social behav- cal Associaton. The most pressing issue today,
ior (primarily on TV) influences children’s learning according to Huston, is how to introduce knowl-
and behavior. In addition, she has studied the edge about children’s development into the
effects of poverty and child care on children’s policy process. She sees multidisciplinary work,
development. Her proudest accomplishment is combining developmental sciences, sociology,
that she was the first researcher to go beyond policy analysis, and economics, as an exciting
studying violent television programs to study trend that will lead to better understanding of
prosocial television programs. This began a long complex problems. As an undergraduate, she
program of research in which she investigated was frightened by the idea of doing original
the potential of television for teaching children research because she thought it required a new
social and cognitive skills and contributed to a theory or something remarkably creative, but her
movement to improve children’s television rather message to students today is, “Don’t be intimi-
than simply criticizing it. The Federal Communi- dated. You can start small, working with good
cations Commission frequently cites her work mentors, and grow into doing good work.”
in decisions about children’s television, and she
has been widely recognized for her work. She Further Reading
has won numerous research awards, includ- Huston, A. C. (2018). A life at the intersection of science and
ing the Urie Bronfenbrenner Award for Lifetime social issues. Child Development Perspectives. 12, 75–79.

Chapter Summary
Role of Schools in Social Development
• Schools have an informal agenda of socializing children by teaching them the
rules, norms, and values they need to make their way in society and helping
them develop the skills to interact successfully with their peers.
• Schools are communities of teachers, students, and staff. Children who develop
a sense of community in school do better socially and have lower rates of vio-
lence and drug use; they are also less likely to drop out of school.
• In small schools, children are more likely to participate in extracurricular activ-
ities and less likely to drop out than in large schools.
• Making the transition from elementary school to middle school or from mid-
dle school to high school can affect children’s self-esteem negatively.
• Children in single-sex schools do better academically and perhaps socially than
children in coeducational schools, perhaps because of differences in the char-
acteristics of the schools and the parents who select them.
• In small classes, teacher–child contacts are more frequent and personalized
and children are better behaved, interact more with their peers, and are less
likely to be victimized.
• Elementary school children in open classrooms have more varied social con-
tacts, develop more positive attitudes toward school, and show more self-­
reliance and cooperation in learning situations. High school students in open
classrooms participate more in school activities, have more varied social rela-
tionships, and have fewer disciplinary problems.
 Chapter Summary  385

• Cooperative learning involves small groups of students working together. This

classroom technique has a positive effect on children’s self-esteem, concerned
feelings about peers, willingness to help, and enjoyment of school.
• Peer tutoring in which an older, experienced student tutors a younger child
has benefits for both the tutor and the pupil, but tutors usually gain more.
They benefit in self-esteem and status, and they derive satisfaction from help-
ing others.
• Children whose relationship with the teacher is close and warm have high lev-
els of school adjustment and are likely to be accepted by their peers. Minority
children are especially likely to benefit from close teacher–child ties.
• Children are likely to succeed academically and socially when teachers expect
them to do so, demonstrating a self-fulfilling prophecy or “Pygmalion effect.”
• Teachers’ expectations for poor and minority children are less positive than
for other children.
• When parents are involved in their children’s school, the children tend to do
better, especially if the parents’ involvement includes communicating expecta-
tions to teachers and communicating the value of education to children.
• Children in high-quality after-school programs have better emotional adjust-
ment, better peer relationships, better conflict-resolution skills, and less delin-
quency than latchkey children.
• Children from integrated schools feel safer and more satisfied and develop
more positive interracial attitudes than children from segregated schools.
Mentors
• Children with frequent, good-quality contact with a natural mentor have fewer
behavior problems, higher self-esteem, more positive attitudes toward school,
and higher educational attainment.
• Mentoring programs lead to modest gains in social, emotional, behavioral, and
academic development from early childhood to adolescence, especially when
youth have preexisting difficulties or are from disadvantaged backgrounds and
mentors and mentees “click.”
Screen Media
• Screen media is a major influence on children’s social behavior. Viewing begins
early in life and increases until adolescence.
• Children watch a variety of programs, including cartoons, situation comedies,
family-oriented programs, and educational shows. Boys watch more action-
adventure and sports programs; girls prefer social dramas and soap operas.
• Very young children display magic window thinking in which they do not dis-
tinguish between screen media game fantasy and reality.
• Programs that teach children about social rules and expectations, such as
Sesame Street and Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood, have positive effects on children’s
prosocial behavior.
• Negative effects of television and video games include biasing children’s per-
ceptions; children who are extensive TV viewers tend to overestimate the
degree of danger and crime in the world and underestimate people’s trustwor-
thiness and helpfulness.
• Screen media and perhaps video games curtail children’s social interactions
and activities such as sports and clubs.
• Screen media portrayals of minority groups often support ethnic stereotypes.
• Exposure to violent screen media leads to desensitization and increased
aggression.
386  Chapter 9 Schools, Mentors, and Media

• Exposure to sexually suggestive media fare leads to more acceptance of sexual-

ity, earlier sexual activity, and higher rates of pregnancy.
• Screen media advertising influences children’s consumer choices, especially
preferences for food and toys that may be either unhealthy or dangerous.
• Parents can modify the effects of media viewing by serving as interpreters of
media messages and as managers of access to programs and games.
• Almost all U.S. teenagers use Internet social media.
• Boys are more likely to be heavy gamers and girls engage in more social media.
• The Internet is a venue for maintaining social ties and forming new, albeit
weaker, ties as well as for exploring identities.
• Children are exposed to pornography and other adult sexual material—often
inadvertently—which can cause anxiety and upset.
• The Internet can affect children’s and adolescents’ well-being through overin-
volvement and online harassment or cyberbullying. It can also foster exchange
of information between individuals with problems, such as self-injurious
behavior.
• Smartphones foster social connections with peers across time and space; they
can become “addictive” if children think they can’t live without them and they
can become dangerous if children use them for sexting.

Key Terms
cooperative learning magic window thinking Pygmalion effect
desensitization natural mentors self-fulfilling prophecy
flipped classroom open classroom stage–environment fit
latchkey children peer tutoring

At th e M ov i e s

Schools and electronic media are not just textbook topics In Won’t Back Down (2012) two determined mothers, one
but also popular subjects for movies. This selection of films a teacher, look to transform their children’s failing inner
and television programs might make you think more deeply city school. Facing a powerful and entrenched bureaucracy,
about the issues discussed in this chapter. they risk everything to make a difference in the education
Teachers in Film. The Ron Clark Story (2006) drama- and future of their children. This illustrates an extreme case
tizes the true story of a teacher who moved to Harlem and of parent involvement in schools. The film is loosely based
was given the “opportunity” to educate an unruly sixth-grade on events surrounding the use of the Parent Trigger Law in
class. He has a hard time trying to reach the tough kids, Los Angeles, when several groups of parents attempted to
but he perseveres, asserting his “we-are-family” creed and take over failing public schools. This law, which was passed
enforcing his multiple classroom rules. Gradually, the class in California and other states in 2010, allows parents to over-
warms up to him, and the story ends happily. The ending is rule administrators in underperforming public schools and
not so happy in The Class (2008). This French movie focuses to direct changes such as dismissal of staff and conversion of
on the clash between naive students and flawed teachers. a school to a charter school.
One teacher’s class is populated by teenagers from diverse School Integration. One of a number of films exploring
backgrounds. He works to gain their trust and teach them, the effects of school desegregation is the HBO Documen-
but his own frustrations sabotage his progress. These films tary, Little Rock Central High: 50 Years Later (2007). In 1957,
illustrate the challenges teachers have in connecting with after the Supreme Court ordered desegregation in its Brown
students on their developmental and emotional levels. vs. the Board of Education decision, nine African American
 Key Terms  387

students were prevented from entering Little Rock Central World of Warcraft player whose psychiatrist tells him that he is
High School by an angry mob of Whites. This film follows addicted and should delete his character. Yet, he still wants
present-day Central High students and faculty as well as one to fulfill his one big dream: to become a dragonslayer.
of the original “Little Rock Nine” who reflects on how much Internet Issues. The PBS documentary Front-
and how little has changed since she courageously crossed line: Growing Up Online (2008) looks inside the world of
the school’s steps nearly half a century ago. In a second TV cyber-savvy teenagers who are on YouTube and Facebook
documentary, I Sit Where I Want: The Legacy of Brown v. Board of every day, socializing with friends and strangers, trying
Education (2004), students at a racially mixed magnet school on identities, and building virtual profiles of themselves.
in Buffalo try to get their fellow students to do more racial min- The program shows how teens often find themselves on
gling in the lunchroom and spend more time in each other’s the opposite side of a digital divide from their parents,
homes. Remember the Titans (2000) depicts school integration grappling with issues their parents never had to confront
in 1971 in suburban Virginia when federal mandate closed from instant Internet fame to online sexual predators. The
an African American school and a White school and sent the issue of Internet deception is a popular movie topic. In
students from both to T.C. Williams High School. Tensions one movie, Internet Dating (2008), a man who describes
arose when players of different races were forced together on himself as a 7-foot tall Lakers basketball player turns out
the same football team, but the boys and the coaches learned to be a 5-foot burger flipper. Deception is a particular con-
to depend on and trust each other. cern when it hides a sexual predator as in the short film
Movies about the “Small Screen.” The effects of TV First Date (2006) in which an ex-con arranges an encounter
are exaggerated in two thought-provoking satirical com- with an underage boy he has met online. In the feature
edies: In Being There (1979), a simple-minded gardener is film Hard Candy (2005), predatory Internet hook-ups are
put out on the street after his millionaire benefactor dies. turned on their head. After 3 weeks of online chat, a
He has no knowledge of the world except what he has 14-year-old girl meets the 32-year-old man she has been
learned from TV, but his empty-headed pronouncements communicating with and proposes they go to his house.
and generalizations are taken to be profoundly intelligent Once there, she gets the man drunk, ties him up, and
and insightful. In The Truman Show (1998), Jim Carrey is an accuses him of pedophilia. For the rest of the movie, she
insurance agent who lives with his chronically nice wife engages in a torturous game of mouse and cat—quite the
in the largest TV set ever built where everyone except him reverse of what usually happens when a pedophile lures
is an actor. The message of these movies that TV will over- a child to a meeting. A much lighter note is sounded in
run lives and saturate brains should provide insights about LOL (2012), a coming-of-age story in a world connected
children glued to the tube. More seriously, two recent doc- by YouTube, iTunes, and Facebook. Lola and her friends
umentaries Miss Representation (2011) and Sexy Baby (2012) navigate the peer pressures of high school romance and
offer powerful and uncompromising looks at how the media friendship while dodging their sometimes overbearing and
trivialize and sexualize girls and women. confused parents. When Lola’s mom “accidentally” reads
Video Gaming. Avatars Offline (2002) examines the her daughter’s racy journal, she realizes just how wide
multibillion-dollar gaming industry and explores how their communication gap has grown. In @urFRENZ (2010)
MMORPGs are part of mainstream U.S. culture and chang- a psychologically fragile high schooler develops a flirta-
ing the lives of those who play them. Second Skin (2008) is a tious online relationship with a boy she’s never met and
documentary that follows the lives of seven people whose doesn’t realize it’s actually a middle-aged woman using a
lives have been transformed by virtual worlds in online phony name—illustrating another Internet problem—lack
games such as World of Warcraft, Everquest, and Second Life, of transparency.
including an avid player whose life spins out of control All of these movies are more than a diversion with
due to his addiction to playing. /afk (2010) (http://www. popcorn; they provide new insights into serious issues of
youtube.com/watch?v=LlpEOaLyx1s) is a short film about a social development in an electronic age.
 CHAPTE
C H APT E R 10

Sex and Gender

Vive La Différence?

Emma likes to pretend her doll is a baby. She

sympathizes when her friend falls and skins her
knee, and she comes quickly when her par-
ent calls. Jason prefers to play with trucks and
trains. He and his friends like to play games and
sports and plays further way from his parents
than Emma does. How much does the behav-
ior of these two children reflect differences
between girls and boys? This chapter addresses
Fuse/Corbis/Getty Images

this question.

In all societies, girls and boys behave differently in some ways, are viewed and treated
somewhat differently, and have different roles when they grow up. At the same time,
boys and girls behave similarly in many ways, often receive equivalent treatment,
and have many comparable roles. The challenge for psychologists is to determine
which behaviors fall into which category and how these differences and similarities
originate: How much do they result from biology, cognition, and socialization? In
this chapter, we discuss research that addresses these issues.

Getting Started: Defining Sex and Gender

Traditionally, the word sex was used to refer to a person’s biological identity as male
or female, and gender was used to refer to the person’s socially constructed identity.
Today, the terms are often used interchangeably. The process by which children
acquire social behaviors viewed as appropriate for their sex (or gender) is referred
to as gender typing (Hines, 2015). This is a multidimensional concept: Children
begin by developing gender-based beliefs that include awareness of their own

388
 Gender Differences in Growth, Abilities, Activities, and Interests  389

gender, understanding of gender labels applied to them and to others, and knowl-
edge of gender stereotypes. Early in life, children also develop a gender identity, a
perception of themselves as either male or female and as having the characteristics
and interests that are appropriate for their gender. After developing a gender iden-
tity, children develop gender-role preferences, or desires to possess certain gender-
typed characteristics. Children’s choices of toys and play partners reflect these
preferences. Children also acquire the concepts of gender stability, the belief that
males remain male and females remain female, and gender constancy, the belief
that superficial changes in appearance or behavior do not alter one’s gender. Gen-
der stereotypes are beliefs that members of a culture hold about typical acceptable
or appropriate attitudes, activities, traits, occupations, and physical appearance for
each gender. Gender roles are the general patterns of appearance and behavior
associated with being a male or a female in a particular culture.

Gender Differences in Growth, Abilities,

Activities, and Interests
In what ways do males and females differ? Consistent male–female differences in
some behaviors and characteristics are evident in childhood, and others develop
as men and women are influenced by work, power, status, childbearing, and home-
making experiences (Hines, 2015; Leaper & Farkas, 2015). It is essential to keep in
mind, however, that the characteristics of males and females overlap (Figure 10.1).
For example, even if females are more compliant and verbal than males overall,
some males are more compliant and verbal than some females. Likewise, even if
men have some physical advantages on average; some women are stronger than the
average man and are more successful in traditionally male sports such as boxing,
basketball, soccer, and hockey. Although differences between males and females
do indeed exist, it is important not to exaggerate them. Most differences are quite
small (Hyde, 2005). It’s not that men are from Mars and women are from Venus,
as you may have heard; it’s more as if men are from Montana and women are from
Virginia.
Despite many similarities in the physical development of girls and boys, there are
some gender differences as well. On average, girls “mature faster” than boys in that
they are physically and neurologically more advanced at birth, learn to walk earlier,
and reach puberty at younger ages than boys. However, as children get older, boys
Number of individuals

Male Female

FIGURE 10.1 Overlapping bell-shaped curves.

These distributions show the values for a trait
in which females, on average, score higher than
males. In this example, the difference between
SD

SD

SD

SD

the means (the vertical lines) is about 80

–1

–1

+1

+1

percent of 1 standard deviation (SD), giving an

Measure of Trait effect size, d, of about 0.8.
 390  Chapter 10 Sex and Gender

have advantages in muscular development and lung and heart size compared with
girls, and they usually do better at activities involving strength and motor skills.
From the age of 2, though, boys also engage in riskier behaviors than girls and are
injured at a rate that is two to four times than that of girls (Morrongiello & Hogg,
2004). This may be because boys have less inhibitory control over their behavior
than girls do (Moilanen et al., 2010).
There are some differences in cognitive skills as well. On average, boys have
stronger visual-spatial abilities than girls, which allow them to read maps, aim at
targets, and manipulate objects in space more easily (Newhouse et al., 2007). In
contrast, girls tend to have better verbal skills than boys—talking more, learning
words more quickly, reading better, and displaying more verbal creativity (Eriksson
et al., 2012). Their conversations are more collaborative (Leaper & Smith, 2004;
Leman & Björnberg, 2010; Rose et al., 2016).
Other differences involve emotional development. Girls are better than boys at
recognizing and processing facial expressions (Alexander & Wilcox, 2012; McClure,
2000). In addition, girls tend to be more emotionally responsive with their moth-
ers (Bornstein et al., 2008). Although girls display emotions, such as sadness, more
often than boys (Perry-Parrish & Zeman, 2011), they also are able to control their
emotions better (Else-Quest et al., 2006).
Girls also tend to be oriented toward interpersonal relationships more than boys.
Even by 4 months of age, the average duration of mutual gazing between infant
girls and women is four times longer than that between infant boys and women
(Leeb & Rejskind, 2004). Girls also are generally more compliant than boys with
the demands of parents and other adults and are more nurturing toward younger
children. In terms of peer relationships, girls tend to self-disclose with their friends
and talk about problems with friends more than do boys (Rose & Rudolph, 2006).
As compared to boys, girls’ friendships are characterized by greater helping, valida-
tion, and caring as well (Rose & Asher, 2017).
In contrast, boys’ play typically is more physically active than girls’ play; they tend
to play in larger groups and larger spaces and enjoy noisier,
more strenuous physical games. Boys engage in more competi-
tive sports and games than girls (Fabes et al., 2003). In addi-
tion, boys interrupt each other more than girls (Leaper &
Smith, 2004; Leman & Björnberg, 2010) and are more likely to
be physically aggressive, including pushing and hitting (Card
et al., 2008). As compared to girls, boys are more aware of the
dominance hierarchies in their peer group as well. At the same
©NMPFT Kodak Collection/SSPL/The Image Works

time, boys may be especially likely to use humor in their friend-

ships and to generate a lot of fun and excitement in their activi-
ties (Rose & Asher, 2017; Rose et al., 2016).

At nursery school, Aiden told me, first he saved TJ from the rob-
bers. Then he and TJ switched on their giant electric spider webs,
and when the robbers attacked, they zapped themselves to death.

Differences in girls’ and boys’ play behavior also are reflected

in their toy choice. Even before they can talk or reach for a toy,
infants express preferences by where and how long they stare.
By measuring these visual preferences, Lisa Serbin and her col-
leagues (2001) found that boys and girls differed in their attrac-
Girls dressed up and played with dolls 100 years ago tion to dolls and cars. By the time they were 1 year old, girls
just as they do today. looked at dolls more than boys did, and this difference was even
 Gender Differences in Growth, Abilities, Activities, and Interests  391

stronger by the time they were 1½ (see Figure 10.2); boys preferred looking at vehi-
cles such as cars and trucks when they were 1½, and this preference increased by
age 2. In another study, when they were 1½, girls spent more time playing with a
baby doll, cosmetics, and a tea set, and boys spent more time playing with blocks,
vehicles, and tools, but the preference was especially strong for girls (Alexander &
Saenz, 2012). Even the pretend play of boys and girls differs: for girls, socio-dramatic
play focuses on domestic situations such as cooking or looking after dolls, whereas
for boys, fantasy play involves action and adventure with a superhero such as Batman
often as a lead character (Leaper & Farkas, 2015). These preferences are persis-
tent not only among preschoolers (Weisgram et al., 2014) but also during middle
childhood. In a study of 5- to 13-year-olds, girls preferred dolls and stuffed animals
and boys preferred manipulative toys, vehicles, and action figures (Cherney & London,
2006). Demonstrating these preferences, girls ask their parents for more dolls
than boys do; boys request more sports equipment, vehicles, military toys, and
action figures (Etaugh & Liss, 1992). Toys that girls like tend to be associated with
appearance—dolls, clothing, costumes, jewelry—and those for boys are associated
with action, aggression, and violence—trucks, cars, planes, action figures, and
weapons (Blakemore & Centers, 2005).
Some signs indicate that children’s toy choices may be broadening a bit. Some
toys considered in 1975 to be masculine (e.g., science toys, Legos, larger vehicles) or
feminine (e.g., toy vacuum cleaners) were considered neutral in 2005 (Blakemore &
Centers, 2005). However, the fact that researchers studying nonhuman primates
have found toy choices paralleling those observed in human children—specifically,
young female animals prefer playing with dolls and young male animals prefer play-
ing with a toy car (Alexander & Hines, 2002; Williams & Pleil, 2008)—suggests that
some of these differences in child preferences are unlikely to disappear.
More generally, girls and boys differ in the types of leisure activities they pre-
fer. In a survey of more than 2,000 children between the ages of 7 and 11 years,
researchers found that boys liked shooting, boxing, wrestling, doing martial arts,
playing on a team, and fixing and making things more than girls did, whereas girls

3.0
Boys
2.8 Girls

2.6
Looking time (seconds)

2.4

2.2

2.0

1.8 FIGURE 10.2 By 18 months, boys and girls prefer to look

at gender-typed toys. Boys prefer looking at vehicles, and
1.6 girls prefer to look at dolls.
Source: Serbin, L. A., Poulin-Dubois, K. A., Colburne, K. A.,
0 Sen, M. G., & Eichstedt, J. A. (2001). Gender stereotyping
12 18 23 12 18 23 in infancy: Visual preferences for and knowledge of gender-­
stereotyped toys in the second year. International Journal of Behav-
Months
ioral Development, 25, 7–15, copyright © 2010 Sage Publications
Vehicles Dolls Ltd. Reproduced by permission of Sage Publications Ltd.
392  Chapter 10 Sex and Gender

enjoyed sewing, cooking, dancing, and looking after younger children more than
boys did (Zill, 1986). In middle childhood and adolescence, girls spend more time
in feminine leisure activities such as dancing, writing, making crafts, and creating
art than in masculine activities such as hunting, fishing, building, or playing com-
petitive sports (McHale et al., 2004).
Although both girls and boys read books and use electronic media, there are
some differences in their choices of books and media as well. In terms of books,
girls prefer romantic tales and boys are more likely to opt for horror stories and
violent adventures (Collins-Standley et al., 1996). This parallels their preferences
for different TV shows—girls preferring soaps and social dramas and boys prefer-
ring action-adventure and sports (Valkenburg, 2004). Girls and boys spend similar
amounts of time on some activities on electronic media, such as downloading music
and browsing the Internet. However, girls tend to use social media more than boys
and boys tend to play video games, especially action-oriented games, more than girls
(Common Sense Media, 2015).

Changes in Adolescence and Adulthood

Although gender-typed preferences and interests are evident in childhood, many
boys and girls participate in activities for both genders. In adolescence, however,
gender intensification is observed. With the onset of puberty, young people shift
toward more typical gender-typed patterns of behavior (Larson & Richards, 1994;
McHale et al., 2004). In one study, tomboyish girls reported that at about age 12
they began to adopt more traditionally feminine interests and behaviors owing
to pressures from their parents and peers and to their own increasing interest in
romantic relationships (Burn et al., 1996). Other researchers observed that, dur-
ing adolescence, consistent with gender stereotypes, girls became more involved in
caring for others and boys less so (Aubé et al., 2000), girls became more emotion-
ally expressive and boys more emotionally restricted (Polce-Lynch et al., 2001),
and girls but not boys develop more sad symptoms (Ge et al., 2001). Recently
researchers have found less evidence of gender intensification, suggesting that
adolescents today may feel less constrained by gender stereotypes than they did
in earlier decades (Priess et al., 2009; Priess & Lindberg, 2015). Nevertheless,
social–emotional differences between males and females are particularly salient
in adolescence; for example, adolescent girls are more involved in emotional,
personal events than adolescent boys, and these events are more strongly linked
to their moods (Flook, 2011).
Gender roles are likely to intensify when adults become parents. Following the
birth of a child, men and women become more traditional in their gender-role
attitudes, especially first-time mothers (Katz-Wise et al., 2010). Even among couples
who are committed to equally sharing household tasks, the onset of parenthood
generally heralds the emergence of traditional gender roles (Cowan & Cowan, 2000;
Parke & Cookston, 2019; Yavorsky et al., 2015). These roles emphasize women’s
expressive characteristics—­nurturance, sympathy, concern with feelings, orienta-
tion toward children—and men’s instrumental characteristics—task and occu­pation
orientations. Women tend to become more autonomous as they and their children
grow older, and older men become more expressive and nurturant (Jones et al.,
2011). Older women may then return to a more feminine orientation in their later
years, perhaps because they have a greater need for help (Hyde et al., 1991). Alto-
gether, then, gender typing is a dynamic process that, to some extent, continues
across the life span.
 Gender Differences in Growth, Abilities, Activities, and Interests  393

Stability of Gender Typing

In spite of these overall shifts in gender typing during childhood, adolescence, and
adulthood, individuals who are strongly masculine or feminine at one age tend
to continue to be strongly masculine or feminine as they age. Researchers study-
ing a representative sample of 5,500 boys and girls in England found that children
whose behavior was most gender typed in the preschool years were still most gen-
der typed at age 8 (Golombok et al., 2008). Even adult behavior may be predicted
from gender-typed interests in childhood. In one longitudinal study in the United
States, boys who were interested in competitive games and activities that required
gross motor skills and girls who were interested in noncompetitive games, cooking,
sewing, and reading were involved in similar gender-typed activities in adulthood
(Kagan & Moss, 1962). Stability was especially strong when children’s characteristics
were congruent with gender stereotypes. When children do not act in gender-typed
ways in childhood, researchers have found, this, too, is stable across time. Some
boys’ behavior in childhood is gender nonconforming—they don’t like sports,
prefer playing girls’ games, and are often called sissies. These boys were likely to
see themselves as more feminine and to be more interested in female-stereotyped
occupations in adulthood. Similarly, girls who didn’t like dresses and were called
“tomboys” in childhood, as adults saw themselves as more masculine and were more
interested in male-stereotyped occupations (Lippa, 2008). Thus, evidence of gender
typing appears early and casts a long shadow. Another way of thinking about stability
is whether the degree to which the population overall is gender typed has changed
through the years. To address this, research examined all of the studies conducted
between 1993 and 2012 that used the Bem Sex Role Inventory, a measure which
gives scores for feminine (expressive) traits and masculine (instrumental) traits
(Donnelly & Twenge, 2017). In 2012, women reported that they have fewer femi-
nine traits as compared to women in 1993. Gender typing for men did not change
over time. Although women still see themselves as having more feminine traits, such
as being sensitive and kind, as compared to men, they are not characterized by these
traits as much as they once were.

nto Adulthood: Occupations for Men and Women

“THE WORK THAT WOMEN DO— a wheelwright, and a few whitewashers, roofers,
BARRED FROM ONLY TWO distillers, tinsmiths, woodchoppers, coal miners,
OCCUPATIONS” read the head- and brewers. Women were most likely to be
line of a New York Times article in servants; more than one-quarter of working
1895. Data from the 11th U.S. women were servants, and 84 percent of servants
census had been compiled, were female. Women also made up the majority
showing “the number of persons ten years of age of nurses, midwives, housekeepers, teachers,
and over engaged in gainful occupation.” The musicians, and workers in occupations related to
only two occupations from which women were female clothing—making dresses, gloves, corsets,
barred were officers of the U.S. Army and Navy hats, hosiery, lace, embroidery, and buttons, and
and soldiers, sailors, and marines. Most occupa- doing laundry. Men were the majority in all other
tions had only a handful of women working in occupations including actors and authors,
them, however, including one pilot, one well-borer, bakers and bartenders, physicians and surgeons.
394  Chapter 10 Sex and Gender

Times have changed since 1895. Women have female employees may leave for a period of
entered male-dominated occupations and given time or indefinitely to care for children. In fact,
up work as servants and corset makers. Between women with children are less likely to be hired
1960 and 1980, the number of women managers than are male applicants, and if they are hired,
increased 800 percent, and women professionals they are offered lower salaries (Correll & Benard,
increased 300 percent (Beller, 1985). Since then, 2005). Half of the gender gap in earning is a
women have continued to enter occupations result of employers paying women less even
dominated by men (Longley, 2005). The biggest when they do the same job as a man (Bayard
shift has been in auto body repair, in which the et al., 2003). Gender discrimination is demon-
proportion of workers who were women strated in research showing that male-to-female
increased 400 percent. Other traditionally male transgendered individuals earn, on average,
jobs in which the proportion of female workers 32 percent less after their transition, whereas
increased markedly were police detectives, female-to-male transgendered individuals earn
engineers, mechanics, firefighters, and pilots. But 2 percent more (Schilt & Wiswall, 2008). Women are
an increase in the proportion of women in an also discriminated against if they ask for higher
occupation does not mean a huge increase in salaries, whereas men are not (Babcock, 2007).
absolute numbers. For example, there are still To test gender discrimination in the academic
only 5,000 women in the United States working in community, researchers sent faculty members in
auto body repair. The disproportionate represen- science departments at research universities a
tation of men and women in different occupa- fictional job application (Moss-Racusin et al.,
tions continues: Men are the majority of clergy, 2012). These applications were identical except
physicians, and surgeons; women are the that they were either from “John” or from
majority of housekeepers, nurses, and teachers. “Jennifer.” Faculty members rated John as
Occupational segregation is one reason why significantly more competent and hirable as a
men earn more money than women. Although lab manager and said he would be offered a
the overall labor force participation of females higher starting salary than Jennifer—regardless
has increased from about 20 percent when the of whether the faculty member was a man
New York Times article was published in 1895 to or a woman.
about 75 percent today, women’s economic Efforts continue to be made to eliminate labor
standing has increased only modestly. On market discrimination. Although woman’s wages
average, today women in the United States are did increase as a result of the Equal Pay Act of
paid 19.5 percent less than men (Hegewisch & 1963, Title VII in 1964, and the Equal Employment
Williams-Baron, 2017). “If the pace of change in Opportunity Commission in 1972, there is still a
the annual earnings ratio continues at the same ways to go. The first bill President Obama signed
rate as it has since 1960, it will take another 43 after taking office in 2009 was the Lilly Ledbetter
years, until 2059, for men and women to reach Wage Discrimination Act, named for a woman
parity” (Institute for Women’s Policy Research, who discovered that she had been paid less
2017). In Canada, a gap exists as well but the than her male colleagues after working for
discrepancy is only 12 percent between the 19 years at a Goodyear plant in Alabama.
wages for men and women in 2016 (Statistics Hopefully continued legislation will help pave
Canada, 2017). Occupational choice is an the way for gender equity in the workforce.
important factor in this gender wage gap The occupations adults choose are to some
because jobs dominated by women are gener- extent influenced by their gender-role orienta-
ally lower paying than those dominated by men. tion. Men with more traditional gender-role
In addition, although it has been illegal to attitudes are likely to enter male-dominated
discriminate in hiring based on sex since the Civil fields such as mechanical engineering rather
Rights Act of 1963, some employers may none- than nontraditional occupations such as
theless chose male applicants for high-paying elementary school counseling (Dodson &
positions because they are concerned that Borders, 2006). In fact, there may be some stress
 Gender Stereotypes  395

involved in entering an occupation dominated orientation earn more than men with less-
by the other sex. When men enter a female-­ traditional beliefs (Judge & Livingston, 2008). The
dominated field such as nursing, they report reverse is true for women. Interestingly, parents’
higher rates of sickness, absence, and work- gender roles also may influence their children’s
related problems; women in a male-dominated future occupational choices. One study found
occupation such as accounting are likely to that women with more traditional gender role
have high anxiety scores and work-related attitudes had sons who were more likely to
problems (Evans & Steptoe, 2002). In addition, pursue gender-typed occupations as adults
men with a more traditional gender-role (Lawson et al., 2015).

Sex Differences in Gender Typing

Just as men are more bound by gender stereotypes than women are, boys are more
gender typed in their play and toy choices than girls are (Leaper & Farkas, 2015;
Moller & Serbin, 1996). Boys’ preference for gender-stereotyped toys remains con-
stant as they age, whereas girls’ interest in gender-stereotyped activities decreases
(Cherney & London, 2006). In addition, boys are more likely than girls to develop
“extremely intense interests” in objects and activities, and these passionate interests
are often gender stereotyped, for example, collecting trains, building models, and
competing in go-cart races (DeLoache et al., 2007).
Why are boys less likely to cuddle a doll than girls are to play with a truck?
For one thing, adult Western culture is basically male oriented: Men are given
more esteem, privileges, and status than women, and everyone is encouraged to
do things that are regarded as higher status. The male role is also more clearly
defined than the female role, and the pressure for boys to conform to the mascu-
line gender stereotype is higher than for girls. Boys shy away from “girly” things
because if they don’t, they’ll receive derision from other boys and criticism from
their parents. Both parents and peers condemn boys for crying, for retreating in
the face of aggression, for wearing girls’ clothes, and for playing with dolls. In
contrast, parents and peers tend to accept a girl’s occasional temper tantrums,
rough-and-tumble play, blue jeans apparel, and play with trucks. In fact, one sur-
vey found that more than half of women and girls described themselves as being
tomboys, participating in sports and playing with boys’ toys at some point during
childhood (Morgan, 1998). Although feminine boys are rejected, tomboy girls are
tolerated (Halim et al., 2012).

Gender Stereotypes
Stereotypes are ways people think that individuals with particular characteristics
(such as being male or female) typically do, or should, look and act. Our culture
has consistent stereotypes of males and females. The stereotyped male is controlling
and manipulates the environment. Men are expected to be independent and self-
reliant, strong willed and assertive, dominant and competitive, decisive, direct, active,
adventurous, worldly, and strong. They are expected to control their emotions, even
under stress, and to be able to easily separate feelings from ideas. The stereotyped
female supports friends, romantic partners, and family. Women are expected to be
pretty, sociable, loving, sensitive, considerate, gentle, sympathetic, sentimental, and
396  Chapter 10 Sex and Gender

compassionate. In general, people regard the expression of warmth in personal

relationships, the display of anxiety under pressure, and the suppression of overt
aggression and sexuality as more appropriate for women than for men (Prentice
& Carranza, 2002; Seem & Clark, 2006). Gender stereotypes also apply to children:
Girls are supposed to be sweet, gentle, and pretty; wear dresses and jewelry; play
with dolls and toy kitchens; and be concerned with their appearance whereas boys
are expected to be rough, tough, and brave; like sports and video games; and play
with toy cars, guns, construction toys, and action figures (De Caroli & Sagone, 2007;
Leaper & Farkus, 2015; Miller et al., 2009).
Children are aware of these adult and child gender stereotypes from an early age.
In one study, 2-year-olds looked longer—indicating they were surprised—when they
saw pictures of a man doing stereotypical female things, such as putting on make-
up, than when they saw a woman doing these things (Serbin et al., 2002). Children’s
knowledge of stereotypes increases rapidly between ages 3 and 5 and is well devel-
oped by the time they enter school (Signorella et al., 1993). From this age until they
are 7 or 8, children are quite inflexible about gender stereotyping (Conry-Murray
& Turiel, 2012; Ruble et al., 2006). By age 8 or 9, they begin to be more flexible
about what’s acceptable for members of each sex to do—although most still say
they wouldn’t be friends with a boy who wore lipstick or a girl who played football.
Development of stereotype knowledge continues through fifth grade and is evident
in children’s descriptions of what men, women, girls, and boys are like (Miller et al.,
2009). Girls are more knowledgeable about stereotypes than boys are, and by mid-
dle childhood, they are also more flexible about them.
You probably noticed that the stereotypes of males and females match up pretty
well with actual gender differences in behavior. For instance, there is a stereotype
that women are “emotional” and women do tend to be more emotionally expressive
than men. Stereotypes are problematic, though, even when they do match up with
average-level gender differences. Although women overall may be more emotion-
ally expressive than men, any particular women may not be emotionally expressive.
If people expect her to be emotionally expressive due to the stereotype, this puts
undo pressure on her to behave that way. In addition, others’ holding expectations
of her that do not materialize may create difficulties in interpersonal interactions
and relationships.
Despite the concern with gender equality that began with the women’s move-
ment in the 1960s, gender stereotypes have remained remarkably stable. Attitudes
may be changing, but the process is glacial. In studies documenting some slight
shifts, researchers have found that men now are less likely to say they are tough
and aggressive than they did in the 1970s (Spence & Buckner, 2000), and psychol-
ogy students define a mentally healthy woman as not only nice and nurturing—the
stereotypical view of femininity—but also independent and up for a challenge—
stereotypical masculine traits (Seem & Clark, 2006). For the most part, though, gen-
der stereotypes about occupations remain the same (Liben & Bigler, 2002). Both
children and adults still think of doctors, dentists, mechanics, pilots, plumbers, truck
drivers, firefighters, electricians, architects, police officers, and engineers as male,
and librarians, nurses, teachers, secretaries, dancers, hair dressers, and decorators
as female (Oakhill et al., 2005; Wilbourn & Kee, 2010). These gender differences
in occupations illustrate how gender-role development is embedded in a societal
context and reflects differences in males’ and females’ status and power (Wood &
Eagly, 2002). Cross-cultural studies show that these stereotypes are widespread, not
only in North America but also in a range of societies (e.g., De Caroli & Sagone,
2007). In a recent study of 450 10- to 14-year-olds from 15 countries (in North and
South America, Europe, Africa, Asia), the researchers found that boys and girls
 Gender Stereotypes  397

across both rich and poor countries shared universal stereotypes about boys and
girls (Blum et al., 2017).
There is also some variation, though, in how strongly individual people subscribe
to gender stereotypes. Women who have a college education are less likely to have
a stereotyped view of the feminine role than less educated women, and women’s
views are less stereotyped than men’s (de Pillis et al., 2008; Pasterski et al., 2011;
Seem & Clark, 2006)—even in countries outside North America (e.g., in China;
Wang & Liu, 2007). In addition, there can be variation across cultures in stereotypes
that reflect the actual status of men and women in those cultures; for example, in
countries in which more women pursue careers in science, people hold fewer ste-
reotypes regarding gender and science (Miller et al., 2015). In spite of these varia-
tions, almost everyone views aggression as more characteristic of boys and men and
interpersonal sensitivity as more characteristic of girls and women (Dodge, Coie,
et al., 2006; Eisner & Malti, 2015).

ultural Context: Cultural Differences in Gender

Stereotypes
Gender stereotypes appear in story paralleled the masculine-boy story but
every culture, and similarities included stereotyped feminine choices such as
across cultures greatly outweigh playing with dolls. In the counter-stereotyped
differences (Best, 2004). However, stories, the child in the story violated gender
gender stereotypes do seem to be more pro- stereotypes. In the masculine-girl story, Siou May
nounced in traditional cultures where male– (or Ruthi) liked to play baseball (football) and
female differences in social status are larger War Game (model airplanes) with boys. In the
(Wood & Eagly, 2002). Thalma Lobel and her feminine-boy story, the boy played with girls and
colleagues (2001) studied gender stereotypes dolls. To assess the children’s attitudes toward the
held by Chinese children in Taiwan—a traditional, four story characters, researchers asked them to
collectivistic, hierarchical culture that emphasizes rate each character on stereotypical masculine
adherence to social roles, interdependence traits (aggressive, strong, and brave) and stereo-
among individuals, and fitting in with the social typical feminine traits (gentle, cries easily, and
context—and children in Israel—a modern, likes to dress up).
individualistic, egalitarian culture that empha- Children in both cultures distinguished
sizes independence, self-expression, and the between boy characters who behaved in
pursuit of personal goals and interests. They masculine and feminine ways, but the difference
predicted that Chinese children would be less was much more marked in the traditional
flexible and less accepting of violations in Chinese culture than in the modern Israeli
gender stereotypes than Israeli children. To test culture. Children were also asked to rate how
the prediction, they read third- and fifth-grade popular the story characters were with their
children stories about a boy or a girl who had peers. Chinese children said that boys who
either stereotyped masculine or stereotyped behaved in stereotypical masculine ways would
feminine interests. Each child heard one story. In be more popular than boys who behaved in
the masculine-boy story, children heard that “Sing feminine ways; the difference was much less for
Ming (or Ron) is a boy your age who lives around children in Israel. Finally, children were asked how
here. He likes to play with boys and to play much they liked the boy or girl in the story, how
baseball (or football). He often plays War Game much they would want to be friends with the
(or plays with model airplanes).” The feminine-girl child, and how willing they would be to engage
398  Chapter 10 Sex and Gender

in various activities with each child. As in the dolls were more feminine and girls who played
other assessments, Chinese children indicated War Game were more masculine, and they liked
that they liked masculine boys better than the feminine girl more than the masculine girl.
feminine boys relatively more than did children But they did not think that the feminine girl would
in Israel. be more popular with peers. Other studies
These findings provide clear evidence that conducted in Western cultures have also shown
children in a more traditional, collectivistic culture that a girl exhibiting masculine behavior is not
are less tolerant when boys violate gender judged as harshly as a boy exhibiting feminine
stereotypes. Traditional cultures stress adherence behavior, and that a girl who behaves in a
to social norms and judge any transgressions masculine manner is not perceived as less
harshly; collectivistic cultures stress the signifi- popular than a girl who behaves in a feminine
cance of social norms and the importance of manner (Ruble et al., 2006). Lobel’s study found
conformity. Moreover, in hierarchical cultures, this latitude toward counter-stereotypical behav-
individuals tend to abide by their roles and to be ior by girls in Taiwan as well. It seems that the
aware of others’ roles. All of these characteristics Westernization of Taiwan has resulted in girls
increase concerns with gender consistency and being positively reinforced for exhibiting stereo-
intensify the saliency of gender transgressions. typical masculine behaviors. As global communi-
However, the findings in Lobel’s study provided cations and technological advances permit
less evidence of a cultural difference when girls more cross-cultural sharing of attitudes and
violated gender stereotypes. Both Chinese and information, cultural differences in gender
Israeli children thought that girls who played with stereotypes for boys might also lessen.

Biological Factors in Gender Differences

What is behind the differences in the behaviors and characteristics of boys and girls,
men and women? Biology is one important contributor. Biological factors affect-
ing gender typing include evolution, hormonal functions, genetic factors, and the
brain.

et You Thought That . . .: Gender Identity

was Determined by Biological Sex
For most people, gender identity ideation. This incongruity was once considered a
is congruous with biological sex. psychological disorder. However, over the past
However, for transgender persons, few decades, discomfort with pathologizing
gender identity does not match people for gender variance has increased (Hill
their assigned biological sex. These people et al., 2007).
experience an incongruity that is long lasting. Gender identity issues usually begin in early
They usually suffer gender dysphoria, a deep childhood (Mallon & DeCrescenzo, 2006).
unhappiness because their gender identity Transgender children prefer dressing like the
reflects one sex but their genitals another. If they opposite sex. They participate in the games and
are living as the sex that they do not identify with, activities of the other sex and avoid those of their
they often experience depression, anxiety, fear, own sex: Transgender boys play house, draw
anger, self-mutilation, low self-esteem, or suicidal pictures of princesses, play with dolls, dress up,
 Biological Factors in Gender Differences  399

doily, a bandanna—when he was just a toddler

(Rosin, 2008). His mother finally figured out that
he wanted something that felt like long hair. He
spoke his first full sentence when the family was
out at a restaurant: “I like your high heels,” he told
a woman in a fancy red dress. At home, he would
rip off his clothes as soon as his mother put them
on him and try on something from her closet.
At the toy store, he headed straight for the aisle
with the Barbies and the pink and purple doll-
houses. One afternoon he climbed out of the
bathtub and began dancing in front of the mirror
with his penis tucked between his legs. “Look,
Mom, I’m a girl,” he told her happily. “Brandon,
God made you a boy for a special reason,” she
told him. “God made a mistake,” Brandon replied
without hesitation.
Signs that a child has transgender prefer-
Barcroft Media/Getty Images

ences can occur as early as 2 or 3 years of age,

and transgender persons commonly report
having had feelings of confusion and discom-
fort with their assigned gender as early as age 4
(Vitale, 2001). However, many transgender
people do not reveal a transgender gender
identity until adolescence or adulthood (Hines,
In June 2013, Coy Mathis, a 6-year-old transgender child who 2006). Unfortunately, many trans youth try to
was born a boy but identified herself as a girl, won the right to keep their gender issues secret (Mallon &
use the girls’ restroom at her school. Transgender advocates DeCrescenzo, 2006) at least in part because
hailed the decision as a major step forward for transgen- they anticipate a negative reaction. In fact, a
der rights. trans youth’s revelations often takes parents by
surprise, which may be often followed by shock,
denial, anger, grief, guilt, shame, and concern
and have girls as playmates; transgender girls about the youth’s safety, health, surgery, employ-
play Batman and Superman and baseball, ment, and future relationships. Fathers often
hockey, and other competitive contact sports, have more difficulty accepting their child’s
preferably with boys. Transgender children insist gender variance than mothers (Wren, 2002);
that they are or want to be of the other sex. They mothers are more likely to find ways to convey
also have negative feelings toward their bodies compassion and care and to see their child’s
as they represent a gender with which they do atypical gender identity development as
not identify. A girl might insist she will grow a legitimate. Parents who are most tolerant believe
penis and stand to urinate. A boy might fantasize that the child’s condition was caused by nature
about being a girl, sit to urinate, and wish to be (biology), not nurture (problems in the family),
rid of his penis. When Joey Romero was 4, he and, in fact, some evidence suggests that sex
started telling people he was a girl. He liked to differentiation of the brain may be responsible
wear orange clothing because it was closest to for gender variance (Blackless et al., 2006).
pink. At age 5 he refused to have his hair cut and Increasingly, research suggests that parents’
was often mistaken for a girl. Another transgen- supporting their transgendered children
der boy, Brandon, would search the house for presenting themselves according to their
something to drape over his head—a towel, a gender identity (e.g., Brian now goes by
400  Chapter 10 Sex and Gender

Megan at home and at school, grows long with certainty whether a child will continue to
hair, and wears dresses) may be a good identify as transgendered as an adult and
decision. Recent research indicates that which sex(es) they will be attracted to, gender-
transgendered children who live as their variant children typically are not treated with
identified gender (rather than their biological hormones of the other sex as gender-variant
sex) feel positively about their identified adults are. Recently, physicians have begun to
gender and do not suffer mental health treat children with drugs that suppress puberty
problems (Olson et al., 2015, 2016). On the and create a state of suspended development
other hand, when parents reject their trans­ so that the children can postpone a decision
gender offspring, this can lead to adjustment about their future until later in adolescence
problems such as loneliness and depression (Cohen-Kettenis et al., 2008). However, the
for these transgender youth (Yadegarfard long-term effects of puberty suppression drugs
et al., 2014). are still not clear and continues to be a
Gender-variant young people have some- controversial treatment (Mahfouda et al.,
times been confused with gay and lesbian 2017). Joey has begun taking testosterone
youth. Indeed, most trangendered youth are blockers and the plan is that she will begin
attracted to individuals who have the same female hormones at age 13. As we find out
biological sex as they do (i.e., a youth born a more about gender variance, we are likely to
biological male but who has a female gender see substantial changes in the way parents,
identity will most likely be attracted to males). physicians, and society treat it (Byne
However, because it is impossible to determine et al., 2012).

Evolutionary Theory and Gender Development

The evolutionary theory stresses the principles of natural selection and adaptation.
These principles can be applied to gender development to explain gender-typed
behaviors that increase the likelihood that a person’s genes will be passed on to the
next generation. To be able to pass genes from one generation to the next, people
need to have mating strategies that enhance their reproductive success. Males need

nsights from Extremes: The First American

Transgendered Person
Long before Chaz Bono and when he returned home, he began taking
appeared on Dancing with the the female hormone estradiol. He intended to go
Stars and focused media to Sweden where doctors were performing
attention on transgendered sex-reassignment surgery, but during a stopover
individuals there was Christine Jorgensen. Born in Copenhagen, he met Dr. Christian Hamburger,
George William Jorgensen, Jr., May 30, 1926, in a Danish endocrinologist. He ended up staying in
New York City, Christine was the first well-known Denmark, and under Dr. Hamburger’s direction,
person to have sex-reassignment surgery began hormone replacement therapy and a
(Meyerowitz, 2002). As a child, Jorgensen was not series of surgeries to remove his testicles and
interested in fistfights or rough-and-tumble penis and construct a vagina. On December 1,
games. In 1945, he was drafted into the army, 1952, a media sensation erupted when the New
 Biological Factors in Gender Differences  401

York Daily News carried a front-page story under when he called another politician “the Christine
the headline “Ex-GI Becomes Blonde Beauty,” Jorgensen of the Republican Party.” Jorgensen
announcing that Jorgensen had become the worked as an actress and nightclub entertainer,
recipient of the first “sex change.” This claim was singing songs that included, most poignantly, “I
not actually true: This type of surgery had been Enjoy Being a Girl.” She continued her act until
performed by German doctors in the late 1920s 1982. In 1989, the year of her death, Jorgensen
and early 1930s. But what was different in said that she had given the sexual revolution “a
Jorgensen’s case was the addition of hor- good swift kick in the pants.” She also gave
mone therapy. gender researchers a kick by demonstrating that
When Jorgensen returned to New York in a person’s gender identity is not always consist-
February 1953, she became an instant celebrity. ent with his or her gender chromosomes and
She used her fame to become a spokesperson that these individuals can make a successful
for transgender people, and during the 1970s, psychological transition from one gender to
she toured university campuses to speak about another. Her courageous behavior opened the
her experiences. She was known for her direct- door for others to express transgender urges, for
ness and wit, and she once demanded an society to begin to accept gender diversity, and
apology from Spiro Agnew, the U.S. vice president, for researchers to study gender complexities.

aggressive and competitive skills to compete successfully with other males in attract-
ing mates. Females need strategies for attracting and keeping mates who are able to
provide resources and protection for their offspring; they also need skills and inter-
ests that commit them to child rearing (Buss, 2000; Geary, 2006, 2015). According
to evolutionary theory, these two sets of complementary strategies have led to the
evolution of gender differences in behavior in both animals and humans, includ-
ing males’ expression of strength, power, and aggression and females’ concern
with physical appearance and caregiving skills. This could also be the reason that
females express their negative emotions openly; crying or looking sad is functional
for maintaining an intimate, exclusive dyadic relationship and for consolidating
a social network and evoking emotional support from family members, especially
under adverse life circumstances (Vigil et al., 2010).
However, the evolutionary explanation has limitations. First, testing it is difficult.
Second, it applies to females and males as groups but does not explain individual
differences among males and females. Third, it does not account for recent rapid
changes in gender roles due to technology that have lessened the importance of
male–female differences in size and strength. Fourth, cross-cultural research show-
ing considerable variability in gender roles across cultures has challenged its assump-
tions (Wood & Eagly, 2002). Finally, evolutionary theory has been criticized as being
too strongly linked to genetic determinism rather than offering a fully interactive
position that embraces the role of the environment (Lickliter & Honeycutt, 2003).

Hormones and Social Behavior

Hormones are also biological contributors to gender differences and gender
typing. Hormones associated with sexual characteristics and reproductive func-
tions are present in differing concentrations in males and females beginning in
infancy. Testosterone is the principal and most potent male hormone. Estrogen
and progesterone are the principal female hormones. Each sex has a great deal of
its own hormones and a small amount of the other sex’s hormones; that is, males
402  Chapter 10 Sex and Gender

have a high level of testosterone and a low level of estrogen and progesterone,
and females have a high level of estrogen and progesterone and a low level of
testosterone.
These hormones organize the fetus’s biological and psychological predisposi-
tions to be masculine or feminine, and a hormone surge in puberty activates these
early predispositions (Hines, 2004, 2011, 2015). The contributions hormones make
to the social behaviors of males and females have been clearly demonstrated in
animal studies. When researchers injected pregnant monkeys with testosterone dur-
ing the second quarter of pregnancy, for example, the monkeys’ female offspring
exhibited social behavior patterns characteristic of male monkeys, such as threaten-
ing gestures, mounting behavior, and rough-and-tumble play (Young et al., 1967).
When researchers injected male hormones into normal female monkeys after birth,
these females also become more assertive, sometimes even attaining prime domi-
nance status in their monkey troop (Zehr et al., 1998).
Human studies also demonstrate effects of hormone levels. For example, female
fetuses with unusually high levels of androgens exhibited traditionally masculine
behavior and interests (Money, 1987; Money & Ehrhardt, 1972). They enjoyed
vigorous athletic activities such as ball games and showed little interest in play-
ing with dolls, babysitting, or caring for younger children. They preferred simple
clothing and showed little concern with cosmetics, jewelry, or hairstyles. Not only
were their interests more like those of boys but also their assertiveness and attitudes
toward sexuality and achievement resembled males. Additional studies of fetally
androgenized girls indicated that they preferred toys usually preferred by boys,
and exhibited behaviors more common in males such as rough-and-tumble play
(Berenbaum, 2018; Berenbaum & Snyder, 1995; Hines, 2015; Reiner & Gearhart,
2004). The higher their exposure to prenatal androgens, the stronger were these
girls’ preferences for masculine play and activities (Berenbaum, 2001; Servin et al.,
2003). Their masculine preferences persisted in spite of their parents’ efforts to
encourage their feminine play (Pasterski et al., 2005). In other studies, genetic males
who were born without a penis and raised as girls exhibited typical male behavior,
presumably because of their high levels of testosterone (Reiner & Gearhart, 2004).
In fact, for both girls and boys, a high level of fetal testosterone predicts more male-
typical play (Auyeung et al., 2009), less empathy, and more aggression among 3- to
12-year-old girls (Pasterski et al., 2007). Clearly, all this research proves that hor-
mones play an important role in gender-role development (Hines, 2015).

Gender and the Brain

Although male and female brains are more similar than different, there are some
interesting differences in structure and function (see Figure 10.3; Cahill, 2006;
Hines, 2015; Ritchie et al., 2018; Yamasue et al., 2009). Supporting this suggestion,
researchers have found that in females’ brains, on average, the ratio of gray matter
to white matter is relatively larger than in males’ brains (J. S. Allen et al., 2003),
particularly in the social brain regions (Yamasue et al., 2009; see Figure 3.4 in Chap-
ter 3, “Biological Foundations”). Brain-imaging studies reveal that females show
more activation in these social regions of the brain than males do, for example, in
the left prefrontal cortex when they look at humorous cartoons (Azim et al., 2005)
or heard jokes (Chan, 2016) and in the medial frontal cortex when they empathi-
cally react to an opponent’s loss in a gambling game (Fukushima & Hiraki, 2006),
and in the inferior frontal cortex when making decisions based on facial affective
cues (Hall et al., 2012).
 Biological Factors in Gender Differences  403

FIGURE 10.3 Sex differ-

ences in the structure of
the brain.
Source: Cahill, 2006, adapted
Posterior from Goldstein, J. M., Seidman,
Anterior L. J., Horton, N. J., Makris, N.,
Kennedy, D. N., Caviness,
V. S., . . . , and Tsuang, M. T.
Structures that are larger in the healthy female brain, (2001). Normal sexual dimor-
relative to cerebrum size phism of the adult human brain
assessed by in vivo magnetic
Structures that are larger in the healthy male brain, resonance imaging. Cerebral
relative to cerebrum size Cortex, 11, 490–497.

Another sex difference in the brain involves the amygdala, a brain structure
that plays a major role in processing emotions (Hamann, 2005). Although men
have a larger amygdala than women (adjusted for total brain size), women have
a relatively larger orbital-frontal region (Gur et al., 2002), which is responsible
for modulating input to the amygdala (LeDoux, 2000). This means that females
have relatively more cortex available for modulating emotional input, which could
result in more efficient processing of emotions and better consolidation of emo-
tional memories. Studies have also documented a gender difference in the human
mirror neuron system, with females exhibiting stronger empathic responses than
males (Cheng et al., 2006; Schulte-Rüther et al., 2008; Yang et al., 2009). However,
women also show more sustained responses than men in the amyglada to famil-
iar negative images which in turn is linked with higher levels of mood disorders
(Andreano et al., 2014).
The extent to which brain functioning is organized across the two cerebral hemi-
spheres is another difference between males’ and females’ brains. As we discussed
in Chapter 3, the right hemisphere in most people is involved in processing visual
and social–emotional information, such as faces and emotional expressions, and
the left hemisphere is responsible for processing verbal information. It has been
suggested that men’s brains are more lateralized than women’s, that is, more spe-
cialized for processing language in the left hemisphere and visual information in
the right (Tomasi & Volkow, 2012). Although not all studies show a sex difference in
lateralization, support for this suggestion has been found in brain-imaging studies
of phonological processing (Lindell & Lumb, 2008; Sommer et al., 2008) and visual
processing (Bourne, 2008). Even infants show this sex difference in lateralization in
a word-comprehension task (Hines, 2004, 2015). In addition, men whose left hemi-
sphere is damaged are more likely to experience verbal deficits than women with
left-hemisphere damage, and men whose right hemisphere is damaged show more
spatial deficits than women with right-hemisphere damage (Halpern, 2000). The
end of the corpus callosum, a bundle of fibers connecting the left and right hemi-
spheres, which facilitates transfer of information between the two hemispheres, is
larger in females than in males (Driesen & Raz, 1995), which could account for
the reduced lateralization in females. Together, these studies provide support for the
404  Chapter 10 Sex and Gender

view that male and female brains are distinctive and help explain the social and
emotional advantage of females.

Genetics of Gender
In 2008, a team of Swedish researchers released the results of a large study of genetic
differences in the human brain (Reinius et al., 2008). They found 1,349 genes that
are expressed differently in the brains of men compared with the brains of women,
providing the strongest evidence to date that sex differences in the brain are geneti-
cally programmed. Recent work has confirmed that there are clear gender differ-
ences in human gene expression (Gershoni & Pietrokovski, 2017). In the 1970s and
1980s, gender was believed to be primarily a social construct. Children learned how
to “do gender”—boys learned that they should play with trucks and girls learned
that they should play with dolls. Until quite recently, even scientists assumed that
sex differences in the expression of genes would be confined to genes on the X and
Y chromosomes.

When Emma’s mother learned that her third child was going to be a boy—her first—
she asked Aiden’s mother how she had learned about cars and trucks. “Aiden taught
me, and your boy will teach you too. Before Aiden was born, I really believed the differ-
ences between boys and girls were totally socially determined. But now I know that they
aren’t. Aiden loves his stuffed animals and he plays at cooking dinner. ‘Me the cooker
tonight.’ But from the start he’s been fascinated with things that move and roll. He likes
to put his face close to the wheels of his toy cars and watch them turn. My husband jokes
that there’s a truck gene on the Y chromosome. You’ll see.”

However, we now know that genes scattered across all 46 chromosomes are
expressed differently in male and female brains. We also know that the extent to
which individuals’ behavior is gender typed relates to genetic factors. Studying a
sample of nearly 4,000 3-year-olds, behavior genetics researchers found higher cor-
relations between monozygotic twins than dizygotic twins in gender-typed behavior—
for example, liking guns, playing soldier, and enjoying rough-and-tumble play
versus liking jewelry and dolls, playing house, dressing up, and liking pretty things
(Iervolino et al., 2005). A moderate genetic influence was found, especially for girls,
as was a strong environmental influence, especially for boys. Perhaps the reason
boys were more influenced by the environment is that parents and peers provide
stronger feedback and are more likely to criticize boys for what they consider
gender-inappropriate behavior (Ruble et al., 2006). Boys are also more likely than
girls to believe that other people think of cross-gender-typed play as “bad” and to
be influenced by this belief (Banerjee & Lintern, 2000). In another twin study,
moderately high heritability was found for children (again, especially girls) with
gender-typical values (Knafo & Spinath, 2011): This meant caring for others for
girls and valuing power and achievement for boys. But there was very high herit-
ability for girls with atypical values—they did not value caring for others—and no
heritability for boys with atypical values—they did value caring for others. Again,
boys were more influenced by the environment than were girls.

Biology and Cultural Expectations

At all ages from childhood through adulthood, females are more interested in
infants than males are. Women are more likely than men to experience a strong
 Cognitive Factors in Gender Typing  405

and overwhelming desire to have a baby; men experience this desire but not to
the same degree as women (Brase & Brase, 2012). When asked to care for a baby,
boys are inclined to watch the baby passively, whereas girls are likely to engage
in taking care of the baby (Berman, 1987; Blakemore, 1990). Whether children,
adolescents, young adults, middle aged, or elderly, females like looking at baby
pictures and indicate their preference verbally (Maestripieri & Pelka, 2002). When
adults are asked to choose the cuter of two babies, women can reliably do so, but
men have difficulty (Lobmaier et al., 2010); moreover, these differences are most
marked when women are in the ovulation period of their menstrual cycle which
suggests that hormones may play a role (Lobmaier et al., 2010). These findings are
consistent with a biological explanation of gender differences. They fit with the
evolutionary perspective, which argues that females are more committed to paren-
tal activities than males. They are also consistent with the suggestion that physical
and hormonal factors allowing women to bear and breast-feed children program
females to be responsive to the sights and signals of infants and children. These
behavioral tendencies, however, could also be due to cultural expectations and
training (Parke & Cookston, 2019). In adolescents and adults, gender-based differ-
ences are less apparent under conditions of privacy than in situations in which peo-
ple know that they are being observed (Berman, 1987). When experimenters have
used subtle measures of adults’ responsiveness to infants’ crying, such as changes
in blood pressure, skin conductance levels, or other responses of the autonomic
nervous system, they have not detected differences between mothers and fathers
(Frodi et al., 1978; Lamb, 2004). It seems likely that gender-linked responses to
babies are affected both by biological and evolutionary programming and by cul-
tural conditioning.

Cognitive Factors in Gender Typing

Gender typing also has a cognitive basis. Children’s own understanding of gen-
der, gender roles, and gender rules contributes to gender typing. In one of the
earliest attempts to explain the cognitive basis of gender typing, Sigmund Freud
(1905) proposed that children form their gender identity at around age 5 or 6
when they become curious about their own sexual anatomy and are alerted to
differences in the sexual anatomy of males and females. After forming a gender
identity, Freud suggested, children acquire either feminine or masculine traits
and behaviors through a process of identification with the same-sex parent. More
recently, explanations of gender typing have been proposed in the two major
theoretical approaches to cognitive development. According to cognitive devel-
opmental theory, children categorize themselves as female or male on the basis
of physical and behavioral clues and then behave in ways they understand to be
gender appropriate, making stable gender-typed choices by the time they are 6 or
7 years old. According to information-processing gender-schema theory, children
begin to develop their own naive theories about gender differences and form
schemas of gender-appropriate behavior when they are about 2 or 3 years old.
Both of these theories share the assumption that children take an active role in
perceiving and interpreting information from the environment and creating envi-
ronments that support their understanding of gender development. They differ
in their ideas about when children acquire different types of gender information
and how knowledge modifies gender-role activities and behavior. We discuss these
two cognitive theories in the next section.
406  Chapter 10 Sex and Gender

Cognitive Developmental Theory

In his cognitive developmental theory of gender typing, Lawrence Kohlberg (1966)
proposed that from an early age, children begin to differentiate between male and
female roles and perceive themselves as more like same-sex than opposite-sex mod-
els. These processes begin before Freud’s proposed process of identification and
without deliberate teaching. Using physical and behavioral clues, such as hairstyle
and clothing, children categorize themselves as male or female. They then find it
rewarding to behave in gender-appropriate ways and to imitate same-gender mod-
els. For example, a girl thinks, “I am a girl because I am more like my mother and
other girls than I am like my father or boys; therefore I want to dress like a girl, play
girl games, and feel and think like a girl.” Consonance between children’s actual
gender—the way they see themselves—and their behaviors and values is critical for
their self-esteem.
According to Kohlberg, all children go through three phases in understanding
gender. First, between the ages of 2 and 3 years, they acquire basic gender identity,
recognizing that they are either a girl or a boy. Second, by the age of 4 or 5 years,
they acquire the concept of gender stability, recognizing that males remain male
and females remain female. The little boy no longer thinks he might grow up to be
a mommy, and the little girl gives up her hopes of becoming a superhero. Third,
by about 6 or 7 years, children acquire the notion of gender constancy, recognizing
that superficial changes in appearance or activities do not alter gender. Even when a
girl wears jeans and plays football and a boy has long hair and a burning interest in
needlepoint, they recognize—and their peers recognize too—that gender remains
constant. This achievement is important, Kohlberg argued, because gender con-
stancy influences gender-typed choices.
Researchers who have tested Kohlberg’s theory have confirmed that both boys
and girls acquire gender identity first, an understanding of gender stability next,
and finally an appreciation of gender constancy (Chauhan et al., 2005; Martin &
Little, 1990; Ruble et al., 2006). Children in cultures other than those of North
America show a similar progression in their understanding of gender (Munroe
et al., 1984), although those in nonindustrialized cultures and lower-income fami-
lies generally reach milestones about a year later than middle-class children in the
United States and Canada (Frey & Ruble, 1992).
Children begin to recognize males and females as distinct categories when they
are still infants and cannot understand labels and language. In one study, 75 per-
cent of 12-month-olds were able to recognize male and female faces as belonging
to distinct categories (Leinbach & Fagot, 1993). This is not the same thing as rec-
ognizing that they themselves belong to one of these categories, but it suggests that
the process of understanding gender begins earlier than Kohlberg proposed. The
ability to understand gender labels such as boy and girl is not far behind. In a study
using parental diaries of children’s speech, researchers found that 25 percent of
children used gender labels—girl, boy, woman, man, lady, guy—by 17 months and
68 percent by 21 months (Zosuls et al., 2009). Children who knew and used gender
labels were more likely to show increases in gender-typed play between these two
ages. However, 2-year-old children still have a very limited understanding of gender
identity (Fagot & Leinbach, 1993). Although they recognize that some activities and
objects are associated with each gender—for example, that men wear neckties and
women wear skirts—it’s not until they’re about 3 years old that children grasp the
concept that they themselves, along with other children, belong to a gender class or
group. Even then confusions can remain. Consider the following exchange between
 Cognitive Factors in Gender Typing  407

two 4-year-old boys. Leo accused Jeremy, who wore a barrette to preschool, of being
a girl because “only girls wear barrettes.” When Jeremy pulled down his pants to
show that he really was a boy, his young classmate retorted, “Everyone has a penis;
only girls wear barrettes” (Bem, 1983, p. 607).
Genital knowledge is an important determinant of understanding gender con-
stancy. Sandra Bem (1989) showed preschool children anatomically correct photos
of a nude boy and a nude girl and then showed them pictures of the same chil-
dren dressed in clothing appropriate to their gender or appropriate for the other
gender. Even when boys wore dresses or girls wore pants, nearly 40 percent of the
children correctly identified the gender of the child. When Bem then tested the
preschoolers’ understanding of genital differences between the sexes, she found
that nearly 60 percent of the children who possessed genital knowledge but only
10 percent of those who lacked it had displayed gender constancy. Children apply gen-
der constancy to themselves slightly earlier than they apply it to others. Preschoolers
achieved gender constancy for themselves by age 4½ but did not understand that
the concept applied to other children until they were 5½ (C. L. Martin et al., 2002).

Gender-Schema Theory: An Information-Processing

Approach
According to gender-schema theory, children develop schemas that help them
organize and structure experience related to gender differences and gender roles
(Martin & Ruble, 2010). These generalizations about which toys and activities are
“appropriate” for boys versus girls and what jobs are “meant” for men versus women
tell children what types of information to look for in the environment and how to
interpret this information.
Children develop schemas based on their own perceptions and the information
that parents, peers, and cultural stereotypes provide. Children use these gender
schemas to evaluate and explain behavior. For instance, when they were told about
a child who spilled some milk, children evaluated the behavior more negatively if
the child was a boy because of the stereotype that boys are badly behaved (Giles &
Heyman, 2004). They appraised the risk of injury as higher for girls than for boys
because of the stereotype that girls are fragile—even though boys actually incur
more injuries than girls do (Morrongiello et al., 2000). The links between gender
schemas and the child’s own behavior are presumed to occur through selective
attention to and memory for information relevant to one’s own sex and through
motivation to be like same-sex others (Martin & Ruble, 2010).
To determine how gender-role schemas affect the way children see things,
researchers showed 5- and 6-year-olds pictures of males and females involved in
activities that were either gender-consistent (e.g., a boy playing with a train) or
­gender-inconsistent (e.g., a girl sawing wood) (Martin & Halverson, 1983). A week
later, they asked the children to recall the pictures. When the children described the
gender-inconsistent pictures, they tended to distort information by changing
the gender of the actor. When they recalled gender-consistent pictures, they were
more accurate and more confident of their memories. Other studies have reported
similar findings. In addition, girls recall feminine toys, peers, and activities more
easily than boys do; boys are better at remembering masculine toys, peers, and
activities (Martin, 1993; Signorella et al., 1993). In effect, children become “sexist
self-socializers” as they work at remembering and developing the masculine and
feminine attributes they view as consistent with their self-image as male or female.
408  Chapter 10 Sex and Gender

Individual children vary in the extent to which they have well-formed gender
schemas (Signorella et al., 1993). Some children are gender schematic and highly sen-
sitive to gender information whereas other children are gender aschematic and focus
more on other aspects of information. Not surprisingly, gender-schematic children
displayed better memories for gender-consistent information and were more likely
to distort gender-inconsistent information than gender-aschematic children (Levy,
1994). Part of the reason they remembered gender-consistent information may be
that they paid more attention to same-gender information. In a naturalistic study of
TV viewing, researchers found that boys who had a better grasp of gender constancy
watched male characters and programs that featured male characters more than
boys who had not yet fully achieved gender constancy did (Luecke-Aleksa et al.,
1995). Gender-constant girls also watched same-gender characters more than girls
without gender constancy did. Gender-role schemas clearly alter the ways children
process social information and either recall it accurately or distort it to suit their
prior concepts. A study of 7- to 12-year-old girls also demonstrates the link between
children’s gender schemas and gender-stereotyped behavior. Girls who did not
have a schema that they were tomboys were fourteen times more likely to exhibit
responses that were congruent with gender stereotypes than incongruent with
gender stereotypes; girls who considered themselves tomboys were only four times
more likely to exhibit congruent responses (Martin & Dinella, 2012).

Comparison of Cognitive Developmental

and Gender-Schema Theories
These two theories make different predictions about how gender-typed knowledge
influences gender-role activities and behavior (Martin & Ruble, 2010). The cog-
nitive developmental theory predicts that achievement of gender constancy influ-
ences children’s gender-typed choices and, therefore, before the 5- to 7-year age
period, the children should have little preference for gender-appropriate activities.
Gender-schema theory suggests that children need only basic information about
gender, such as identification of the sexes, to begin forming and following rules
about it. On this issue, gender-schema theorists appear to be correct. Teaching pre-
school children gender constancy did not affect their sex-typing responses (e.g.,
activity choices or cross dressing) (Arthur et al., 2009). Gender labeling is sufficient
to affect children’s gender-typed activity preferences (Martin & Little, 1990). Even
just telling children in one study that an attractive novel toy was something that
children of the other sex really liked resulted in the toy being dropped like a hot
potato (Martin et al., 1995). Gender-typed play, such as choosing trucks or dolls as
appropriate toys, apparently does not depend on children’s understanding of gen-
der stability or gender constancy.

Social Influences on Gender Typing

Family, peers, teachers, and TV all influence children’s development of gender-
typed behavior. They are models and shapers, encouragers and enforcers.

Theories of Social Influence

The most influential theoretical account of social influences on gender typing is the
social cognitive theory of gender development, which Bussey and Bandura (1999)
 Social Influences on Gender Typing  409

developed by applying the principles of Bandura’s social cognitive learning theory

to gender development. According to this theory, one way that children learn about
gender issues is through observational learning. By watching other children and
adults of both sexes, children learn which behaviors are appropriate for their own
sex and actively construct notions of appropriate appearance, occupations, and
behaviors for both sexes. They use this knowledge to develop concepts of gender-
appropriate behavior. Children also learn about gender by responding to positive
and negative feedback provided by others when their behavior is gender appro-
priate or inappropriate. Peers, parents, and teachers are enforcers of acceptable
gender-appropriate behavior. Although external influences at first regulate this
behavior, over time children develop internalized expectancies that gender-
appropriate choices are likely to lead to positive outcomes, and gender violations
are likely to lead to penalties and punishments. Sometime between 3 and 4 years
of age, children shift from external regulation to self-regulation, using self-praise
and self-sanctions to maintain their adherence to personal standards of gender-
appropriate behavior (Bussey & Bandura, 1992). Children’s desire to have a sense
of self-efficacy and perceive that they are skilled and competent in the realm of
gender motivates, guides, and regulates their choices of gender-role-appropriate
actions and opportunities, which, in turn, strengthens their gender-linked interests
and beliefs. In brief, personal conceptions about gender, activity patterns linked to
gender, and environmental influences that promote or discourage gender-related
behavior all contribute to children’s gender development.
This theory of gender development has some similarities with the cognitive devel-
opmental and gender-schema theories, including its emphasis on the importance
of cognition and the active role of the child in developing an understanding of
gender. However, the social cognitive theory places more emphasis on the roles of
motivational, affective, and environmental influences on gender development than
do the other two theories. It also recognizes the embeddedness of gender devel-
opment in a matrix of societal institutions. The social structural theory of gender
roles focuses specifically on factors such as institutionalized constraints on male and
female opportunities in educational, occupational, and political spheres as determi-
nants of gender roles (Wood & Eagly, 2000, 2012). It shares with feminist perspec-
tives the view that the distribution of power and status between men and women in
the home, the work force, and political arenas strongly influences gender develop-
ment (Miller & Scholnick, 2000). Both the social cognitive and the social structural
theories emphasize the importance of tracking changes in societal influences across
historical eras and stress the significance of societal and institutional constraints
in accounting for children’s and adults’ gender-linked expectations and behaviors.

Parents’ Influence on Children’s Gender-Typed

Choices
Parents have a very strong influence on children’s early gender typing (Leaper &
Farkas, 2015; McHale et al., 2003). They’re the first people children observe closely,
and they’re also the first ones who try to teach children and shape their behav-
ior. When children are still infants, their parents are already sending them mes-
sages about gender roles and stereotypes. The process starts at birth when parents
give the baby a name—boyish Brad or feminine Angelina—and bring him or her
home to a nursery decorated in blue or pink with a sports theme or flowers. Parents
announce the gender of their babies to the world by the ways they dress them. A
group of researchers watching infants in a shopping center found that baby boys
410  Chapter 10 Sex and Gender

were dressed in simple blue or red clothes and baby girls were dressed in pink with
ruffles and lace and had bows, barrettes, and ribbons in their hair (Shakin et al.,
1985). Gender-typed clothing announces the child’s gender and ensures that even
strangers will respond to the child in a gender-appropriate way. When the boys and
girls are older, parents dress them in either pants or dresses, style their hair in buzz
cut or curls, select toys and activities that they deem gender appropriate, promote
the children’s association with same-sex playmates, and often react with dismay or
criticism when the children behave in ways they consider gender inappropriate.
They fill boys’ rooms with action toys—vehicles, machines, army equipment, sol-
diers, and sports equipment—and girls’ rooms with family-focused toys and feminine
decor—dolls, dollhouses, and floral-patterned and ruffled furnishings (Pomerleau
et al., 1990). However, same-gender parent households are less likely to decorate
children’s rooms in gender stereotyped ways (Sutfin et al., 2008). Thus, well before
children make lists of toys they’d like to receive for birthdays or holidays, parents
are actively shaping their youngsters’ tastes and preferences. Parents also provide
opportunities for boys and girls to learn gender-typed behaviors by enrolling them
in different types of gender-typed activities, clubs, and sports—for example, boys on
baseball teams and girls in ballet classes (Leaper & Friedman, 2007). Although sup-
port for girls’ participation in sports has increased in the United States and Canada,
since the passage of legislation in 1972 that gave girls and boys equal opportuni-
ties to participate in school-based sports, girls’ participation in high school sports
increased from 1 in 27 to 1 in 2.5 in 2012 (National Federation of State High School
Associations, 2013). And more girls and women are going to the Olympics: only
11 percent were female in 1960 but 44 percent of participants were female in 2012
(International Olympic Committee, 2013).

Parents’ Behavior toward Girls and Boys

The influence of parents on children’s gender typing goes beyond choosing bats
and balls or dolls and tutus. Parents also behave differently toward their sons and
daughters from the moment they first meet.

Behavior with infants and toddlers Parents perceive boys and girls as different
as soon as they are born. Consistent with evolutionary theory, which emphasizes
strength and competitiveness in males and nurturance in females (Geary, 2015),
parents describe their newborn daughters as smaller, softer, cuter, more delicate,
and more finely featured than they describe their sons. They emphasize their sons’
size, strength, coordination, and alertness and their daughters’ fragility and beauty
(Stern & Karraker, 1989). In view of these differences in parents’ perceptions, it is
not surprising that they also treat their sons and daughters differently. They tend to
be more verbally responsive with daughters than with sons; they talk more to girls in
infancy and at older ages and use more supportive and directive speech (Clearfield
& Nelson, 2006; Kitamura & Burnham, 2003; Leaper & Farkas, 2015; Lovas, 2011).
They are harsher with boys (McKee et al., 2007).
This differential perception and treatment of infant boys and girls is even more
marked for fathers than for mothers (Stern & Karraker, 1989). From the time they
hear they are going to have a baby, fathers-to-be show a preference for sons, and
after the baby is born, fathers are more likely to play and talk with their sons than
with their daughters, especially when the baby is a firstborn (Parke & Cookston,
2019; Schoppe-Sullivan et al., 2006). When the children are toddlers, fathers spend
 Social Influences on Gender Typing  411

more time watching, touching, and playing with sons than daughters. They indulge
in rough-and-tumble antics and talk to their sons in a kind of macho way, saying
things such as “Hey, Tiger!” (Parke & Cookston, 2019). With daughters, they are
likely to cuddle gently rather than engaging in active play. In contrast, mothers tend to
treat baby girls and baby boys much the same way (Leaper, 2002; Lytton & Romney,
1991). With preschoolers, fathers of boys engage more frequently in physical
play than fathers of girls; fathers of girls engage more frequently in literacy activities
(Leavell et al., 2012). This pattern of differences in mothers’ and fathers’ interac-
tions with sons and daughters suggests that the social forces involved in gender
typing begin at birth and that fathers, through their markedly different treatment
of boys and girls, may contribute to the gender-typing process more than mothers.

As Jason’s dad exclaimed when he found out that his first-born was a boy. “Wow! A boy!
That’s so great. I know what to do with a boy . . . like play football. But I’m not so sure
about a girl. What a relief!” Jason’s mom, on the other hand, was less concerned about
the gender of their newborn. “He’s just so cute . . . but I bet that if our new baby was a
Josephine she would be just as adorable.”

Behavior with older children As children grow, parents actively encourage and
reinforce their gender-typed behavior. One area in which this has been observed is
play. In one study, researchers watched how mothers and fathers reacted to their
3- and 5-year-old sons’ and daughters’ play, purposely manipulating the children’s
choices of toys. Both masculine toys, such as soldiers and a gas station, and feminine
toys, such as a dollhouse and kitchen utensils, were available, but the researchers
specifically told the children to play with toys that were either gender appropriate or
gender inappropriate. They then recorded parents’ reactions to the children’s toy
choices. Fathers exerted pressure on their children—both sons and daughters—to
play with gender-typed toys; they rewarded them for playing with gender-appropriate
toys and punished them for playing with cross-gender toys. Mothers took the same
approach with their daughters but were less consistent with their sons; sometimes
they punished them and sometimes rewarded them for playing with cross-gender
toys (Langlois & Downs, 1980). In other studies as well, researchers have found that
fathers are more likely than mothers to disapprove of their children’s engagement
in activities that are considered appropriate for the other gender (Leve & Fagot,
1997). Men are also more likely than women to purchase gender-typed toys, espe-
cially for boys (Fisher-Thompson et al., 1995).
A second area in which parents encourage different behaviors in their sons
and daughters is dependence and independence. Parents encourage boys to be
independent, to explore, and to assume personal responsibility; they encourage
girls to be dependent, be obedient, and maintain close family ties (Leaper &
Farkas, 2015; Martin & Ruble, 2010). They are more protective of daughters’ physi-
cal well-being. When asked to imagine that their child had been injured, parents
reacted with concern to less-severe injuries of their daughters (Morrongiello &
Hogg, 2004). They were more likely to stop children fighting when their daughter
was involved as either a perpetrator or a victim (Martin & Ross, 2005). Parents
think that boys should be able to engage in venturesome activities at earlier ages
than girls, for example, playing away from home without telling the parents where
they are, running errands in the neighborhood, crossing the street alone, and
using sharp scissors (Pomerantz & Ruble, 1998). Parents are more likely to pick
up and supervise girls after school and to set restrictions and curfews (Parke &
Buriel, 2006). Many psychologists are concerned that restricting girls’ freedom
412  Chapter 10 Sex and Gender

could lead them to feel less adequate and discourage them from exploring the
world and taking risks (Ruble et al., 2006).
A third area in which parents encourage differences between their sons and
daughters is achievement. Parents encourage their boys to achieve and compete
more than they encourage their girls (Ruble et al., 2006). During the school
years, differential treatment of boys and girls is particularly marked in the areas
of math and science achievement (Wigfield et al., 2015). Parents believe boys have
higher ability in math than girls have (Gunderson et al., 2012). They are more
likely to encourage their sons to work on math and science activities (Simpkins
et al., 2015a). When visiting a science museum, parents in one study were
more likely to explain the interactive exhibits to their sons than to their daugh-
ters (Crowley et al., 2001). In another study, although sixth-grade girls and boys
expressed equal interest in science and earned the same grades, their parents
underestimated their daughters’ interest, believed that science was more diffi-
cult for them, and were less likely to give the girls scientific explanations when
working on a physics-related task (Tenenbaum & Leaper, 2003). Fathers are more
likely to stress the importance of achievement, a career, and occupational suc-
cess for their sons than for their daughters; they are more concerned about their
daughters’ interpersonal interactions (Block, 1983). Even when parents are read-
ing bedtime stories, mothers teach their sons more than their daughters. They
supply their sons with unfamiliar names (“Look, here’s a giraffe. Can you say
giraffe?”), but with their daughters they emphasize the pleasure of the interac-
tion (Weitzman et al., 1985) and they focus on feelings and emotions rather
than information and learning (Cervantes & Callanan, 1998). These differences
in parents’ behavior are not lost on their children. When parents have strongly
stereotyped beliefs about boys’ and girls’ abilities, their children have matching
views, regardless of their own ability levels (Eccles et al., 1993; Simpkins et al.,
2015b), and the children’s math performance is affected by being read a gender-
salient story (Tomasetto et al., 2011). Girls achieve more when their parents have
more gender-egalitarian attitudes and are more balanced in their treatment of
boys and girls (Leaper & Friedman, 2007).
The degree to which parents encourage gender differences in their children var-
ies somewhat across ethnic groups. African American parents value early independ-
ence for both sons and daughters and make fewer gender distinctions in deciding
who is to carry out which family roles and tasks than European American parents do
(Gibbs, 1989). African American parents also encourage girls to be aggressive and
assertive and boys to express emotion and nurturance more than European Ameri-
can parents (Allen & Majidi-Abi, 1989; Basow, 1992). Mexican American parents, in
contrast, have more strictly differentiated gender-role socialization standards than
European American parents (Coltrane & Adams, 2008). The behavior of children
reflects their parents’ socialization (Martin & Ruble, 2010). For example, com-
pared with European American girls, Mexican American girls place less emphasis
on educational achievement, consistent with their socialization into the traditional
role of wife and mother, and Mexican American boys are more assertive than Euro-
pean American boys in keeping with the traditional emphasis on male “machismo”
(Adams et al., 2007).

As Jose Martinez, a Mexican immigrant father, noted, “I will be happy if my daughters

get married and start families. I am not too concerned about college for my girls. I leave
the education stuff to my sons who need the extra schooling so they can provide well
for their future families.”
 Social Influences on Gender Typing  413

Modeling Parents’ Characteristics

Beyond providing gender-appropriate toys, parents influence the gender-role devel-
opment of their children by modeling gender-typed behavior. Mothers’ and fathers’
attitudes, actions, and lifestyles provide models their children can follow in work-
ing out their gender roles. One study found a link between parents’ and children’s
gender beliefs: Parents who were highly traditional in their own gender roles had
children who knew more about gender stereotypes (Turner & Gervai, 1995). In
another study, researchers observed a link between parents’ and children’s behav-
ior styles: Boys with strong, “masculine” fathers and weak, “feminine” mothers were
more likely to exhibit masculine characteristics and less likely to exhibit feminine
characteristics than boys with weak fathers and powerful mothers (Hetherington,
1965). The ways mothers and fathers divide household tasks is another source of
parental modeling that can influence children’s gender typing. Researchers have
found that when parents are traditional in their division of tasks, their children
are more knowledgeable about gender distinctions (Serbin et al., 1993; Turner &
Gervai, 1995). See Table 10.1 for highlights of children’s gender-role development
and gender-role socialization by parents. Modeling even occurs on a much broader,
societal scale. An international meta-analysis suggests that when girls develop in
a societal context where women have careers in scientific research, they receive a
clear message that careers in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics
(STEM) are within the realm of possibilities for them. Conversely, if girls’ mothers,
aunts, and sisters do not have STEM careers, they perceive that STEM is a male
domain and thus feel anxious about math, lack the confidence to take challenging
math courses, and underachieve on math tests (Else-Quest et al., 2010).

When Father Is Absent

As we have said, fathers are more likely than mothers to treat sons and daughters
differently. For this reason, we might expect that children from families in which
fathers are absent or away for long periods would be less gender typed. The absence
of a male model and the lack of opportunities for children to interact with a man
might also lead to difficulties developing a gender identity and a gender role.
Researchers have found that when fathers are permanently away because of divorce
Fuse/Corbis/Getty Images

Children clearly imitate

the gender-typed
­behaviors of their
same-sex parent.
414  Chapter 10 Sex and Gender

TABLE 10.1

Development of Gender Typing and Gender Roles

Age Description
Infancy Parents dress baby and decorate nursery in pink or blue.
They describe a boy as “strong” and “active” and a girl as “sweet.”
Fathers greet a boy with expressions such as, “Hey, Tiger,” and girls with expressions such as “Hello, little
darling.”
1–3 years Parents select gender-appropriate toys, promote contact with same-gender playmates, disapprove when a
child displays behavior that is inappropriate for her or his gender.
Fathers are more likely to gender type children than are mothers.
Children recognize male and female faces as belonging to two distinct categories.
Children can correctly label own gender but have limited understanding of gender identity and its wider
implications.
As they approach 3 years of age, children begin to grasp concept of gender identity.
3–5 years Children understand that they themselves and some other children belong to a gender class.
Children have developed clear preferences for gender-appropriate toys.
Girls interact more with babies and in a more active way than boys do.
Children are more gender stereotyped than adults.
Children begin to understand the concept of gender stability.
5–7 years Boys are more likely than girls to play in same-gender groups.
Children spend much more time with same-gender playmates than with other-gender children.
Children understand gender stability and gender constancy (by age 7).
7–11 years Children develop patterns of interest in activities that are consistent with cultural gender stereotypes.
Most children display knowledge of gender-typed traits.

Note: Developmental events represent overall trends identified in research studies. Individual children vary greatly in the ages at which they exhibit
these developmental changes. Sources: Leaper & Farkas, 2015; Martin & Ruble, 2010; Maccoby, 1998; Pasterski et al., 2011; and Ruble et al., 2006.

esearch Up Close: Gender Roles in Counterculture

Families
Researchers in the Family commitment to gender-egalitarian beliefs and
Lifestyles Project followed more values. The parents in these avant garde
than 200 families in southern and countercultural families were likely to
California, beginning in the be active in progressive political activities,
1970s, and investigated relations between such as antiwar demonstrations and environ-
lifestyles and children’s gender development mental activism. They were committed to
(Eiduson et al., 1988). Some of the families were ­feminism and attempted to practice it in their
traditionally married couples and others had everyday lives. They shared domestic, financial,
unconventional family configurations—single and child-care tasks or reported that the fathers
parents, common-law couples, and couples in performed them exclusively.
communes or other group arrangements. When the children in these families were
Among these nonconventional families were about 6 years old, the researchers brought each
a sizable number (78) who had a high child and his or her parents to a university center
 Social Influences on Gender Typing  415

for a one-day visit (Weisner & Wilson-Mitchell, family’s unconventional lifestyle. They were not
1990). They interviewed the parents about how counter-stereotyped; instead, they tended to be
they put their gender values into practice raising multischematic; that is, they displayed either
their children, and they assessed the children’s conventional or egalitarian gender-typing
gender typing in several areas: appearance, schemas depending on the situation. They had
activities and interests, social relationships, and multiple schemas available, and they had
personal–social attributes (e.g., adventurous, developed selective criteria for when to use
considerate, outgoing, calm). In comparison each. This capacity to be flexible was part of a
with children reared by traditional married more general pattern that characterized these
couples, children in the avant garde and children’s families. Their parents regularly
countercultural families were less gender typed engaged in negotiations and discussions about
in their chosen activities and interests and less all kinds of cultural standards, debating and
gender stereotyped in their assumptions that questioning the standards and including the
girls could be engineers and firefighters and children in their discussions. This process encour-
boys could be librarians and nursery school aged the children to think about and question
teachers. More than 70 percent of the children in beliefs and behavior rather than always adopt-
the avant garde and countercultural families ing either conventional or countercultural
gave nonstereotyped answers to questions standards.
about appropriate occupations for boys and Some family styles observed in the study,
girls in comparison with only 40 percent of the however, made children even more rigidly
children in traditional families. The avant garde gender stereotyped. Children who were
and countercultural children were very much like reared in devotional communes that strongly
the traditional family children in other ways, emphasized culturally conventional gender
though, such as their play preferences and their roles were even less likely to be open minded
basic knowledge of the ways familiar play about gender than children in conventional
objects (e.g., dishes, trucks, dolls, racing cars) married families. This study provided a clear
are culturally gender typed. demonstration of how parents can modify
Children from avant garde and countercul- their children’s gender roles toward more
tural families had acquired the normal cultural gender-differentiated or more gender-
schemas for gender typing, regardless of their egalitarian roles.

or death, are temporarily unavailable because of occupational demands or military

service, or simply show little interest in their children, young boys may experience
more challenges in gender-role development (Hupp et al., 2010; Ruble et al., 2006).
However, given the broad range of socialization agents in children’s worlds, it is not
surprising that most children develop gender-typed characteristics even when the
father is not present.
In childhood, the effects of fathers’ absence on gender typing in girls are mini-
mal. However, in adolescence, there are some differences between girls with fathers
present versus absent in terms of their behavior with the opposite sex. Researchers
following girls in the United States and New Zealand from age 5 to age 18 found
that the father’s absence was associated with an elevated risk of early sexual activity
and pregnancy, and the earlier the father left, the greater the risk (see Figure 10.4;
Ellis et al., 2003). These links were still evident even after the researchers controlled
for family conditions such as poverty, exposure to violence, inadequate parental
guidance, and lack of supervision. These findings can be explained by psychologi-
cal theories: For example, learning theories suggest that the father-absent girls had
not developed the social skills and confidence they needed for normal heterosexual
416  Chapter 10 Sex and Gender

United States New Zealand

Percent Percent

60 60

50 50
Early sexual activity Early sexual activity
40 40

30 30

20 20
Teenage Pregnancy Teenage Pregnancy
10 10

0 0
Early father- Late father- Father-present Early father- Late father- Father-present
absent girls absent girls girls absent girls absent girls girls

FIGURE 10.4 The effects of fathers’ absence on girls’ early sexual activity and pregnancy. Teenage girls in the United
States and New Zealand were far more likely to engage in early sexual activity when they lost their fathers, especially if
the father’s absence occurred before they were 5 years old.
Source: Ellis, B. J., Bates, J. E., Dodge, K. A., Fergusson, D. M., Horwood, L. J., Pettit, G. S., and Woodward, L. (2003). Does father
absence place daughters at special risk for early sexual activity and teenage pregnancy? Child Development, 74, 801–821. Reprinted with
permission of the Society for Research in Child Development and Wiley-Blackwell.

relationships because they had missed out on interactions with a man who rewarded
and enjoyed their femininity and modeled ways to behave with the opposite sex. As
one teenage girl reflected:

“I did not realize what I missed growing up without a dad until I started to date. Then I
had a tough time figuring out how to relate to boys. Perhaps if I had seen my mom with
a man when I was younger, it would be easier for me now when I have to deal with guys.”

Studies of children who grow up in lesbian households have challenged the

importance of the father’s contribution to gender typing, however. Although these
children may be less gender stereotyped than children reared in heterosexual
households (Bos & Sandfort, 2010; Goldberg et al., 2012), differences are not always
observed. On average, boys and girls with lesbian parents choose traditionally
gender-oriented toys, activities, and friends (Patterson & Hastings, 2007). Moreover,
studies of children reared by same-sex parents (women or men) generally indicate
that the children do not differ from children from traditional homes in terms of
adjustment (e.g., self-esteem, conduct problems) or relationships with other adults
and peers (Patterson & Farr, 2015).

Siblings as Agents of Gender Socialization

Siblings also influence children’s gender choices, attitudes, and behavior. In one
longitudinal study, researchers investigated whether the gender-role attitudes, activi-
ties, and attributes of firstborn children predicted the same qualities in their second-
born siblings (McHale et al., 2001). They found that the younger siblings’ gender
typing was indeed related to their older siblings’ attributes, even more strongly than
to their parents’. Other researchers have found that the sex of the siblings matters
 Social Influences on Gender Typing  417

too. Children with sisters tend to develop more feminine qualities; children with
brothers tend to develop more masculine qualities (Rust et al., 2000). A recent
meta-analysis confirmed that boys and girls with an older brother were more likey to
show more traditional masculine characteristics than having an older sister (Farkas
& Leaper , 2014). The effects were not evident for the impact of older sisters which
may reflect the higher staus accorded to masculine than feminine stereotyped quali-
ties. Brother–brother pairs engage in more boyish play, throwing balls, making vehi-
cles go “vroom,” and shooting toy weapons; sister–sister and older sister–younger
brother pairs engage in more feminine pursuits, doing art activities, playing with
dolls, and playing house (Stoneman et al., 1986). Firstborn boys with brothers have
the most stereotyped gender attitudes; children with an older sibling of the oppo-
site sex have less stereotypical gender-role concepts (Crouter et al., 2007).

Role Models in Books, Games, and Television

As children grow older, influences outside the family become increasingly impor-
tant for gender-role development. The books children read generally portray male
and female roles in gender-biased ways. An examination of pronouns (e.g., he or
she) used in U.S. books indicates that males are referred to in books twice as much
as females; which is better than in the 1950s and 1960s, when males were referred
to four to five times more often than females (Twenge et al., 2012). In stories
about animals, the cows and donkeys are more likely to be males than females
(McCabe et al., 2011). Even in egalitarian countries such as Sweden, children con-
tinue to be exposed to fewer female than male book characters (Lynch, 2016).
Although educators have advocated for a more egalitarian presentation, children’s
literature still contains many gender stereotypes. Books still often show females as
more passive, more dependent, and engaged in a narrower range of occupations
than men and show males as more assertive and action oriented (Turner-Bowker,
1996; Uttley & Roberts, 2011). This gender stereotyping is evident even in books
labeled “nonsexist” (Diekman & Murnen, 2004).
Television programs are also sources of gender stereotyping. Males on TV are
more likely than females to be aggressive, decisive, professionally competent, rational,
stable, powerful, and tolerant; females are portrayed as warmer, happier, and more
sociable and emotional. When women on TV are aggressive, with a few notable
exceptions, they are usually inept or unsuccessful and are more likely to be shown
as victims than initiators of violence. Females are less likely than males to be leading
characters and more likely to play comedy roles, to be married or engaged, and to
be young and attractive (Calvert, 2015; Comstock & Scharrer, 2006; Lauzen, 2017).
In Spanish-language TV female characters focus on physical appearance and nur-
turing roles; male characters focus on occupational roles (Rivadeneyra, 2011). Part
of the reason for this gender imbalance is that only 28 percent of directors, writers,
and producers of programs are female (Lauzen, 2017). A trend toward showing
women in a wider range of occupational roles has been noted (Coltrane & Adams,
2008; Douglas, 2003). However, even in TV commercials, gender stereotypes abound
(Paek et al., 2011). Males more often portray authorities and make voice-over
comments about products’ merits, whereas women play the role of consumer, dis-
playing interest in the products. When women are shown as experts, they are likely
to be discussing food products, laundry detergent, or beauty aids. Video games also
provide gender-stereotyped images and activities. Interestingly, male video games
characters have become more masculine over time, as depicted by their increased
muscularity and powerful body type (Miller & Summers, 2011).
418  Chapter 10 Sex and Gender

These stereotyped presentations are of particular concern because children

tend to watch actors of their own gender on TV. In both North America and Asia,
researchers have found that boys prefer male characters and girls prefer female
characters and that children prefer gender-consistent content; that is, boys like vio-
lent fare and girls prefer peaceful content (Knobloch et al., 2005). Their gender
schemas guide the specific programs children watch, and what they view shapes
their gender beliefs—creating an endless cycle of gender typing and stereotyping
(Leaper & Farkas, 2015).
The influence of stereotyped presentations of male and female roles is demon-
strated by research showing that children who view TV extensively are more likely to
have stereotyped notions of gender and to conform to culturally accepted gender
typing (Berry, 2000; Ward & Friedman, 2006). In the study of what happened when
TV was introduced in a small town in Canada, which we discussed in Chapter 9,
“Schools, Mentors, and Media,” researchers found significant increases in children’s
stereotyped gender attitudes 2 years later (Kimball, 1986; MacBeth, 1996). It is pos-
sible for TV to be used to reduce children’s gender-role stereotypes. In one study,
5- and 6-year-old children who were shown a cartoon in which the characters played
nontraditional gender roles (e.g., girls helped build a clubhouse) developed less
stereotyped gender-role attitudes (Davidson et al., 1979). Freestyle, a TV series that
attempted to counteract children’s gender stereotypes, was moderately successful
in increasing acceptance of children who exhibited non-gender-typed behaviors—
for example, girls who participated in athletics and mechanical activities and boys
who engaged in nurturing (Johnston & Ettema, 1982). However, the effects of most
TV-based interventions have been relatively modest, short-lived, and effective only
with young children (Calvert, 2015; Comstock & Scharrer, 2006). More substantial
and pervasive changes in books and TV must be made to reduce children’s develop-
ment of gender-role stereotypes.
One source of positive gender role models is sports on TV. The Olympic Games—
summer or winter—is an excellent venue for showing children and adolescents that
young men and women can compete on comparable playing fields, wearing the
same blazers, and inspiring young people around the world. These games offer
matched events—men’s and women’s hockey, women’s and men’s gymnastics,
men’s and women’s breast stroke, and so on.

As Emma noted: “At least at the Olympics, girls get to be center stage along with the
boys. It really feels good to see that girls can do well, just as well at sports as boys. Now
if our schools would give girls’ sports their proper due, that would be real progress.”

The “Science Cheerleaders” (http://www.sciencecheerleader.com/)—cheerleaders

with degrees and careers in science—offer another source of positive gender role
models, demonstrating in their TV appearances and performances that gals (and
guys) can be both gorgeous and accomplished.

Peers, Gender Roles, and Gender Segregation

Peers serve as models and enforcers of society’s gender-role standards and are major
influence on children’s gender-typed behavior by the time they enter school (Leaper
& Friedman, 2007; Rose & Rudolph, 2006). To investigate the effect of peers as
models, researchers exposed 3rd and 4th graders to peer models who displayed
preferences for a variety of objects (Bussey & Perry, 1982). Children were more
likely to play with a gender-neutral toy or even a cross-gender toy after observing a
 Social Influences on Gender Typing  419

eal-World Application: Do Computers Widen

the Gender Gap?
Computers are commonplace in typically presented computers as mathematical
classrooms and homes, after- tools even though they had many other uses.
school clubs, and summer Computer labs were usually found in the math
camps, but do they provide boys department, and credits for computer courses
and girls an even playing field genderwise? often counted toward math requirements.
When computers first became available, com- Because girls often believe that they have less
puter use by girls and boys differed widely math ability than boys, this arrangement kept
(Lepper, 1985; Lepper & Gurtner, 1989). As many them away from computers and sometimes from
as ten boys were enrolled in basic computer careers in math and science (Shea et al., 2001).
classes for every one girl, and the ratio was even Fourth, most computer programs seemed to
higher in more advanced classes. Boys also have been written for boys (Subrahmanyam
played more computer games than girls did and et al., 2001). Even specifically educational games
believed that these games were more accept- could turn girls off with their macho titles: Alien
able for them (Funk & Buchman, 1996). They Addition, Demolition Division, Spelling Baseball.
even claimed that girls who spend a lot of time Finally, boys originally spent more time on
playing games are unpopular and that if they computers because their peers encouraged and
want to be popular, they should not play games, rewarded them more for doing so (Funk &
especially “the fighting games.” (Girls, by the way, Buchman, 1996; Lawry et al., 1995).
did not agree.) According to recent reports, the gender gap
Many factors can explain this gender discrep- in computer use is closing, primarily because of
ancy in computer use. First, the computer field the expanding range of available applications,
was dominated by males and had fewer female including e-mail, chat rooms, and educational
role models to attract girls. Even popular movies pursuits, not just computer programming and
and television shows featuring computer experts, games (Miller, 2012; Munusamy & Ismail, 2009).
such as Real Genius, Big Bang Theory, and Silicon Recent data suggest that girls and boys spend
Valley, depicted computer scientists as primarily equal amounts of time on the computer and are
white or, more recently, Asian males (Cheryan equally confident about their computer skills. But
et al., 2015). Second, computer labs tended to the computer activities they favor still differ. As the
be competitive and noisy, which boys found photos below illustrate, girls use computers more
more comfortable than girls. Third, schools for social contact whereas boys use them for
Fuse/Corbis/Getty Images

© Onoky/Media Bakery
420  Chapter 10 Sex and Gender

games (Kirmani et al., 2009). Girls and boys both As Abby lamented when she was 12, “I sure
embrace computers when they offer functions do envy my brother because he has loads
that fit their interests (Subrahmanyam et al., of cool computer games to play. It’s time
2001). Thus, computers themselves do not widen the game makers started to realize that girls
the gender gap, but until there are computer like computer games too, not just war and
programs and opportunities that appeal equally action hero ones. More games (nonviolent
to both boys and girls, they will not eliminate it. please) for girls would be really awesome.”

same-gender model do so. To investigate the effect of peers as enforcers, researchers

watched 200 preschoolers at play over several months’ time (Fagot, 1985a,b). They
found that peers reacted strongly when children violated appropriate gender-role
behavior patterns. Boys who played with dolls rather than trucks had a particularly
tough time; they were criticized five to six times more often than boys who con-
formed to stereotype. Peers were less harsh in their treatment of girls who played
firefighters rather than nurses; they tended to ignore rather than criticize them.
When peers rewarded appropriate gender-role behavior, children persisted longer
in the rewarded type of activity. Negative peer reactions to gender-atypical behavior
have been documented in middle childhood (Blakemore, 2003) and adolescence
(Young & Sweeting, 2004) as well as preschool.
In the early study of peers as enforcers, children were more effective in shaping
up the behavior of their same-sex playmates than they were at influencing peers of
the other gender (Fagot, 1985a,b). Similarly, in a more recent study, peer harass-
ment of 9-year-old boys predicted decreased gender atypicality only for the boys who
had many male friends (Lee & Troop-Gordon, 2011). This pattern of peer interac-
tion is related to children’s gender segregation into same-sex playgroups. Look at
any school playground, and you will see that children are playing with others of the
same sex. Although parental influence might play a role in setting the process in
motion, by the time they are in preschool, children spontaneously choose same-
gender play partners without adult encouragement, guidance, or pressure (Pellegrini
et al., 2007). In one study of preschool children, both boys and girls had more than
twice as many interactions with same-sex peers as with other-sex peers, were faster
to return to them after their play had been interrupted, and started playing with
them more quickly (Martin & Ruble, 2010). These patterns were apparent even
after only a few weeks of preschool. Other research indicated that by the end of
preschool, children spent nearly three times as much time with same-sex play part-
ners as with children of the other sex, and by age 6 years, they spent eleven times
as much time with same-sex partners (Maccoby, 1998). Boys were even more likely
than girls to congregate in same-sex groups (Benenson et al., 1997). This trend
continues in elementary school; children like same-sex peers better than other-sex
peers and are less likely to behave negatively toward them (Underwood, Schockner,
et al., 2001). Gender segregation is evident across many cultures, including
India and some African countries as well as North America and Europe (Munroe &
Romney, 2006).
Thus, children live in segregated worlds, which, in turn, encourage separate
styles of interaction that are distinctly male and female. With their same-sex peers,
girls play house and boys act out adventures. These activities provide opportunities
for practicing gender-typed behavior. Girls’ play offers practice in nurturant, affilia-
tive, and collaborative behavior; boys’ play offers practice in assertive and competi-
tive behavior, physical action, and attention seeking. This is another way children
learn and maintain gender roles.
 Social Influences on Gender Typing  421

To investigate gender segregation in more detail, Carol Martin and Richard

Fabes (2001) followed preschoolers over the course of one school year. They found
that gender segregation increased during the year and that boys’ and girls’ activities
were clearly different when they played in same-sex groups. The more time boys
spent together, the higher was their activity level, and boys who spent more time
with other boys engaged in increasing amounts of rough-and-tumble play and overt
aggression, spent less time with or near adults, and expressed more positive emo-
tion (i.e., had more fun). In contrast, the activity and aggression of girls who spent
more time with other girls decreased and they spent more time with or near adults.
Thus, same-gender segregation provided distinctive socializing experiences for boys
and girls. Consistent with these findings, researchers in another study found that
preschool boys chose friends who had high activity levels, but preschool girls chose
friends with low activity levels; in short, children chose friends whose activity level fit
their comfort zone (Gleason et al., 2005).
Here are some illustrations of the difference between boys’ and girls’ play
(Pitcher & Schultz, 1984, pp. 6–7):
John: I’m gonna make a supercave.
Adam: 
We can kill the joker. We can use our sneezer gun to kill the bad guys. We’re the good
guys.
John: My gun can break up the whole sun storm. (He sneezes.)
Adam: 
Don’t sneeze the sun storm away. (John continues to sneeze. Adam ignores it and
keeps on blasting. Puts toy gorilla wrapped in flag on rocket.) Now I’m gonna do
wrecking. (Knocks his structure down.)
John: Now don’t knock mine down. Next time try to be careful.
Adam: OK. I’m gonna blast it. Now here goes.

Wanda: Mom, I’m going shopping [to another girl, who assumes the role of “Mom”].
“Mom”: OK.
Wanda: Mom, I got some new paper and magic markers.
“Mom”: OK, put them over there. They’re very expensive, so don’t waste them.
A boy: Can I play?
Wanda: No, there’s already too many people here.
A girl: Can I play?
Wanda: Yeah, you can be the dog.
Gender segregation continues through childhood and into adolescence. In one
study, 72 percent of the peers nominated for hanging out by 15- to 17-year-olds were
the same gender as the adolescent (Mehta & Strough, 2010). Boys and girls were
equally likely to identify same-gender others as their reference group. However,
girls’ gender segregation was correlated with the belief that girls are more respon-
sive communicative partners than boys.
Eleanor Maccoby (1990, 1998) suggested several reasons for children’s gender
segregation. First, girls view boys’ rough-and-tumble play style and competition–
dominance orientation as aversive, so they avoid interacting with boys. This emo-
tional reaction to opposite-sex interactions is particularly strong for highly gender-
typed children (Martin & Ruble, 2010). Second, boys and girls prefer different
activities: Boys like sports and games and girls enjoy socializing and watching TV
(Cherney & London, 2006; Mathur & Berndt, 2006). Clearly, similarity in gender-
typed behavior patterns is a basis for gender segregation but children’s beliefs that
same gender others are more similar to themselves than opposite gender age mates
is a factor as well (Martin et al., 2011). Third, girls find managing boys difficult. They
interact with other girls easily using their preferred tactic of making polite suggestions,
422  Chapter 10 Sex and Gender

but this tactic is not very effective with boys, who use and respond to direct demands.
So girls begin to avoid boys. These preferences for playing with children of the same
sex may not only lead to gender segregation but also lead to differences in chil-
dren’s abilities. For example, because boys prefer to spend most of their time with
a group of boys, this may limit the types of social skills they develop. Because they
are interacting in a group, they are likely to develop competitive and assertive skills;
because they are interacting with boys, they are unlikely to learn to disclose personal
information or express their emotions—or, in the vernacular, to get in touch with
their feminine side (Leaper & Friedman, 2007). Finally, prenatal hormones may
play a role. Girls with congenital adrenal hyperplasia (CAH; i.e., a higher than nor-
mal level of testosterone) made playmate selections that were more masculine than
unaffected girls and they preferred a boy-typical play style.

Schools and Teachers

Schools provide one more influence on children’s gender typing, delivering gender-
related messages just as parents, peers, and the media do (Leaper & Friedman,
2007; Ruble et al., 2006).

The school culture In most school systems, although men hold the positions of
power, such as principal and superintendent, women, as teachers, create the school
culture, which at least in the beginning favors girls. In elementary school, female
teachers tend to frown on the independent, assertive, competitive, and boisterous
qualities that have been encouraged in boys since infancy. They prefer girls, who are
more verbally oriented, well behaved, and willing to follow rules. Girls also tend to
like school better than boys do and perform better in class. For boys who are very
active, school may not be a happy place. They have difficulty adjusting to school
routines and create problems for teachers; on average, girls find school more con-
sistent with their preferences (McCall et al., 2000; Ruble et al., 2006). However, the
conforming behaviors that elementary school teachers encourage in girls actually
may be detrimental in the long run given that independence, assertiveness, and
nonconformity are much more likely to lead to creative thinking and problem solv-
ing and to high levels of achievement over time (Dweck, 2001, 2006, 2017).
Psychologists have found that achievement in competitive activities often is uncom-
fortable for girls and women. Some cope with their conflict about achievement by
concealing their ability, particularly from boys (Ruble et al., 2006). For example, a
girl might tell a boy that she received a lower grade than she actually did in a course
they are both taking, or she might intentionally perform below her capabilities.
Even women who are highly successful sometimes feel that they need to “soften” the
impact of their achievement by also engaging in warm supportive ways that are more
common among women. These behaviors seem to decrease the chances that they
will receive “social backlash” (e.g., being perceived by others as cold or unlikable)
due to their agency and to being highly skilled (Phelan et al., 2008).

Teachers’ attitudes and behavior In the preschool years, gender differences

are apparent in the ways boys and girls play with materials and interact with other
people. When boys are interacting with female teachers, they play significantly more
in feminine activities involving art, music, puzzles, books, writing, phoning, dress-
up, kitchen, and doll play (Goble et al., 2012). Although educators once believed
that increasing the number of male teachers would counteract female teachers’
treatment of boys and girls, both male and female teachers react more positively to
 Social Influences on Gender Typing  423

children involved in feminine activities, such as playing with art and writing materi-
als and helping others, no matter what the child’s gender is (Fagot, 1985a,b). Teach-
ers can minimize or maximize gender divisions in their classrooms by the ways they
organize and talk to the children. Researchers demonstrated this in one preschool
study. They had teachers in some classrooms make gender salient by physical separa-
tion (e.g., lining children up by sex), classroom organization (e.g., posting separate
boys’ and girls’ bulletin boards), and gender-specific language (e.g., “I need a girl to
pass out the markers”) (Hilliard & Liben, 2010). In other classrooms teachers were
to avoid using gendered language and organization in the classroom and to avoid
encouraging competition between boys and girls. After 2 weeks, children in the
high gender-salience condition but not the low gender-salience condition showed
significantly increased gender stereotypes, less positive ratings of other-sex peers,
and decreased play with other-sex peers. Thus, it is clear that teachers influence
young children’s gender-typed behavior.
Historically, past the preschool years, boys and girls have differed in their perfor-
mance on verbal and quantitative tasks, girls doing better in language and boys in
mathematics (Eccles et al., 1998). Today, there is evidence that girls still outperform
boys in language skills (e.g., Herbert & Stipek, 2005), and that the female advantage
gets bigger as youth move through childhood and adolescence (Scheiber et al.,
2015). However, recent analyses of large samples of children and adolescents in
the United States and around the world indicate either no or very small gender
differences in mathematics ability (Hyde, 2014; Lindberg et al., 2010; Scheiber
et al., 2015; Voyer & Voyer, 2014).

“Abby is beginning to clutch in math class. She’s not really sure of herself when it comes
to things like working with fractions, even though she’s doing great in English. I don’t
really understand what makes girls fall behind boys in math. If it’s something biological
then why are there women who make it as engineers and physicists?”

This is the curious gender difference in achievement: why are males more likely
than girls to select math-related college majors and career choices if girls and boys
are similar in their math abilities? One reason is that math is viewed as a “male”
domain. As early as second grade, children believe in the stereotype that math is for
boys (Cvencek et al., 2011). A second reason, possibly due in part to the stereotype
that math is for boys is that boys perceive themselves as more competent in math.
Boys rate their math competencies as higher than girls’ beginning in third grade
and continuing through high school; they are more confident and less anxious in
their math abilities, are more motivated to do well in math, and score one-third of a
standard deviation higher than girls on math self-concept and self-efficacy (Else-Quest
et al., 2010; Gunderson et al., 2012; Herbert & Stipek, 2005; Nagy et al., 2010; Watt
et al., 2012). Interestingly, differences in girls and boys perceptions of their math
abilities are much stronger than gender differences in actual abilities (Hyde, 2014).
These differences in math competency beliefs appear in countries around the world
and play a critical role in math performance, math course-taking, and the pursuit
of math-related career paths. Girls think of themselves as good only in language—
because that’s what they are supposed to be good at (Pomerantz et al., 2002).
The third reason for the discrepancy in class enrollments is that teachers
encourage boys more than girls in mathematical pursuits (Wigfield et al., 2015).
Why? For one thing, teachers believe that boys have greater math ability than girls
(Gunderson et al., 2012). Like the other adults in our society, teachers hold the stereo-
types that males are better than females at math and science and females are better
at language (Halpern et al., 2011; see Table 10.2). Teachers also attribute boys’
424  Chapter 10 Sex and Gender

TABLE 10.2

Speaking Truth to Gender Stereotypes

Answer the questions in Part 1 of the table based on your knowledge of how boys and girls differ. Then compare your
answers with what other adults think and what research indicates is the truth in Part 2.
Part 1
Language Abilities
1. How many meaningful words can they speak at age 2 (on average)?
Boys____________
Girls____________
2. In what percentage are reading disorders diagnosed?
Boys____________
Girls____________
3. How many months are they ahead on a national assessment of writing at grade 12?
Boys____________
Girls____________
Math and Science Abilities
4. What is their average SAT-Math score?
Boys____________
Girls____________
5. What percentage of mental rotation tasks (requiring the ability to imagine what an object would look like from a differ-
ent angle) can they perform correctly?
Boys____________
Girls____________
6. In how many countries (out of 34) is their performance on an eighth-grade international science achievement test better?
Boys____________
Girls____________
Part 2
Adults Research Stereotypical Actual
Task Believe Shows Difference Difference
Language Abilities
1. Average number of meaningful words spoken at age 2 years 28 78
Boys 194 197
Girls 222 275
2. Percentage with diagnosed reading disorders 5 11
Boys 17 21
Girls 12 10
3. Number of months ahead on national assessment of writing 14 36
at grade 12
Girls > Boys 14 36
Math and Science Abilities
4. Average score SAT-Math 34 34
Boys 566 538
Girls 532 504
5. Percent correct on mental rotation tasks 6 40
Boys 69 70
Girls 63 30
6. Number of countries in which they were better on
eighth-grade science achievement test
Boys > Girls 18 28
Girls > Boys 9 6

Adults in our society believe that males are better than females at math and science and females are better at language. In fact many adults underesti-
mate the size of the difference in language and science, as these results show. How did you do? Source: Halpern et al., 2011.
 Androgyny  425

math successes to ability and their failures to lack of effort, whereas they attribute
girls’ math successes to effort and their failures to lack of ability. In addition, teach-
ers who are themselves math-anxious tend to perpetuate math-gender stereotypes
among their students (Beilock et al., 2010). To eliminate the gender discrepancy in
class enrollments, students need positive experiences with math-confident teachers.
Teachers who are low in math anxiety and high in math teaching self-efficacy may
have the ability to break societal stereotypes and encourage positive math attitudes.
This may be especially true for female teachers and female students, consistent with
research showing that competent female role models can encourage high levels of
math achievement among female students. In the future, teachers also can try to
shift children’s perceptions of gender differences in mathematics to be more accu-
rate by encouraging and praising both girls and boys equally.

Nature and Nurture

Years ago, the question was whether development was driven by nature (i.e., biol-
ogy) or nurture (i.e., socialization). That has ceased to be the question. It is now
widely accepted that gender differences are due to both nature and nurture and
that the impact of one (i.e., nature or nurture) can mitigate or influence the impact
of the other. The impact of biology, such as in regards to the previously discussed
attraction to infants, can be exacerbated by cultural expectations. The influence
of socialization also can be constrained by biology. An example involves a male
infant, Bruce, born in 1965, who lost his penis due to a rare accident while being
circumcised (Colapinto, 2006). Under the supervision of an influential psychologist
at the time, John Money, he was raised as a girl. This included surgery and hormone
treatment, a name change to Brenda, and socialization as a female. Although initial
reports were that he had adopted a female identity, by the time he was a teenager, he
rejected this identity and lived as a male. Just as the effects of biology can be influ-
enced by culture and socialization, the influences of socialization can be impacted
by biology.
Researchers have performed simple manipulations that can improve girls’ and
women’s math performance. When teachers in one study told 4th graders that girls
were better on mental-rotation tasks or there was no gender difference between
boys and girls, boys’ performance advantage disappeared, because girls improved
and boys deteriorated (Neuburger et al., 2011). Similarly, when women received a
stereotype lift—their math test contained the following sentence: “For the following
math questions, women are expected to do better than men.”—they did better on
the test than women who received a stereotype threat—their test said the following:
“For the following math questions, women are expected to do worse than men.”
(Johnson, Barnard-Brak, et al., 2012).

Androgyny
Many psychologists believe that traditional ideas of gender roles are too narrow.
To speak and act as if each person is either masculine or feminine in his or her
interests, attitudes, and behavior makes little sense because, in reality, most peo-
ple possess a combination of characteristics that can be described as masculine or
feminine. Any person, male or female, can be tender and nurturant with children,
assertive at work, fiercely competitive on the tennis court, and an excellent cook.
426  Chapter 10 Sex and Gender

People who possess both masculine and feminine characteristics are termed androg-
ynous. (Bem, 1974; Martin et al., 2017). Interestingly, the percent of women who
are androgynous has increased since the 1970s in the United States (Donnelly &
Twenge, 2017) as well as in other countries such as China (Qiuxia, 2013). Children
as well as adults can be androgynous; these children are less likely to make gender-
typed choices of toys and play activities (Harter, 2006). They are better adjusted and
more creative (Norlander et al., 2000; Pauletti et al., 2017). Children who are either
masculine or androgynous have higher self-esteem than those with only feminine
characteristics (Boldizar, 1991; Ruble et al., 2006) and fewer internalizing problems
(Pauletti et al., 2017). Children who both accept themselves as a typical member of
their own gender and believe that it is okay to cross gender boundaries are better
adjusted than those who are not secure in their gender role (Carver et al., 2004;
Egan & Perry, 2001). Finally, androgynous boys have relatively few sexist beliefs
(Pauletti et al., 2017).
Facilitating children’s development of the desirable characteristics of both
genders—social sensitivity, nurturance, open expression of positive feelings, asser-
tiveness, and independence—would, therefore, be constructive. But can children
be taught to be more androgynous? As the following exchange between a psycholo-
gist’s 4-year-old son and his young friend illustrates, the task might not be easy:
Son: My mother helps people. She’s a doctor.
Friend: You mean a nurse.
Son: No. She’s not that kind of doctor. She’s a psychologist. She’s a doctor of psychology.
Friend: I see. She’s a nurse of psychology.
With effort, children can be taught to use fewer stereotypes. Researchers (Bigler
& Liben, 1990, 1992) lessened children’s stereotyping of work roles using ten occu-
pations that children typically view as masculine (e.g., dentist, farmer, construction
worker) or feminine (e.g., beautician, flight attendant, librarian). They first taught
the children that gender is irrelevant. Then they focused the children’s attention on
two other ways of looking at job appropriateness: liking a job and having the skills
needed for it. For example, construction workers must like to build things and must
have the skill to drive big machines. The researchers then gave one group of chil-
dren practice problems in which they had to specify why each job was a good match
for the person. If the children based their answers on gender rather than interest or
skills, they received corrective feedback. Children in a control group participated
in a group discussion about the roles of specific occupations within the community
with no emphasis on gender typing. When they were tested later, children in the
experimental group gave more non-gender-stereotyped answers, not only for the
occupations involved in the lessons and the practice questions but also for a range
of other occupations. For instance, when they were asked who could do activities
such as police work and nursing, they more often replied, “both men and women.”
Children in the control group still argued that “girls can’t be firefighters.” Consist-
ent with gender-schema theory, children in the experimental group also had better
recall of counter-stereotypical information in a later memory test than children in
the control group. Although children in both groups remembered stories about
Frank the firefighter and Betty the beautician, children in the experimental group
also remembered stories about Larry the librarian and Ann the astronaut.
In preschools where teachers consciously attempt to minimize gender stereotyp-
ing, children spend more time in mixed-gender groups and less time in conven-
tional gender-typed activities than children in traditional preschools; both boys and
girls play house and gas up their toy trucks (Bianchi & Bakeman, 1983). Clearly,
 Androgyny  427

children’s gender roles and attitudes are modifiable. In some countries, such as
Sweden, citizens have made an explicit commitment to gender equality, and oppor-
tunities to observe males and females engaging in non-gender-stereotyped jobs
and activities have resulted in increases in androgynous attitudes among children
(Coltrane & Adams, 2008; Tenenbaum & Leaper, 2002). In the United States, atti-
tudes toward gender roles are changing slowly and will likely continue to change as
more people broaden their behavioral repertoires to cross gender lines.

earning from Living Leaders: Carol Lynn Martin

about gender. She became aware of how
gendered children’s thinking is when she heard a
boy saying, “I’m a boy and I’m proud, proud,
proud” and saw how boys are the “kings” on the
Courtesy of Carol Lynn Martin playground.
Today she is particularly interested in the
influence of sex segregation on children’s
gender development and later success. She
is collaborating with a team of researchers on
the Sanford Curriculum Project, a large-scale
curriculum-development project focused on
improving gender relationships in children and
adolescents by changing styles of interaction
Carol Martin is one of the originators of gender- and communication between females and
schema theory. After completing her graduate males. She is a member of the Society for
work at the University of Georgia, she joined the Research in Child Development, the National
faculty of Arizona State University, where she is Council on Family Relations, and a Fellow of
now a Professor of Human Development in the both the American Psychological Association
School of Social and Family Dynamics. As an and the American Psychological Society.
undergraduate, she was interested in anthropol- Dr. Martin also serves as the co-organizer for
ogy, genetics, and psychology, but psychology the biannual Gender Development Research
became her passion. She started graduate Conference. Dr. Martin notes that a challenge
school in experimental psychology with classes for the field is to “move beyond studying gender
in memory and perception but switched to differences: Gender is not binary, gender is not
developmental psychology, which she enjoyed. simple, so it is all the more important to recog-
Eventually she found what she loved doing most: nize and learn about how people vary in
studying children’s social development. gender identity, sexuality, and expression.” In
Her major goal has been to understand regards to students, Dr. Martin urges students to
gender development: how children develop a recognize that “textbooks summarize what is
sense of their own gender identity, how they known and that is a starting point. Go beyond
develop stereotypes about males and females, what is known: search for knowledge gaps—
how stereotypes and identity influence their what we don’t know—and question what we
behavior and thinking, and how gender-normative think we know.”
behavior is linked to adjustment. She traces her
interest in gender development not so much to
her own childhood experiences of gender Further Reading
bias—although she does recall a male cousin Martin, C. L., Anrews, N. C. Z., England, D. E., Zosuls, K., &
Ruble, D. N. (2017). A dual identity approach for
who didn’t have to help with the dishes—but to a ­conceptualizing and measuring gender identity.
provocative professor who challenged her views Child Development, 88, 167–182.
428  Chapter 10 Sex and Gender

Charlotte J. Patterson typing, gender identity, and gender prefer-

ences. Her work has shown that these children
are well adjusted and very similar to children in
two-parent heterosexual families.
Results from Patterson’s research have often

Courtesy of Charlotte J. Patterson,

been used in judicial proceedings related to
child custody and adoption in lesbian and gay
families. Patterson has also testified as an expert
witness in several high-profile cases including

University of Virginia
Bottoms v. Bottoms, in which a lesbian mother
was sued by her own mother for custody of her
child, and Baehr v. Miike, in which two lesbian
couples and a gay couple challenged the ban
on same-sex marriages in Hawaii. She has been
recognized for her pioneering work in this area
Charlotte Patterson is Professor of Psychology
by the Society for Psychological Study of Lesbian
and the Center for Children, Family, and Law at
and Gay Issues (a division of the American
the University of Virginia. She also is the Direc-
Psychological Association), which presented her
tor of the Interdisciplinary Women, Gender,
its annual award for Distinguished Scientific
and Sexuality program. Since receiving a BA
Contributions. She also received an Outstanding
from Pomona College and a PhD in psychol-
Achievement Award from the APA Committee on
ogy from Stanford University, she has pursued
Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Concerns and the
research in developmental psychology, focus-
Carolyn Attneave Diversity Award from Division 43
ing especially on development in families with
of the American Psychological Association
lesbian and gay parents. Her interest in these
(Family Psychology) for contributions that
families was inspired by her recognition that
advance the understanding and integration of
mainstream psychology generally ignored them
diversity into family psychology.
even though their numbers were increasing and
by her experience raising two daughters with a
Further Reading
lesbian partner. Her goal was to document the
Patterson, C. J. (2017). Sexual orientation and children’s
effects of growing up in this type of family on development. Child Development Perspectives,
children’s psychosocial adjustment, gender 11, 45–49.

Chapter Summary
Gender Definitions
• The process by which children acquire values and behaviors viewed as appro-
priate for males and females within a culture is called gender typing. Children
develop gender-based beliefs, including gender stereotypes, which are reflected
in gender roles. Children form a gender identity and begin to develop gender-
role preferences early in life.
Gender Differences in Development
• On average, girls are more physically and neurologically advanced at birth,
excel early in verbal skills, and are more nurturing toward younger children.
Boys have more mature muscular development and are more aggressive.
 Chapter Summary  429

• Although differences exist, the overlap between the two sexes is more than the
differences between them.
• Children exhibit gender-typed preferences as early as 1 year of age.
• Girls tend to conform less strictly to gender-role stereotypes than do boys, pos-
sibly because parents and teachers exert greater pressure on boys to adhere to
the masculine role. Girls may also imitate the male role because it has higher
status and privilege. Although some boys and girls receive support for cross-
gender behavior, most are encouraged to behave according to traditional
stereotypes.
• Adult behavior can be predicted from gender-typed interests in elementary
school. Greater stability occurs when personal characteristics are consistent
with gender stereotypes.
• Gender roles may intensify in adolescence and when adults become parents.

Gender-Role Stereotypes
• Within our culture, males are expected to be independent, assertive, and com-
petitive; females are expected to be passive, sensitive, and supportive. These
beliefs have changed little over the years despite the efforts of feminists and
other advocates of gender equality.

Biological Factors in Gender Differences

• Males and females use different strategies to achieve reproductive success,
and according to evolutionary theory, these strategies have led to gender dif-
ferences such as females’ emphasis on physical appearance, sensitivity, and
caregiving skills and males’ emphasis on strength, power, and aggression.
• Hormones organize biological predispositions to be masculine or feminine
during the prenatal period, and the increase in hormones during puberty can
activate these predispositions.
• Male and female brains are somewhat different in structure and function.
Female brains are more active in social regions and tend to be less lateralized
than the male brain. This may explain the female tendency to be more flexible
about gender-related behavior than males.
• More than 1,000 genes are expressed differently in male and female brains,
and the extent to which individuals’ behavior is gender typed is related to
genetic factors.

Cognitive Factors in Gender Typing

• Children’s understanding of gender and gender stereotypes may contribute to
their acquisition of gender roles.
• Kohlberg’s cognitive developmental theory suggests that children first cate-
gorize themselves as male or female and then feel rewarded by behaving in
gender-consistent ways. Gender-typed behavior should not appear until chil-
dren understand gender constancy.
• Gender-schema theory suggests that children need only basic information
about gender to develop mental schemas that help them organize their experi-
ences and form rules concerning gender. Research supports gender-schema
theory rather than Kohlberg’s theory; it indicates that gender labeling is
enough to affect gender-typed toy and activity preferences.
• Some children are more gender-schematic than others; some are multischematic.
430  Chapter 10 Sex and Gender

Social Influences on Gender Typing

• The social cognitive theory of gender development applies the principles of
Bandura’s social cognitive learning theory to gender development. Social-
structural theories of gender focus on institutionalized constraints on
male and female opportunities in educational, occupational, and political
spheres.
• Parents initiate children’s gender typing by organizing boys’ and girls’ envi-
ronments differently, dressing them in different clothes, and giving them
different toys to play with. Parents also treat them differently. They see boys
as stronger, even at birth, and play with them more roughly and actively.
As children grow, parents protect girls more and allow them less autonomy
than boys.
• Parents also influence children’s gender typing through role modeling.
• Fathers are stricter about their children’s gender typing than are mothers.
• Older siblings affect younger siblings’ gender role development.
• Children’s gender roles may be impaired if their fathers are absent or unin-
volved, but no evidence indicates any impairment in the gender roles of boys
and girls raised in lesbian families.
• Male and female characters in children’s books and on TV are typically por-
trayed in gender-stereotyped ways. Children who view TV extensively have
more gender-stereotyped views. Attempts to use TV programs to reduce gen-
der stereotypes have been successful, but their effects have been modest and
short-lived.
• Peers also serve as an important source of gender-role socialization. They act as
models and enforcers of gender-typed behavior and choices. They react nega-
tively when other children violate gender standards, and this typically results
in behavior changes. Gender segregation and play with peers also provide
opportunities to learn gender-typical roles.
• Teachers often react to children in gender-stereotypical ways and tend to criti-
cize boys more than girls.
Androgyny
• Most people are not strictly feminine or masculine but androgynous, possess-
ing both masculine and feminine characteristics.
• Children who are more androgynous make less stereotyped play and activity
choices and are likely to have higher self-esteem than those who have tradition-
ally feminine characteristics.

Key Terms
androgynous gender segregation identification
cognitive developmental theory gender stability instrumental characteristics
of gender typing gender stereotypes multischematic
expressive characteristics gender typing social cognitive theory of gender
gender constancy gender-based beliefs development
gender identity gender-role preferences social structural theory
gender roles gender-schema theory of gender roles
 Key Terms  431

At t h e M ov i es

Many movies explore gender issues. Memoirs of a Geisha him, and bigoted neighbors eventually run him out of town.
(2005) tells the story of one young woman being trained This movie addresses the complex issues of gender identity
in the Japanese geisha tradition and illustrates the trans- through a child’s eyes. Boys Don’t Cry (1999) portrays the
mission of the feminine ideal through social learning and problems of a transgender individual in young adulthood.
self-identification. Many classic movies for children such as When Brandon moves to a tiny Nebraska town, he hangs
Beauty and the Beast (1991, 2017), The Little Mermaid (1989), out with the guys, drinking and cussing, and charms young
and Cinderella (1950) are good illustrations of the ways in women, who’ve never met a more sensitive and considerate
which films can promote traditional gender roles. Some young man. But Brandon has forgotten to mention that he
children’s movies focus on children who don’t conform to was actually born a girl. When his friends find out, his life is
their assigned gender role such as Mulan (1998), a movie ripped apart. This wrenching movie, based on actual events,
about a girl who pretends to be a guy so she can go to fight won a Best Actress Academy Award for Hillary Swank. A
in the army to prevent her elderly father from fighting. Sim- documentary movie, The Brandon Teena Story (1998), tells
ilarly, the recent films Brave (2012) and Frozen (2013) depict the same story through interviews with people who knew
the main female character as powerful and brave and not Brandon, recorded interrogation and trial transcripts,
dependent on a man to slove a problem. Billy Elliot (2000) photographs and file film footage. A transgender male-to-
is an 11-year-old boy who doesn’t like the brutal boxing female teen is the focus of the movie Trained in the Ways
lessons at his school. He stumbles out of the boxing ring of Men (2007). This emotional documentary describes the
and onto the ballet floor and confronts disapproval for his life and death of Gwen Araujo and the subsequent trials of
nonconforming behavior. In Dress Code (1999), 8-year-old her killers. It presents information about what transgender
Bruno likes to wear dresses—which causes him plenty of means and provides some surprising, thought-provoking
problems. This movie raises more questions than it answers, answers to questions such as “What gender are you?” and
but it does illustrate the difficulty children face when they “How do you know?”
do not conform to gender-role expectations. In a third A number of films, such as 13 Genders (2004) and
movie, Night Fliers (2008), a boyish looking girl experiences Gender Rebel (2006), explore gender variation by interview-
difficulty in adjusting to a new school where she is bullied ing people who identify themselves as neither male nor
and harassed. In Tomboy (2011), a 10-year-old girl, settling female. Assume Nothing (2009) focuses on the art, photog-
into her new neighborhood, is mistaken for a boy and has raphy, and performances of four “alternative” gender art-
to live up to this new identity. This movie focuses on the sig- ists, posing the question: “What if ‘male’ and ‘female’ are
nificance of gender identity and the ambiguity of possibly not the only options?” Other films deal with alternative
being transgender. gender roles in other cultures; one example is Blossoms of
Other movies focus on the painful discrimination that Fire (2000), about the Isthmus Zapotecs of southern Oaxaca,
transgender individuals face. In Ma Vie en Rose (My Life in Mexico; another example is Two-Spirit People (1992), about
Pink) (1997), Ludovic is a 7-year-old boy who is sure that the berdache tradition in Native American culture. Finally,
he was meant to be a girl—and he waits for a miracle to some movies highlight the benefits of androgyny. In It’s a
“correct” this mistake. He cross-dresses, generally acts like Boy Girl Thing (2006), a studious, sensitive girl and a dumb
a girl, and can’t wait to grow up to be a woman. As a result, jock experience a magical swap of bodies and find them-
his schoolmates ostracize him, his family misunderstands selves adopting the positive behaviors of the other gender.
 CHAPTE
C H APT E R 11

Morality
Knowing Right, Doing Good

It’s exam time in the seventh grade. Aiden sits with his brow
furrowed in focused attention, trying to solve the math prob-
lem in front of him. He should have spent more time studying
last night, he thinks. Becca, sitting behind him, should have
spent more time studying, too. But she isn’t trying to solve the
problem; she is trying to see what answer Aiden comes up
with so she can copy it. She peeks surreptitiously over Aiden’s
Miguel Villagran/Getty Images Inc

shoulder hoping the teacher won’t notice. The behavior of

these two children illustrates clear differences in moral behav-
ior. Why do the two behave so differently? Is it age, gender,
upbringing, or the situation? In this chapter, we discuss the
course of moral development and how it is affected by these
and other factors.

Anyone who spends time watching children in the classroom can spot differences
in their moral behavior. Some children clearly obey the rules, while others whisper
or pass notes, furtively glance at the textbook they have hidden under their desk,
or look for answers on another student’s paper. Differences are also evident on
the playground. Some children help and comfort classmates who have lost their
books or scraped their knees; they share their lunch with a child who has misplaced
hers. Other children ignore these incidents and go on playing, chatting, and eating.
What contributes to these variations in children’s behavior? How do moral values
develop in young children? How do children become capable of generosity and
compassion?
In this chapter, we provide some answers to these questions as we discuss chil-
dren’s moral development. Moral development can be divided into several compo-
nents. One component is cognitive. Children develop knowledge about ethical rules
and make judgments about the goodness or badness of certain acts. Another com-
ponent is behavior: Children behave in good or bad ways in situations that require
ethical decisions. Third, moral development involves emotions; children have good
and bad feelings about their behaviors in these situations. We discuss each of these

432
 Moral Judgment  433

components and also the development of positive moral behavior, that is, prosocial
behavior. We examine how these judgments, emotions, and behaviors change with
age and how parents, peers, and the broader culture influence them.

Moral Judgment
Jean Piaget and Lawrence Kohlberg offered explanations for children’s develop-
ment of moral judgment based on the principles and processes of cognitive growth.
In their theories, moral development was simply part of cognitive development.

Piaget’s Cognitive Theory of Moral Judgment

Piaget investigated children’s moral development in two ways: by studying how
children’s attitudes toward rules in games changed as the children got older and
by examining the way children’s judgments of the seriousness of transgressions
changed with age. Based on his observations, Piaget proposed that children’s moral
concepts develop through three stages.

Stages of moral reasoning In the premoral stage, young children show little
concern for or awareness of rules. When playing games such as marbles, they don’t
try to play systematically with the intention of winning. They just play for the satis-
faction of manipulating the marbles and finding out how they can be used in dif-
ferent ways. When children are about 5 years old, they move into the stage Piaget
called moral realism in which they are concerned about rules that come from some
authority, usually their parents, and they see rules as unchanging and not to be
questioned. They settle disputes with firmly stated conviction that they are right
“because my daddy (or mommy) says so.” In this stage, moral absolutism prevails. If
asked whether kids in other countries could play marbles with different rules, chil-
dren are sure they could not. They also subscribe to the notion of immanent justice:
They see any deviation from the rules as inevitably resulting in punishment. Some-
one or something is going to punish you, one way or another. The punishment
might take the form of an accident or a mishap controlled by inanimate objects
or by God. A child who has lied to her mother may later fall off her bike, skin her
knees, and think, “That’s what I get for lying to Mom.” In this stage, children also
evaluate the seriousness of an immoral act solely in terms of its consequences; they
don’t consider the perpetrator’s intentions.
Piaget’s stage of moral reciprocity begins when children are about 11 years old.
At this stage, judgments are characterized by the recognition that social rules are
arbitrary agreements that can be questioned and changed. Children realize that
obedience to authority is neither necessary nor always desirable and that violations
of rules are not always wrong or inevitably punished. In judging another’s behavior,
children at this stage can consider the other person’s feelings and viewpoint. They
believe that if behavior is to be punished, the punishment should be related to both
the wrongdoer’s intentions and the nature of the transgression. The punishment
should also be of such a nature that it somehow makes up for the harm done or
helps teach the wrongdoer to behave better in the future. Children at this stage
also believe in “equalitarianism”; that is, they believe that there should be equal
justice for all. According to Piaget, mature morality includes an understanding and
acceptance of social rules as well as a concern for equality and reciprocity in human
relationships.
434  Chapter 11 Morality

In one set of experiments, Piaget read children pairs of stories and then asked if
the children in each story were equally guilty or if one child was naughtier and why
(Piaget, 1932, p. 122):

Story I. A little boy who is called John is in his room. He is called to dinner. He goes into
the dining room. But behind the door there is a chair, and on the chair there is a tray
with 15 cups on it. John couldn’t have known that there was all this behind the door. He
goes in, the door knocks against the tray, “bang” to the 15 cups and they all get broken!

Story II. Once there was a little boy whose name was Henry. One day when his mother
was out he tried to get some jam out of the cupboard. He climbed up on a chair and
stretched out his arm. But the jam was too high up and he couldn’t reach it. But while
he was trying to get it, he knocked over a cup. The cup fell down and broke.

Clearly, Henry tried to deceive his mother and therefore should be considered less
moral. But the child in the stage of moral realism is likely to say that John is naugh-
tier because he broke more cups (even though his act was unintentional). A child
who has reached the stage of moral reciprocity is likely to say that Henry is naugh-
tier, and when asked if it makes any difference that the other child broke more cups
replies, “No, because the boy who broke 15 cups didn’t do it on purpose.”

Evaluation of Piaget’s theory Piaget’s theory of moral development has been

the subject of many studies since 1932. In those conducted in industrialized Western
countries such as the United States, Great Britain, France, and Switzerland, across a
wide range of populations and social classes, investigators have found regular age
trends for both boys and girls in the development of moral judgment from moral real-
ism to moral reciprocity as Piaget’s theory predicted. However, the findings in other
cultures have been less consistent. For example, researchers found that among the
people of ten Native American tribes, the belief in immanent justice increased rather
than decreased with age, and only two of the ten groups showed the shift toward
increased flexibility in the conception of rules (Havighurst & Neugarten, 1955).
It also appears that Piaget underestimated children’s capacities. Even 6-year-old
children are able to consider an actor’s intentions when the situation is presented in
a way they can understand. For example, when researchers presented stories acted
out and videotaped rather than merely written down and read, 6-year-old children
responded to the actors’ intentions as well as older children did (Chandler et al.,
1973). Viewing the scenarios provided additional information about the actors’
emotional states, which helped the children infer the actors’ intentions. One rea-
son Piaget underestimated children’s abilities was that he gave them only the bare
bones of the stories.
Another reason that Piaget underestimated children’s abilities was that he mixed
actors’ intentions with action outcomes. He invariably required children to judge
whether someone who caused a small amount of damage in the service of a bad
intention was “worse” than someone who caused a large amount of damage but had
good intentions. When researchers present stories in which good and bad intentions
and good and bad outcomes can be evaluated separately, even elementary school
children use intentions as a basis for judgment (Helwig et al., 2001). For example,
if the story of the broken cups is retold with a focus on intentions (the child breaks
the cups either trying to sneak a cookie or trying to help his mother) but the out-
come is the same for all stories (the child breaks 6 cups), children have no trouble
understanding the role of intention. By creating variations on Piaget’s basic stories,
 Moral Judgment  435

researchers have been able to isolate factors that affect children’s moral judgment.
They have found that judgments about rightness and wrongness depend on both
whether the consequences of actions are positive or negative and whether the con-
sequences are intended or accidental.

Kohlberg’s Cognitive Theory of Moral Judgment

Kohlberg (1969, 1985) based his theory of moral development on Piaget’s, but he
refined and expanded the stages. Like Piaget, Kohlberg believed that children’s
cognitive capabilities determine their level of moral reasoning and that moral devel-
opment builds on concepts grasped in the preceding stage.

Levels and stages of moral judgment Kohlberg studied moral development

by presenting a series of moral dilemma stories in which people had to choose
either to obey rules and authority or to respond to the needs and welfare of others.
The participants in the studies were asked to say what they thought the person in the
dilemma should do and why. Here is one sample story (Colby et al., 1983, p. 77):

Heinz needs a particular expensive drug to help his dying wife. The pharmacist who dis-
covered and controls the supply of the drug has refused Heinz’s offer to give him all the
money he has, which would be about half the necessary sum, and to pay the rest later.
Heinz must decide whether or not to steal the drug to save his wife; that is, whether to
obey the rules and laws of society or to violate them to respond to the needs of his wife.
What should Heinz do, and why?

Based on his interviews, Kohlberg formulated three broad levels of moral develop-
ment, each subdivided into two stages. The levels and stages were based not only on
whether the interviewees said that the person in the story should obey the rules or
should respond to the needs of others but also on the reasons they gave and on the
ways their choices were justified.
At Level I, the preconventional level, moral judgment was based on the desire
to avoid punishment (Stage 1) or to gain rewards (Stage 2). Kohlberg called
this level preconventional because reasoning at this level was not yet based on the
conventions—rules and norms—that guide social interactions in society. At Level II,
the conventional level, moral judgment is based on the motive to conform: In Stage 3,
a person conforms to get approval from others; in Stage 4, the person conforms
with society’s rules, laws, and conventions such as duty to family, marriage vows, or
the country. Only at Level III, the postconventional level, is moral judgment based
on an internalized ethical code that is relatively independent of others’ approval or
disapproval. In Stage 5, morality is based on society’s consensus about human rights;
in Stage 6, it is based on abstract principles of justice and equality. People who have
reached this level view rules and laws as arbitrary but respect them because they
protect human welfare. They believe that individual rights can sometimes justify vio-
lating these laws if the laws are destructive. (For more detail on the stages of moral
reasoning, see Table 11.1.)
According to Kohlberg, this sequence of six stages is fixed; that is, all people
pass through the stages in the same order, and once attaining a level, a person does
not go back to an earlier stage. The stages can occur in different people at differ-
ent ages, and not all individuals reach the highest level. Research conducted by
Kohlberg and his associates supported the general sequence of stages the theory set
out (Colby et al., 1983; Colby & Kohlberg, 1987; Kohlberg, 1985). Participants in
436  Chapter 11 Morality

TABLE 11.1

Kohlberg’s Theory of Moral Development

Stage Orientation Description
Level I. Preconventional Morality
Stage 1
Obedience and punishment To avoid punishment, children defer to prestigious or powerful people, usually their
orientation parents. The morality of an act is defined by its physical consequences.
Stage 2
Naive hedonistic and Children conform to gain rewards. They understand reciprocity and sharing, but this
instrumental orientation reciprocity is manipulative and self-serving rather than based on a true sense of justice,
generosity, sympathy, or compassion. It is a kind of bartering: “I’ll lend you my bike if
I can play with your wagon”; “I’ll do my homework now if I can watch the late-night movie.”
Level II. Conventional Morality: Conventional Rules and Conformity
Stage 3
Good boy/girl morality Children’s good behavior is designed to maintain approval and good relations with
others. Although children still base judgments of right and wrong on others’
responses, they are concerned with others’ approval and disapproval rather than their
physical power. They conform to their family’s and friends’ standards to maintain
goodwill. However, they are starting to accept others’ social regulations and to judge
the goodness or badness of behavior in terms of a person’s intent to violate these rules.
Stage 4
Authority and morality that People blindly accept social conventions and rules and believe that rules accepted by
maintain social order society should be maintained to avoid censure. They conform not only to other indi-
viduals’ standards but also to the social order. This is the epitome of “law-and-order”
morality that unquestionably accepts social regulations. People judge behavior as good
according to whether it conforms to a rigid set of rules. Many people never go beyond
this conventional level of morality.
Level III. Postconventional Morality: Self-Accepted Moral Principles
Stage 5
Morality of contract, People’s moral beliefs have a flexibility they lacked in earlier stages. Morality is based on
individual rights, and an agreement among individuals to conform to norms that appear necessary to main-
democratically accepted tain the social order and the rights of others. However, because this is a social contract,
law people within a society can modify it when they rationally discuss alternatives that
might be more advantageous to more members of the society.
Stage 6
Morality of individual People conform to both social standards and internalized ideals. Their intent is to
principles and conscience avoid self-condemnation rather than others’ criticism. People base their decisions on
abstract principles involving justice, compassion, and equality. This morality is based
on a respect for others. People who have attained this level of development have
highly individualistic moral beliefs that may at times conflict with rules accepted by the
majority of society.

Source: Adapted from Kohlberg, 1969.

the research were asked to make judgments about moral dilemmas over a 20-year
period. All but two moved from lower to higher stages, and no one skipped a stage.
Younger children gave more preconventional (Level I) responses; older children
provided more conventional (Level II) responses. Most participants stopped at this
 Moral Judgment  437

Moral judgments at each age (percent)

70

Stage 4
60
Stage 3
50

40
Stage 2
30 FIGURE 11.1 How does moral reasoning develop? In Kohlberg’s
study, about 20 percent of the boys at age 10 used Stage 1 rea-
20 soning, but it had disappeared by age 16. Stage 2 reasoning was
Stage 1
Stage 5 used by 60 percent of the boys at age 10, but by less than
10 10 percent at age 24. Stage 4 reasoning was most common at
age 36, but about a third of these men still used Stage 3 reasoning.
Source: Colby, A., Kohlberg, L., Gibbs, J., & Lieberman, M. (1983).
0 A longitudinal study of moral judgment. Monographs of the Society
10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36
for Research in Child Development, 48 (Serial No. 200). Fig 1, p. 46.
Age (in years)
Reprinted with permission of Wiley-Blackwell.

level of reasoning (Stage 4). A few (10 percent) continued to develop moral rea-
soning in their 20s, reaching Stage 5 in young adulthood. None, however, reached
Stage 6 (Figure 11.1).
The sequence of six stages is not only fixed, according to Kohlberg, but also
universal; that is, the development of individuals in countries around the world fol-
lows the same set of stages (although the ultimate level of moral reasoning attained
might vary across cultures as it does across individuals within the same culture).

nsights from Extremes: Moral Heroes

Among the many influences on “Skin color makes no difference because all
children’s moral development are people are equal.”
parents, peers, coaches, and
clergy. However, throughout A continent away and nearly a century later,
history, generations of children Mahatma Gandhi worked to increase the rights
and adults have been inspired to reach higher of people in India. Using nonviolent civil disobe-
levels of moral thought and action by moral dience as a strategy, he succeeded in bringing
heroes: individuals who go beyond the call of about social change including the reduction
duty and challenge us do the right thing even at of poverty, expansion of women’s rights, and
a cost. Three of these heroes served as models for improvement of relations between religious
Kohlberg’s highest stages of moral development. and ethnic factions. Although he was jailed,
Abraham Lincoln succeeded in ending beaten, and suffered through hunger strikes,
slavery in the United States by means of his Gandhi persisted in working for moral causes
extraordinary courage and perseverance, clear on behalf of the Indian people. After a 30-year
sense of moral purpose, and firm commitment to struggle, his efforts were responsible for freeing
the view that India from British colonial rule. His birthday,
438  Chapter 11 Morality

October 2nd, is commemorated worldwide as raised public consciousness of the civil rights
the International Day of Nonviolence. movement and established himself as one
According to Gandhi, of the greatest moral leaders in U.S. history,
explaining that
“Man becomes great exactly in the degree
to which he works for the welfare of his “An individual has not started living until
fellow-men.” he can rise above the narrow confines of
his individualistic concerns to the broader
Gandhi was an inspiration for Martin Luther concerns of all humanity.”
King, Jr., the leader of the U.S. civil rights move-
ment. In the 1950s and 1960s, King adopted These moral heroes share several key charac-
Gandhi’s tactics of nonviolent disobedience as teristics including self-sacrifice for the purpose of
he led the Montgomery bus boycott, the a greater good, a clear sense of moral duty and
Montgomery voter protest, the Selma march, and obligation, and an unwavering sense of what is
the famous march on Washington, D.C., where he right. Their lives provide insights into the highest
delivered his “I Have a Dream” speech. King level of moral development.

Limitations of Kohlberg’s theory Empirical research since Kohlberg’s death

in 1987 has provided support for some key aspects of his theory. The notion that
people proceed through the stages of moral judgment in an invariant fashion has
received support through Stages 3 and 4 (Turiel, 2015; Walker et al., 2001). Stages
5 and 6 have less clear support in part because of the small number of people who
reach these lofty moral heights. Empirical findings have also been consistent with
Kohlberg’s view that progress is toward higher rather than lower stages. When
researchers have tested whether children, adolescents, and adults can be induced
to shift their moral reasoning to another level by using role-playing scenarios or
peer modeling, for example, they have generally found that people prefer more
advanced reasoning and that shifting a person’s moral judgment to a higher stage is
easier than shifting it to a lower one (Turiel, 2006, 2015).
Empirical research has been less supportive of other aspects of Kohlberg’s the-
ory. Although studies conducted in different cultures from Alaska to Zambia show
that individuals go through the stages of moral reasoning in the same order and
few skip a stage or go back to a lower one, supporting Kohlberg’s claim that the
stages are universal, cultural differences have been found (Gibbs et al., 2007). People
in collectivist cultures—Papua New Guinea, Taiwan, and Israeli kibbutzim, for
example—explain their answers to moral dilemmas by pointing to the importance
of the community rather than personal standards. People in India include in their
moral reasoning the importance of acting in accordance with gender and caste
and with maintaining personal purity (Shweder et al., 1997). Kohlberg’s focus
on individual rights and obligations underestimated moral development in some
other cultures and excluded some culturally unique domains of morality (Snarey &
Hooker, 2006; Wainryb & Recchia, 2014).
Researchers have also found that history shapes people’s views of morality. Events
such as the civil rights movement and then the 9–11 attack on the World Trade
Center in New York, sensitize people to issues of fairness and justice (Turiel, 2015;
Wainryb & P ­ asupathi, 2008, 2015). People who grow up in different eras tend to have
different understandings of moral issues, as suggested in Bronfenbrenner’s ecological
theory that children are affected by their chronosystem (see Chapter 1, “Theories”).
 Moral Judgment  439

Those who suffer severe economic loss may be more sensitive to the plight of the
poor and thus may endorse more liberal attitudes. In short, the times in which
people live can affect their moral judgments (Rest et al., 2000; Turiel, 2015). Psy-
chologists now suggest that morality is a social construction that evolves from the
experiences, institutions, and deliberations of a community that is bound by both
culture and historical epoch.
Another limitation of Kohlberg’s theory is that it was based on only one type
of data: verbal responses to interviews about moral dilemmas. Kohlberg required
his respondents to be able to explain their moral judgments; they had to be
verbally articulate and able to reason aloud. It has been suggested that this may be
one ­reason Kohlberg found so little evidence of judgments at Stage 5 and Stage 6.
Researchers have found that people are more likely to endorse postconventional
reasoning if they are asked to respond to multiple-choice questions rather than
an open-ended interview (Rest et al., 2000). Of course, there are also issues with
multiple-choice questions; it may be too easy to choose the higher-level option if it’s
staring you in the face and the interviewer is looking over your shoulder.
Kohlberg’s theory is also limited because its hypothetical moral dilemmas differ
from real-life dilemmas. Kohlberg assumed that when people make moral decisions,
they imaginatively take the perspective of another person in an impartial way. In
real life, moral decision makers usually know the people who are the objects of
their moral judgment, have feelings for them, have a history of past interactions,
and expect repercussions in the future. These moral decision makers are usually
involved in the moral conflict, which often evokes strong emotions, and have a
vested interest in the outcome (Greene et al., 2001; Krebs & Denton, 2005). People
tend to make Stage 3 or 4 moral judgments in response to impersonal philosophical
dilemmas but lower-stage judgments in response to more personal real-life dilem-
mas (Wark & Krebs, 1996).
In spite of these limitations, Kohlberg’s pioneering work revolutionized the way
people think about moral development. Because of his influence, cognitive judg-
ment remains a central aspect of explanations of morality. Since Kohlberg’s time,
psychologists have modified his theory and extended his investigations. They have
enlarged the domain of ethical issues studied and softened Kohlberg’s notion of
developmental stages, suggesting that instead of being a stepwise staircase, develop-
ment consists of shifting distributions of frequencies as children give increasingly
complex reasons for their moral judgments. They have also extended Kohlberg’s
research to include more concrete examples of moral reasoning.

New aspects of moral development Some of the limitations of Kohlberg’s the-

ory have led to productive revisions and expansions of the study of moral develop-
ment. Carol Gilligan (1982) expanded the moral domain to address gender issues
and the dimension of caring. Because Kohlberg’s research participants included
only boys and men, she questioned whether girls and women would show the same
pattern of moral reasoning. She suggested that females might take a more caring
approach to moral dilemmas than males, who tend to emphasize individual rights
and principles of justice. When Gilligan asked boys and girls whether Heinz should
steal the drug to save his wife’s life, she found evidence of such gender differences.
Boys’ responses were more likely to emphasize logic and the balance between
life and property rights; girls’ responses often had an interpersonal focus, con-
sidering the impact the theft might have on Heinz, his wife, his wife’s condition,
and their relationship. Since Gilligan conducted her exploration of girls’ and
boys’ moral reasoning, researchers have found some support for her claim of
440  Chapter 11 Morality

gender-linked moral orientations when men and women are asked to talk about
real-life moral issues (Jaffee & Hyde, 2000). However, when they are asked about
hypothetical moral dilemmas, the ways males and females reason are not substan-
tially different (Jaffee & Hyde, 2000; Raaijmakers et al., 2005; Walker, 2006). In
fact, both males and females value justice (e.g., equal rights) and care (e.g., family
responsibilities) (Killen & Smetana, 2015). Moreover, evidence from neural imag-
ing studies suggests that different parts of the brain are involved in decision making
about issues of justice and issues of caring, regardless of gender (Robertson et al.,
2007). Gilligan reframed her argument to suggest that the scope of morality should
be broadened to include the caring perspective for all people, male and female
(e.g., Gilligan, 1993).
A second revision of Kohlberg’s theory was the recognition that people’s moral
reasoning can vary in different situations. Kohlberg assumed that a person applies
the same level of moral reasoning to all moral issues (Colby & Kohlberg, 1987).
Critics argued, however, that different contexts pull for different forms of moral
judgment (Krebs & Denton, 2005). The business world is guided by a Stage 2 moral
order based on instrumental exchange, marriage is guided by a Stage 3 moral order
based on mutuality, and the legal system is guided by a Stage 4 moral order based on
maintaining society. Critics suggested that with development, people expand their
range of moral reasoning, and the way they process moral information depends on
both their mental structures and the types of moral dilemmas they confront. People
move in and out of moral orders, not stages of moral development. With the excep-
tion of describing young children who consistently make Stage 1 moral judgments
because they have not acquired other structures of moral reasoning, saying that
people are in a stage of moral development on the basis of their moral judgments
made in response to Kohlberg’s moral dilemmas is misguided.
A third revision of Kohlberg’s theory was an expansion to include the area of civil
rights and liberties, such as freedom of speech and freedom of religion (Helwig
et al., 2014). Researchers who have begun to study this neglected aspect of moral
reasoning have found that as children mature, their appreciation of the freedoms
we take for granted increases. In one study in Canada, for example, freedom of
speech was endorsed as a right by 62 percent of 6-year-olds, 92 percent of 8-year-
olds, and 100 percent of 10-year-olds (Helwig, 1998). The majority of children at all
ages viewed freedom of speech as a “natural right” that is independent of author-
ity or laws. However, the rationales the children used to justify civil rights changed
with age. The youngest children supported civil liberties based on the need for
personal choice and expression. By age 8, they were beginning to become aware
that civil rights are linked to social and political issues as well as personal ones. They
defended these rights as necessary for fostering communication among individuals
and promoting the correction of social injustice through petitions and protests. The
10-year-olds recognized that freedom of speech was a central aspect of democracy
because it “gave people a say.” In adulthood, people’s support for civil rights relates
to their moral reasoning and their political attitudes. In one study in the United
States, adults who scored high on postconventional moral reasoning and identi-
fied themselves as liberal were less likely to support restrictions on the civil liber-
ties of U.S. citizens, foreign nationals, and terrorist suspects and sympathizers than
were those identifying themselves as conservative (Crowson & DeBacker, 2008).
Judgments about civil rights change when competing moral issues are involved.
For example, when children were simply asked whether they endorsed freedom of
speech and religion, nearly all said they did (Helwig et al., 2014). However, when
these freedoms conflicted with freedom from physical and psychological harm, far
 Moral Judgment  441

fewer endorsed freedom of speech. Children and adolescents are able to distin-
guish between various types of rights such as nurturance (referring to children’s
rights to care and protection) and self-determination rights (referring to autonomy
and control over their lives). Their justifications for different types of rights vary. To
justify nurturance rights, children focus on social and familial roles with little refer-
ence to rights, while reasoning about self-determination rights focuses on personal
freedom and autonomy. Adolescents are more likely than their parents to endorse
requests for self-determination rights (e.g., keeping a diary private) and less likely
than their parents to favor request for nurturance rights in the home (e.g., talking
to a parent when being emotionally upset) (Ruck et al., 1998). British adolescents
endorse same-age asylum-seeking children’s nurturance rights over self-determination
rights which could help us better understand current topics such as refugee and
immigrant rights (Ruck et al., 2007).
Children’s judgments about forms of government also change as they age. When
asked to compare different government systems, children as young as first grade
viewed democratic forms of government as fairer than nondemocratic forms such as
a meritocracy or an oligarchy of the wealthy, and they increasingly preferred demo-
cratic forms as they got older (Helwig et al., 2014). They also became better able
to weigh conflicting issues such as restrictions on freedom of speech in different
government systems. By fifth grade, children were more likely to judge restrictions of
freedom of speech as acceptable if the limitations stemmed from democratic rather
than nondemocratic systems. Surprisingly, even children in nondemocratic coun-
tries espouse democratic ideas. For example, freedom of speech has been endorsed
by children in the Druze, a traditional, hierarchically organized Muslim society in
Israel (Turiel & Wainryb, 1998), and in China, which has a communist political sys-
tem (Helwig et al., 2003, 2014). These children prefer democratic forms of govern-
ment to nondemocratic ones because they are based on principles of representation

ultural Context: Justice versus Interpersonal

Obligations in India and the United States
The significance of a caring and interpersonal obligations (Baron & Miller, 2000;
interpersonal perspective on Miller & Bersoff, 1992). In this phase of the study, the
moral reasoning may have
broader implications than Gilligan
realized when she attributed this perspective to Christoper Pillitz/The Image Bank/Getty

girls and women. Cross-cultural research has

revealed that more than 80 percent of Hindu
children and adults in India endorse interper-
sonal considerations in judging moral dilemmas,
whereas only about one-third of children and
adults in the United States do. Joan Miller and
Images, Inc.

her colleagues asked third- and seventh-grade

children and college-age adults in New Haven,
Connecticut, and Mysore, India, to rate the
undesirability of incidents in which people Hindu children in India are taught that all life is sacred and
were described as breaching either justice or caring for others is a moral duty.
442  Chapter 11 Morality

researchers tried to adjust their examples so that Participants were asked to decide which of the
participants considered all incidents to have the following two alternative actions Ben
same or nearly the same importance. In the should choose:
second phase of the study, they gave partici-
1. Ben should not take the ticket from the
pants conflict situation stories in which actors
man’s coat pocket—even though it means
could fulfill one kind of behavioral obligation
not getting to San Francisco in time to
(justice or interpersonal) only by violating the
deliver the wedding rings to his best friend.
other. Here is one of the conflict situation stories
This is a justice-based response.
presented to U.S. participants (Miller & Bershoff,
1992, p. 545): 2. Ben should go to San Francisco to deliver
the wedding rings to his best friend—even
Ben was in Los Angeles on business. When though it means taking the train ticket from
his meetings were over, Ben planned to the other man’s coat pocket. This is an
travel to San Francisco to attend his best interpersonal response.
friend’s wedding. He needed to catch the
Indian participants were more than twice as
very next train if he was to be on time for
likely as Americans to choose interpersonal
the ceremony and to deliver the wedding
responses. The more serious the violation, the
rings. However, Ben’s wallet was stolen in the
more likely they were to switch to a justice
train station. He lost all his money and his
response, but even then they clearly preferred
ticket to San Francisco. Ben approached
interpersonal responses. Indian participants also
several officials and passengers and
tended to describe interpersonal responses as
asked them to loan him money to buy a
moral imperatives, whereas Americans described
new ticket. But no one was willing to lend
them as personal choices unless the situation
him the money. While Ben was sitting on a
was life threatening. Because the Hindu religion
bench trying to decide what to do next, a
holds that all life is sacred and Hindu culture
well-dressed man sitting next to him walked
emphasizes social duties as the starting point of
away for a minute. Ben noticed that the
society, Indians view helping others in moral
man had left his coat unattended. Sticking
terms no matter how minor the issue. This view is
out of the man’s coat pocket was a train
not so different from the one Gilligan referred to
ticket to San Francisco. Ben knew that he
as a feminine perspective. However, it seems that
could take the ticket and use it to travel
caring and interpersonal moral reasoning is not
to San Francisco on the next train. He also
feminine per se but simply a view of morality that
saw that the man had more than enough
is not strictly or solely based on the concepts of
money in his coat pocket to buy another
justice and individual rights.
train ticket.

and majority rule (Helwig et al., 2007). The concept of civil rights appears to be a
universal aspect of children’s developmental understanding.
Another advance is the search for neurobiological correlates of moral reasoning.
Although still only poorly understood, evidence is accumulating that there are iden-
tifiable brain areas that are activated when we confront moral dilemmas. According
to a recent meta-analysis (Garrigan et al., 2016), making one’s own moral decisions
involves different brain areas compared to judging the moral actions of others,
implying that these judgments may involve different processes. Clearly the type of
moral judgment (about self vs. another) and the type of dilemma (care vs. justice)
may activate different neurological regions, which suggests that no single or homo-
geneous area of the brain is involved but rather is likely to involve multiple areas.
Finally, as in the case of all social-emotional issues, understanding involves multiple
levels of analysis from the biological to the individual to the larger social context.
 Moral Judgment  443

Turiel’s Social Domain Theory

Since Kohlberg’s time, the study of moral development has been most extensively
expanded by Elliot Turiel’s social domain theory (Smetana et al., 2014; Turiel, 2006,
2015 ). According to this theory, morality is one of several strands or domains of chil-
dren’s social knowledge, which also include knowledge about social norms and con-
ventions and concerns about privacy and personal choices. Investigations inspired
by social domain theory have focused on children’s understanding of rules in these
other domains—for example, rules about eating, dressing, talking, and expressing
differences—and how they differ from moral rules against cheating, lying, and steal-
ing. At first, researchers emphasized children’s ability to distinguish between the
different domains; more recently, they have examined children’s reasoning in situa-
tions that involve multiple domains and explored how children and adolescents use
social reasoning to evaluate important and complex issues in their everyday lives.

Social-conventional domain The social-conventional domain involves the social

expectations and regularities that help facilitate smooth and efficient functioning
of a social system, for example, norms for table manners, modes of greeting, and
other forms of etiquette; bathing practices; respect for positions in a social hierar-
chy; and reciprocity in social exchanges (Smetana et al., 2014). To study whether
children distinguish between these social conventions and moral rules, research-
ers have asked them how wrong they think it would be to hit someone, to lie, or
to steal—moral violations—and how wrong it would be for a student to address
a teacher by his or her first name, for a boy to enter a girl’s bathroom or vice
versa, or for someone to eat lunch with their fingers rather than utensils—social-
conventional violations. Children of all ages consistently view moral violations
as worse than violations of social conventions (Turiel, 2015; Turiel & Wainryb,
2000). Even children as young as 3 years old can distinguish between moral and
social-conventional rules (Smetana et al., 2014).
Children view moral violations as worse than transgressions of social conven-
tions because the former result in harm to another person and violate norms of
justice and fairness. As they mature, children expand their notions of what harm
is (Smetana et al., 2014). In early childhood, it is concrete and physical; in middle
childhood, harm results from unfairness defined in terms of inequality between
persons; in preadolescence, harm happens from failure to consider individual dif-
ferences in needs and status; in adolescence, the concept of harm becomes more
comprehensive and is applied more consistently across different moral issues. Both
children and adolescents believe that moral rules are obligatory, absolute, univer-
sally applicable, invariant, and normatively binding (Smetana, 2014). When asked
if it would be acceptable to steal in a country that has no laws against stealing, for
example, children as young as 6 years old say it would be wrong. In contrast, chil-
dren believe that social conventions are arbitrary, relative, alterable, consensually
agreed on, and vary across communities and cultures. They recognize that devia-
tions from social conventions are merely impolite or disruptive violations of social
rules and traditions. They know that conventional rules, unlike moral rules, depend
on social expectations, social norms, and the power of authorities such as parents
and teachers (Helwig 2006; Turiel, 2015; Wainryb, 2006). Regardless of religious
background, children view stealing and harming another person as morally wrong,
but they regard variations in religious conventions, such as day of religious obser-
vance, as acceptable (Nucci & Turiel, 1993). These distinctions have been found
in a wide range of cultures, including North America, China, Central and South
America, Europe, and the Middle East (Smetana, 2013).
444  Chapter 11 Morality

Psychological domain Another domain of social knowledge, which is separate

from the moral and social-conventional domains, is the psychological domain. It
reflects an understanding of self and others as psychological systems and includes
a number of different types of issues: Personal issues that affect only the self, such
as preferences and choices about one’s body, privacy, choice of friends, and recrea-
tional activities; prudential issues that have immediate physical consequences for the
self, such as safety, comfort, and health; and psychological issues that involve beliefs
and knowledge of self and others and choices about revealing aspects of the self to
others.
In these areas, unlike the moral domain, individual choices are acceptable. Hav-
ing spiked hair, getting a tattoo, and watching violent movies are personal issues,
not moral ones; smoking, drinking, and taking drugs are prudential concerns,
not moral ones. Prudential transgressions are not as bad as moral transgressions,
because they harm only the self, not someone else. In one study of 6- to 10-year-old
children’s understanding of moral and prudential issues, children judged a sce-
nario in which a person pushed someone off a swing and he or she got hurt—a
moral violation—as more serious than a scenario in which a person deliberately
jumped off the swing and was hurt—a prudential act (Tisak & Turiel, 1984). They
were more concerned about the type of harm—moral (affecting another person) or
prudential (affecting oneself)—than its severity.
Children also understand that different people have different psychological
beliefs. And recently researchers have examined the links between moral reason-
ing and theory of mind (Jambon & Smetana, 2014)(Recall our earlier review of
the development of theory of mind in Chapter 6). For example, some people
believe that the way to be a good friend is not to tell the other person how they
really feel whereas other people believe that sharing their intimate feelings is an
important aspect of friendship. Children realize that the beliefs of these people
are different but think that neither is necessarily wrong. Children are also toler-
ant of people’s different religious beliefs; for example, both 3rd and 7th graders
thought that it was all right if someone believed that there are 38 gods or that
only people who die on Tuesday become angels, even if this conflicted with their
own religious beliefs (Wainryb et al., 2001). Finally, it is important to note that
the links between children’s understanding of others’ perspectives and their
moral understanding are bidirectional; “Moral experiences may provide children
with opportunities that facilitate their understanding of others’ minds, which in
turn serves to inform and guide the development of moral thinking” (Killen &
Smetana, 2015, p. 719).
Children are particularly open-minded about personal issues, such as friendship
preferences, hairstyle choices, and clothing decisions (Nucci, 2014). These per-
sonal choices are an important part of defining themselves as different from others
(Nucci, 2002, 2014). In one study, 4- to 7-year-old children listened to vignettes
in which characters wanted to do things that conflicted with parental rules; then
they predicted and explained the characters’ actions and emotions (Lagattuta
et al., 2010). The older children were more likely than the younger ones to say that
the characters would comply with moral rules and would feel good complying but
would disobey rules that intruded on the personal domain (choosing friends, activi-
ties, clothes) and would feel good disobeying, especially when their choices were
essential to their identity. Even in cultures with a relatively collectivist orientation,
such as China, children distinguish between moral rules and personal choices and
do so increasingly as they get older (Smetana, 2013; Yau & Smetana, 2003). There-
fore, it is not surprising that as children move into adolescence, they increasingly
appeal to personal choice as a rationale when they have a conflict with their parents.
 Moral Judgment  445

Judgments about complex issues Most of the research on social domains has
examined how children evaluate moral, social-conventional, and personal issues
separately. In real life, though, people often confront situations that combine these
multiple domains. For the most part, moral considerations take priority over social-
conventional and personal ones (Smetana, 2014). However, a conflict between
rules in different domains can lead to ambiguities and uncertainties that cause
people to subordinate morality to other concerns. Stanley Milgram’s (1974) exper-
iments on obedience provide a well-known example of a situation in which individ-
uals subordinated moral judgment to social-conventional judgment. Participants
in these studies complied with the norm of obeying an authority figure (a social
convention) when the experimenter asked them to administer electric shocks to
people in another room (a moral violation). A real-life situation in which people
might subordinate moral judgment to judgment in the psychological domain is
making a decision about abortion. This decision depends on the person’s views
about whether killing a fetus is murder (a moral issue), whether women have the
right to control their own reproductive health (a personal issue), and whether it
is physically risky to have the surgery (a prudential issue). Women who classify the
decision as a personal issue rather than a moral one are more likely to approve of
abortion (Smetana, 1994).
An example of a multidomain issue that is salient in children’s lives is the exclu-
sion of other children from a social group. Melanie Killen and her colleagues
found that elementary school children used moral, social-conventional, and per-
sonal reasons to explain why exclusion is either right or wrong (Killen & Cooley,
2014; Killen & Stangor, 2001). When asked whether it was okay to exclude chil-
dren from a group solely on the basis of their race or gender, the children often
condemned exclusion, saying that it violates the principles of fairness and equality
(a moral reason). The children were more likely to view exclusion as acceptable,
however, if they themselves did not have friends from other races; they claimed
that exclusion was acceptable because “it’s what’s always been done” (a conven-
tional reason). The children were also more accepting of exclusion when asked
whether it was right to exclude children: (a) based on their low level of expertise
in the activity as well as their race and gender (using a social-conventional argu-
ment such as the need to maintain the goals of the group) or (b) based on their
relationship to other children in the group as well as race and gender (using a
personal argument such as that it was better to exclude a classmate than a sibling).
Young adolescents provided multiple reasons to justify or condemn exclusion:
They said, for example, that gender-based exclusion was wrong because it unfairly
denied boys and girls equal opportunity (a moral reason), was okay because
sometimes girls and boys are in separate groups to make the groups work better
(a social-conventional reason), or was okay because it was up to the child to decide
(a personal reason).
Exclusion is often based on ingroup/outgroup identification and majority and
minority group members often differ in their reasoning about exclusion. In the
United States, 9–15-year-old ethnic majority children were more likely than eth-
nic minority children to view interracial exclusion as legitimate (for conventional
reasons) when non-race factors were mentioned (such as parental or peer pres-
sure); in contrast, ethnic minority children were more likely to use moral reasons
to reject such exclusion (Crystal et al., 2008; Killen & Smetana, 2015). Similar find-
ings emerge from studies of exclusion of immigrant groups by majority nationals.
Minority youth are more likely to use moral reasoning to reject intergroup exclu-
sion, whereas majority youth rely on group identity and traditions (Conventional
justifications) to condone exclusion (Malti et al., 2012).
446  Chapter 11 Morality

Another example of current and complex concern is adolescents’ moral reasoning

about sexual minority youth (Horn, 2008). Research has revealed that sexual preju-
dice (toward peers who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender [LGBT])
is multifaceted and involves moral, conventional, and personal reasoning, as well as
stereotypic expectations. Adolescents use more conventional and less moral reason-
ing to exclude homosexual peers who are depicted as gender-nonconforming than
gender-conforming in appearance (e.g., cross-dressing) and activities (e.g., ballet
for boys and football for girls) (Horn, 2008). Moreover, while half of the youth in
the study believed homosexuality was wrong, only 11 percent condoned exclusion
as legitimate, using moral reasons such as unfair treatment. This indicated that their
judgments about personal sexual identity differed from judgments of social exclu-
sion based on identity. Another complex domain that is of current concern as a
civic and political issue is adolescent’s understanding of income inequalities across
society. In response to this growing concern, Arsenio (2015) has found that Ameri-
can adolescents underestimate actual levels of wealth inequality, while also sharing
a consensus about ideal distribution of wealth that is far more equalitarian than
their estimates of existing inequality. Adolescents rely on moral (e.g., fairness) and
non-moral (e.g., efficiency) considerations when they think about how to distribute
wealth and other societal resources. This issue suggests that moral development
issues often intersect with political and economic considerations.
In brief, when faced with complex issues, children apply a range of reasons
drawn from different domains and make decisions based on their age and experi-
ence. When they are young, they are able to make judgments about single-domain
issues more easily and consistently than judgments about complex issues (Crane &
Tisak, 1995; Killen, & Cooley, 2014). As they mature, their ability to understand the
subtleties of complex issues increases.

How Children Learn the Rules and Distinguish

between Social Domains
According to social-domain theory, children construct different forms of social
knowledge based on different types of experiences with other people, which, in
turn, may be reflected in neurological markers. Recent evidence suggests that dif-
ferent parts of the brain may be involved when making judgments about moral and
conventional domains (Lahat et al., 2013). In this section, we discuss the influences
of experiences with parents, teachers, siblings, and peers.

Parents’ and teachers’ roles in moral and social-conventional reasoning

Judy Dunn and her colleagues spent many hours observing toddlers’ interactions
with their mothers at home to identify experiences that might teach the children
about moral issues and social rules (Dunn, 2006, 2014). They found that the chil-
dren began to understand right and wrong as early as 16 months of age, and rapid
increases in understanding occurred between the ages of 2 and 3 years. The moth-
ers, meanwhile, were engaging their young children in moral dialogues about rules,
and the children were nodding or shaking their heads or providing verbal answers
to their mothers’ inquiries. In the following example, Ella, age 21 months, com-
mented on her own responsibility for a transgression (Dunn, 1988, p. 30):
Ella: [At table, throws toy to floor, a previously forbidden act. Looks at mother.]
Mother: No! What’s Ella?
Ella: Bad bad baba.
Mother: A bad bad baba.
 Moral Judgment  447

By the time they were 3 years old, children were justifying their actions or ­mothers
were justifying their rules in most disputes. These justifications might invoke the
child’s own wants, needs, or feelings (“But, I need that”), the consequences of the
child’s actions (“You’ll break it if you do that”), a social rule (“That doesn’t belong
to you”), or the feelings of another person (“Rachel will be hurt if you do that”). As
these examples show, moral and social-conventional reasoning was integral to these
family interactions.
When children are a little older, their moral judgments are advanced if their
parents initiate discussions about other people’s feelings, use disciplinary tech-
niques that involve reasoning and explanation, and promote democratic family
discussions (Hoffman, 2000; Pratt & Hardy, 2015; Walker et al., 2000). These par-
enting strategies promote children’s moral development by stimulating them to
think about their actions and the implications of their actions for the welfare of
others. Parents’ reasoning is most effective when it is clearly linked with the child’s
violation of a moral rule and when it highlights the consequences of the act for the
other person’s moral rights. A general reprimand such as “You shouldn’t do that
to other people” does not teach the child a moral lesson the way a specific expla-
nation does, such as “You should not hit people because it hurts them and makes
them sad.”
Children also learn during their family interactions that breaking moral rules
and breaking social-conventional rules lead to very different results. The conse-
quences of eating spaghetti with your hands, spilling your milk, or wearing your
sweater inside out are less serious than the consequences of taking your sibling’s
toy or pulling your sibling’s hair. Mothers tend to allow children much more choice
and freedom regarding personal and social-conventional issues than moral ones
(Nucci, 2014; Nucci & Weber, 1995) but express more anger in response to moral
than conventional violations (Dahl & Campos, 2013).
Parents’ reasoning and discipline is most effective if it is domain-appropriate—if
it focuses on the harm or injury caused by a moral transgression or on the disor-
der created by a conventional transgression (Nucci, 2014). Observational studies
indicate that mothers naturally coordinate their explanations with the nature of
children’s misdeeds (Smetana et al., 2014). They respond to social-convention viola-
tions with rules that focus on disorder: “Don’t throw your coat on the floor. Look at
the mess you made!” and to moral transgressions by focusing on the consequences
of the acts for the other person’s rights and welfare: “You hurt her. Think how you
would feel if somebody hit you!” By varying their explanations to suit the domain,
they help their children understand which issues are moral and absolute and
which are social conventions or personal choices and more flexible. Children learn
about the different types of rules from caregivers and teachers as well as their par-
ents (Killen & Smetana, 2015); however, they view teachers’ authority as limited to
rules at school (Smetana, 2002).
Parents’ and teachers’ effectiveness also depends on how well the message fits the
child’s developmental level. Giving a moral explanation to a 1-year-old isn’t likely
to be effective and will elicit only a blank stare. As children’s cognitive capacities
increase over the next year, adults can shift from controlling the child’s behavior
with physical interventions, such as distracting the child or removing him or her
from the situation, to using verbal strategies, such as a brief explanation (Dunn,
2006, 2014). By the time the child is 3 years old, the adult can use a concrete ration-
ale to guide his or her behavior, for example, warning that a toy might break. This
will be more effective than invoking an abstract rule about ownership (Walker &
Taylor, 1991). Adults’ explanations that are slightly more sophisticated than the
child’s current level of understanding expose children to more mature thinking,
448  Chapter 11 Morality

challenge them, and are likely to advance their moral understanding (Turiel, 2015).
This scaffolding approach is consistent with Vygotsky’s view of development (see
Chapter 1).
Parents’ influence on children’s moral development does not stop at the end of
childhood. Adolescents also understand that their parents may legitimately regulate
their moral behavior (Padilla-Walker & Carlo, 2006; Smetana, 2013). Adolescents
even accept some parental regulation of social-conventional and prudential matters,
such as smoking and using drugs and alcohol (Hasebe et al., 2004). However, they
are less likely to accept it when their parents try to regulate personal matters, such
as their appearance, friendship choices, or spending decisions. Conflicts between
teenagers and parents most often arise in this area of personal issues and occur with
increasing frequency as adolescents mature (Smetana, 2014). Conflicts that mix
social-conventional and personal issues—for example, when parents demand that
adolescents clean up their rooms or take a shower—are particularly intense.
Parents’ refusal to give adolescents reasonable control over their personal issues
may be bad for the young people’s psychological adjustment. In one study, Japanese
and U.S. teens who viewed their parents as overcontrolling about personal issues,
such as hair style or choice of music, reported more anxiety and depression (Hasebe
et al., 2004). In another study, African American adolescents were better adjusted if
their parents exerted some control over their personal issues in early adolescence
but had lower self-esteem and more depression when parents’ control extended to
mid or late adolescence (Smetana et al., 2004). Gaining control over personal issues
apparently becomes more important as adolescents get older. Authoritative par-
ents are most likely to be able to establish clear and legitimate boundaries between
moral, conventional, and personal issues for their adolescents (Smetana, 2014).
Authoritarian parents treat their adolescents’ conventional transgressions, such as
cursing and putting their elbows on the table, as if they were moral transgressions,
and they treat personal issues, such as choice of clothes and hairstyle, as if they
were social-conventional issues. Permissive parents are likely to treat all issues as per-
sonal. It is important to remember that parents can have negative as well as positive
effects on children’s social judgments when they transmit their own prejudices and
biases about other racial, ethnic, or religious groups to their children. Fortunately,
children are not passive consumers of information presented by parents or oth-
ers concerning how to think about moral and conventional issues. As they develop
“children do not accept parents’ values as given; but negotiate, contest, and some-
times resist expectations that they deem unfair or illegitimate” (Killen & Smetana,
2015, p. 728). Clearly, socialization is a dynamic process involving discussion and
sometimes disagreement between children and parents as children and adolescents
struggle to make sense of their social world.

Sibling and peer influences on moral and conventional judgments Sib-

lings and peers as well as adults play a part in helping children learn moral and
social-conventional rules. Turn-taking difficulties, disputes over possessions, social
exclusion, teasing, taunting, and hurting one another are all opportunities for
learning these rules and are more likely to occur in interactions with other children
than with adults (Dunn, 2014). Researchers have found that 2- and 3-year-olds who
experienced significant sibling rivalry had more knowledge about how to hurt and
upset other people when they were 5 or 6 years old than children whose relation-
ship with their sibling was close and affectionate; the latter children had a more
mature moral orientation (Dunn et al., 1995). Similarly, 4-year-olds with close,
intimate friendships gave more mature justifications when discussing hypothetical
 Moral Behavior  449

moral transgressions than did children who lacked close friendships (Dunn et al.,
2000). For example, these 4-year-olds talked about excluding a friend from play in
terms of the friend’s feelings and the implications of the exclusion for the relation-
ship with the friend. They also had a better understanding of inner states and emo-
tions, which may in part have contributed to their moral development.
Children frequently talk with one another about moral transgressions, which
helps them learn about moral rules and concepts (Dunn, 2014), and their expe-
riences of friendship loyalty and betrayal provide highly emotional forums for
moral learning (Singer & Doornenbal, 2006). For example, when resolving con-
flicts about hypothetical social dilemmas, adolescent best-friend dyads with high-
quality conflict resolution exchanges used more constructive discourse strategies
and more moral reasoning than best friends who had poor conflict resolution
exchanges (McDonald et al., 2014). Other children react to children’s moral and
social-conventional transgressions differently, just as adults do, and this facilitates
children’s development as well. In one study, 3-year-olds in a child care center
were observed to react more emotionally and retaliate more often when another
child committed a moral transgression than a social convention transgression;
they could articulate the moral and social rules, distinguish between them, and
use them to manipulate and manage their peers’ behavior (Smetana, 2014).
Finally, just as we saw earlier in this chapter and in Chapter 6, children in peer
groups develop exclusionary strategies to strengthen their feelings about their
own group while disparaging others—a reminder that peer groups can be sources
of both positive moral development as well as less desirable and darker aspects of
morality (Killen & Smetana, 2015).

The role of culture Social domain researchers have shown that children all over
the world distinguish among the three domains: moral, social-conventional, and
psychological. This has been demonstrated for children living in a wide variety of
places: shanty towns in Colombia, middle- and lower-class neighborhoods in North-
eastern Brazil, rural and urban areas of China, ancient Druze culture and urban
Tel Aviv in Israel, rural Nigeria, India, Taiwan, Korea, and Japan (Smetana, 2013).
However, the content of social conventions varies dramatically across cultures. In
India, a social-conventional issue for girls and women is wearing traditional apparel
(a sari) and having a face marking (a bindi). For girls in Mennonite and Amish com-
munities in Canada and the United States, social conventions include wearing long
dresses and bonnets. Women in the Middle East follow the Islamic dress code cov-
ering their hair, their bodies, and sometimes their faces. These social-conventional
rules are meant to maintain social order in these traditional cultures. The content
of personal issues, similarly, varies across cultures. Parental strategies for socializa-
tion of moral issues also vary across cultures; Chinese parents use more shaming
and love withdrawal in response to moral violations than Canadian parents (Helwig
et al., 2014). However, despite these culture-based differences in the content of
social conventions and personal issues, children still judge violations in the moral
domain as more serious than infractions in the social-conventional and psychologi-
cal domains.

Moral Behavior
The second component of moral development is moral behavior. Morality involves
not only knowing the rules but also following them; it involves not only knowing
450  Chapter 11 Morality

what is right but also doing it. Children’s lives are full of temptations that pull them
away from the morally correct action. They must learn to resist these temptations
and exert control over their behavior. The development of self-control is consid-
ered to be an essential process in the development of moral behavior.

et You Thought That . . .: Moral Judgment Leads

to Moral Action
It would not be surprising if you 2010; Judy & Nelson, 2000; Pizarro & Bloom,
thought that moral knowledge 2003). Similarly moral reasoning in German
leads to better behavior. adolescents was negatively related to bullying
Otherwise, why would parents (von Grundherr et al., 2017). In a meta-analysis
and teachers put so much effort into teaching of research on moral development and behav-
children moral rules? Kohlberg believed that ior, researchers found that developmentally
moral judgment and moral behavior are delayed moral judgment was strongly associ-
related. He thought that people first figure out ated with juvenile delinquency even after they
what is right and then decide whether they are had controlled for study participants’ age,
responsible for implementing the moral course gender, intelligence, socioeconomic status, and
of action, and finally, if they are responsible, cultural background (Stams et al., 2006).
they attempt to perform the moral action However, recent research suggests that when
(Kohlberg & Candee, 1984). But moral behavior members of a group who are participating in a
is not simply a consequence of moral knowl- cooperation game are provided the opportunity
edge, and moral judgment stages are only to make moral judgments of each others’
weakly related to behavior (Krebs & Denton, actions, they are more generous and trust each
2005). Researchers have found that the matu- other more than those who were not allowed to
rity of children’s moral judgment does not provide moral judgment feedback. Reminding
necessarily predict how they actually behave. others of their moral reputations is often enough
Especially in young children, moral judgment to increase moral behavior (Simpson et al., 2017;
and moral behavior are often unrelated. Willer & Simpson, 2017).
Children’s behavior is frequently impulsive and Researchers who consider whether a person
not guided by rational and deliberate thought classifies an issue as moral, social-conventional,
(Walker, 2004). A boy might have reached or personal find stronger associations between
Kohlberg’s Stage 3 of “good-boy” morality. He moral judgment and behavior. For example,
may be able to tell a researcher that it is wrong women are more likely to decide against having
to hit young children because they do not really an abortion if they see it as a moral issue rather
know what they’re doing (Batson & Thompson, than a personal issue (Smetana, 1994). Children
2001). However, when his younger brother are more likely not to grab another child’s toy if
breaks his favorite toy, this boy might kick his they think this would be a moral transgression
sibling sharply. Thought does not always rather than a personal issue, and adolescents
guide action. who think that hitting and hurting another
Moral judgments and moral behavior in older person is a moral matter are less aggressive than
children and adults are more likely to be related. teens who view these actions as personal
People who have reached Kohlberg’s Stage 5 (Guerra et al., 1994). In brief, whether a link exists
are less likely to cheat or inflict pain on others between moral judgment and moral action
and are more likely to endorse free speech and requires consideration of a person’s stage of
oppose capital punishment than people at moral judgment and his or her classification of
lower levels in Kohlberg’s framework (Gibbs, the issue as a moral one.
 Moral Behavior  451

Self-Regulation of Behavior
The ability of children to inhibit impulses and behave in accordance with social
and moral rules in the absence of external control is called self-regulation; it is an
important aspect of moral development. According to Claire Kopp (1991), develop-
ment of self-regulation proceeds through three phases. In the control phase, children
depend on adults for demands and reminders about acceptable behavior. In the
self-control phase, children comply with adults’ expectations even if the adults are
at that moment not making demands and watching to see whether the children
comply. In the self-regulation phase, children are able to use strategies and plans to
direct their own behavior and help them resist temptation, and they exhibit delay
of gratification. In one study demonstrating children’s increasing ability to control
their own behavior, Kopp and her colleagues showed 18-, 24-, and 30-month-old
children attractive objects, such as a toy telephone, and then told them not to touch
the objects right away (Vaughn et al., 1984). The 18-month-olds had minimal self-
control: They were able to wait only 20 seconds before they touched the objects.
The 2-year-olds had limited self-control: the 24-month-olds waited 70 seconds
and the 30-month-olds waited nearly 100 seconds before touching the objects. During
the remaining preschool period, children continue to increase in self-control and
self-regulation (Cole et al., 2011; Kochanska & Aksan, 2006; Moilanen et al., 2010).
Early elementary school children continue to improve their self-regulatory skills
(e.g., planning, perseverance; Tao et al., 2014). This improvement in self-regulation
is accompanied by advances in the development of the frontal cortex (Ochsner &
Gross, 2004; Tarullo et al., 2009).

Individual Differences in Moral Behavior

Although all children progress from control by others to self-control and then to
self-regulation, some children progress through these phases more rapidly and
achieve higher levels of self-regulation than others. Some children reach the self-
regulation phase by age 4 or 5; others continue to rely on adult control in order to
comply with rules. Children who are early self-regulators have a stronger sense of
“moral self”; they endorse and internalize parental values and rules, and they make
conscious efforts to control their behavior even when it requires giving up or post-
poning pleasurable outcomes (Kochanska, 2002).
Actions of parents facilitate children’s development of self-regulation. Growth
in children’s self-control and behavior regulation are predicted by mothers’ sen-
sitivity and support for their infants’ autonomy in the first 2 years (Bernier et al.,
2010), parents’ positive behavior support from age 2 to 4 (Moilanen et al., 2010),
mothers’ sensitivity and warmth from age 2½ to 4½ (Spinrad et al., 2012), mothers’
warmth when children are 5 years old (von Suchodoletz et al., 2011), and secure
and affectionate responsive parenting from age 5 to age 10 (Vazsonyi & Huang,
2010). In addition, mothers’ responsiveness to the child’s distress is linked to 5-year-
old children’s internalization of rules of conduct (von Suchodoletz et al., 2011). A
cooperative, affectionate, and mutually responsive relationship with parents helps
children develop a strong conscience or internal guide to moral standards of behav-
ior. Children with such relationships internalize their parents’ values and standards
at a younger age and can use these internalized rules and values to guide their
actions even when they are not under the watchful eye of an adult (Kochanska
et al., 2008). They are eager to comply with internalized rules because they want
452  Chapter 11 Morality

to maintain positive ties with their parents. Kochanska and her colleagues investi-
gated how a conscience promotes children’s later functioning (Kochanska et al.,
2010). They assessed children’s internalization of their mothers’ and fathers’ rules
when the children were between 2 and 5 years old; they assessed children’s moral
self, using a puppet interview, when they were 5½; and when children were almost
7 years old, parents and teachers rated their behavior. As expected, children who
exhibited stronger internalization of their parents’ rules were more competent and
better socialized later on, and, for maternal rules, that link was mediated by the
child’s moral self.
Individual differences in moral behavior are also related to children’s tempera-
ment. One aspect of temperament that is related to self-regulation is effortful con-
trol or the ability to deliberately inhibit one’s behavior—an aspect of temperament
that appears at an early age. Researchers have assessed preschool children’s active
inhibition by measuring how well they can slow their motor activity, make a clear
effort to pay attention, and suppress or initiate activity in response to a specific sig-
nal such as in a Simon Says game. Children who are able to inhibit their actions in
these ways become better self-regulators. They show more internalization of rules
of conduct and comply more with the rules in the absence of adult surveillance
(Kochanska & Aksan, 2006). Children who exhibit more active inhibition at age 5
are also less likely to cheat in a game at age 7 than children without this tempera-
mental quality (Asendorpf & Nunner-Winkler, 1992).
A second aspect of temperament that is related to moral behavior is fearful or
passive inhibition; this is related to the development of self-regulation through
an interaction with parental discipline. Gentle maternal discipline promotes con-
science development in children who have a fearful inhibited temperament but
does not work for children who are not fearful. For these children, discipline
focused on positive motivation is more likely to promote self-regulation (Kochanska
& Aksan, 2006).
A third aspect of temperament that is related to moral behavior also interacts
with the parental relationship. Infants’ negative emotionality—observed in anger-
eliciting episodes and interactions with parents—has been found to moderate
the effect of the mother–child relationship on the child’s self-regulation (Kim &
Kochanska, 2012). Highly negative infants were less self-regulated when they were in
unresponsive mother–child relationships but more self-regulated when they were in
responsive relationships, whereas for infants who were not temperamentally prone
to negative emotionality, there was no link between the mother–child relationship
and self-regulation.

Consistency of Moral Behavior across Situations

and Time
The fact that self-regulation is related to temperament might lead one to expect
that children would be relatively consistent in their moral behavior—and they are.
In one extensive investigation of 11,000 school-age children, researchers provided
opportunities for cheating, stealing, and lying in a variety of situations: athletics,
social events, at school, at home, alone, and with peers (Burton, 1963). They discov-
ered that children had a general tendency to behave either morally or immorally,
although their behavior was also affected by situational and motivational factors
such as fear of detection, peer support for deviant behavior, and the importance of
the outcome for the child.
 Moral Behavior  453

nto Adulthood: The Love of Money Is the Root

of All Evil
Moral challenges do not end in decisions view the situation from a different
childhood. Adults also face perspective. For them and for many observers,
moral dilemmas in their daily these decisions were based on failed self-
lives. Many of these dilemmas regulation by people who placed a higher
seem to follow from the Biblical wisdom that “the priority on profit than on prudence: “a product of
love of money is the root of all evil” (1 Timothy the culture of greed, dishonesty, ethical blindness
6:10). In the economic meltdown of 2008–2009, and wishful thinking that has characterized
many people were shocked to discover the much of corporate America” is how newscaster
extent to which they were surrounded by others Ted Koppel (2002) put it. According to behavio-
behaving badly to increase their wealth— rally oriented economists, emotions such as
manipulating the stock market, offering subprime greed contribute significantly to economic
mortgages, taking companies into debt while decision making and often override moral
accepting bonuses, and cheating on their decision making. People might know the right
income taxes. Bernie Madoff was convicted of thing to do, but the emotions of the moment in
operating a Ponzi scheme described as the combination with the ability to reframe the issue
largest investor fraud ever committed by a single to suit short-term goals often result in immoral
person. Federal prosecutors estimated his clients’ actions that harm others’ long-term welfare.
losses at almost $65 billion. Madoff was sen-
tenced to 150 years in prison, the maximum
allowed. His moral transgression may be particu-
larly egregious, but many other people take
advantage of the system to avoid spending
money—shoplifting or pirating music and
DVDs—or to get more money than they
deserve—playing solitaire at work or turning in
inflated business expenses. Adult life has many
opportunities to cheat, and people who lack a
moral backbone may fall prey to temptation.
They may violate moral rules knowingly, or they
may reframe moral issues as personal, prudential,
or social-conventional.
Marc H. Miller/Newscom
Consider the collapse of the Enron
Corporation in 2001 or the stock market in 2009.
Were these disasters the result of greed-motivated
immoral behavior or of unfortunate but well-
intentioned capitalistic decisions? Most people
at Enron, on Wall Street, or in the banks giving
out “liar loans” (in which borrowers’ stated
incomes were inflated) would argue that they Swindler Bernie Madoff (left) exits the Federal
Courthouse in Manhattan, New York,
were following company rules and working
January 14, 2009.
to maintain the organization and protect the
welfare of their clients or coworkers. Their
decisions, they would say, were in the social-­ Another example of questionable moral
conventional domain, not the moral domain. behavior that may come closer to home for you
The people who lost money as a result of these is pirating music or movies from the Web. Most
454  Chapter 11 Morality

Americans see downloading movies without returns. In 2012, the IRS reported an annual
paying for them as tantamount to a “minor $450 billion tax gap from underreported income.
parking violation” (Robertson, 2007). They justify About 14 percent of Americans consider this a
this behavior by saying that the pirated material personal issue and merely a way to “keep what
is only for personal use (it’s a personal issue, not belongs to them” (Pew Research Center, 2006).
a moral one) and the large corporations and The take-home message is clear. Adhering to
celebrities who would receive the royalties are moral principles is a life-long challenge, and the
already too rich. Playing solitaire on the office ways adults respond differ. Although some people
computer during regular working hours also can consistently take the moral high road, others
be viewed as a moral issue or an issue of reframe moral issues as social-conventional or
personal discretion. Perhaps the player feels personal to avoid doing the right thing. Still others
underpaid for the hard work performed and recognize an issue as moral but have a low level
sees this as a way to correct an unfair situation. of moral reasoning. For example, they may be in
As one supporter of solitaire rights said, “I would Kohlberg’s “law and order” stage and behave as
never work at a company that wouldn’t allow President Obama described the actions of
me to use company resources to enjoy myself at executives who accepted huge bonuses at one
the cost of productivity. That is just inhuman.” Or company (AIG) after it had been bailed out with
is it immoral? One final economic issue adults billions of taxpayer dollars: “It was legal, but not
face—every year—is filing their income tax moral” (The Tonight Show, March 19, 2009).

Children are also relatively consistent in their moral behavior at different ages.
Researchers found that children who complied with moral rules at 22 months of age
tended to show a similar pattern at 45 months (Aksan & Kochanska, 2005). Children
who displayed good self-control in the preschool period were better self-regulators
in adolescence and young adulthood: Their parents rated them as more likely to
plan, to be attentive, and to be able to deal with frustration when they were 14
(Mischel et al., 1988; Shoda et al., 1990), and, at age 27, men who had delayed grati-
fication in preschool were less likely to use crack or cocaine (Mischel & Ayduk, 2004;

esearch Up Close: Children Telling Lies

One of the most common 5 hours, 4-year-olds, once every 2 hours, and
breaches of moral behavior is 6-year-olds, every 1½ hours.
lying, and researchers have Children told lies to avoid responsibility for
explored when and why children transgressions, to accuse siblings, or to gain
lie. In one study, in Canada, Anne control over another person’s behavior. Boys
Wilson and her colleagues observed 2- and lied more than girls—even after adjusting for
4-year-olds at home during everyday routines the fact that boys had more to cover up. When
(Wilson et al., 2003). Two years later they parents realized that their children were lying,
observed the children again. At each time point, they rarely addressed the act of lying itself but
they recorded six 90-minute observations. The often challenged the veracity of the lie or
audiotaped records were later transcribed and addressed the underlying transgression. Older
incidents of lying were coded. Nearly all the siblings lied more often than younger ones, and
children (96 percent) lied at some point during parents who allowed older siblings to lie at Time
the observations, and the rate of lying increased 1 had ­children who lied more at Time 2. Older
with age: 2-year-olds lied about once every children also told more complex lies than
 Moral Behavior  455

younger ones. They offered deceptive elabora- help the collective group but harm themselves
tions about their motives and actions—“I didn’t or vice versa. For example, here is one story
mean to hit him”—whereas younger children (Fu et al., 2007, p. 293):
used simple explanations, such as blaming
the sibling for their misbehavior—“Jonelle Here is Susan. Susan’s teacher was looking
broke the car.” for volunteers to represent the class in a
This study provides valuable descriptive data spelling competition at their school. Susan
about young children’s lying. Part of the ability to could not spell very well but thought the
be a successful liar may depend on the develop- competition would be a good chance to
ment of false belief understanding since pre- improve her spelling skills. Susan thought
school children who lie have been shown to to herself, “If I volunteer, our class will not do
have better false belief understanding than well at the spelling competition, but if I don’t
those who confess (Evans, Xu, & Lee, 2011). volunteer, I will miss out on the chance to
Understanding others’ mental states can be a improve my spelling skills.”
positive development but can also lead to some
less desirable types of social behavior such as Children were asked, “If you were Susan, what
lying (Dunn, 2014). A study conducted in China would you do? Would you give yourself a good
found that, between 7 and 11 years of age, chance to improve your spelling skills and tell
children increasingly told little white lies to be your teacher you are a good speller, or would
polite (Xu et al., 2010). In a further study of lying, you help your class and tell your teacher you are
Genyue Fu and his colleagues (2007) compared not a good speller?” Chinese children were more
children’s attitudes toward lying in the two likely to lie to help the collective group and harm
different cultures, Canada and China. Children themselves; Canadian children did the opposite
ages 7, 9, and 11 were read stories about char- (see Figure 11.2). This study clearly demonstrates
acters facing moral dilemmas and asked to that children’s moral judgments about lying
decide whether they should lie or tell the truth to reflect cultural values.

1.8

1.6 Lying for Self

Lying for Collective
1.4
Mean choice score

1.2

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
7 years 9 years 11 years 7 years 9 years 11 years
Canada China
FIGURE 11.2 Chinese and Canadian children’s choices of lying to protect themselves
or the collective group.
Source: Copyright © 2010 by the American Psychological Association. Reproduced with permis-
sion. Fu, G., Xu, F., Cameron, C. A., Heyman, G., & Lee, K. Cross-cultural differences in children’s
choices, categorizations, and evaluations of truths and lies. Developmental Psychology, 43, 278–293.
The use of APA information does not imply endorsement by APA.
456  Chapter 11 Morality

In a fourth study researchers investigated how (“I did not pay you a visit because I was very
mothers in China teach their children about lying sick”), defusing tension (“I didn’t really mean it”),
(Wang et al., 2012). The mothers did actively showing false modesty (“My cooking skills are
teach their 4-year-old children the value of poor”), and coaxing a person—often a child—to
honesty by talking about it, responding to the do something (“If you drink this soup, your fever
children’s transgressions, and using positive and will be gone in a minute”).
negative examples to show the consequences of From these four studies we learn that children
being honest. However they also used their own lie often and increasingly—to get out of trouble,
interactions with others to model how to use to get control of or help other people, and to be
situational-appropriate deception to maintain polite. Lying is affected by the child’s culture and
harmonious interpersonal relationships and family experiences. Boys, firstborns, and children
avoid conflicts; for example, giving false praise with permissive parents are particularly
(“Your daughter is beautiful”), providing excuses likely to lie.

Peake et al., 2001). At age 40, those who were unable to delay gratification in pre-
school continued to show reduced self-control abilities (Somerville et al., 2011).
There also were brain differences in these 40-year-olds, such that the nondelayers
showed enhanced activity of the ventral striatum (part of the neural reward circuit)
than their better controlled peers (Somerville et al., 2011). Other research indicates
that having a deficient conscience in childhood—marked by callousness, impaired
moral emotions, and limited internalization of rules of behavior—can launch a tra-
jectory leading to immoral behavior in adolescence and adulthood (Frick et al.,
2003; Goffin et al., 2017).

Moral Emotions
The third component of moral development involves emotions. We have all expe-
rienced feeling bad when we break a rule or sometimes even when we think of
breaking a rule. We feel remorse or shame or guilt. These emotions play a role in
regulating moral actions and thoughts and help us negotiate the struggle between
wishes and rules.

Development of Moral Emotions

As we discussed in Chapter 5, “Emotions,” children experience the moral emotion
of guilt as early as 2 years of age (Lewis, 2014). When Kochanska and her colleagues
gave children a toy that was rigged to fall apart and told them to be very careful
when they handled it, the 22-month-olds looked guilty when the toy fell apart—they
frowned, froze, or fretted; 33-month-olds squirmed and hung their heads (Kochanska
et al., 2002). If these children had merely been surprised when the toy broke, their
reactions would not likely have involved these signs of negative affect and tension.
The children seemed to realize that they had done something wrong, and they felt
bad as a result. Researchers now suggest that the period between 2 and 3 years is
normal for the emergence of guilt and the beginning of conscience (Groenendyk
& Volling, 2007; Kochanska & Aksan, 2006; Lewis, 2014). It is not until several years
later that children are sensitive to the function of guilt displays in others though.
Not until they are 5 years old do children recognize that a guilty look on another
person’s face indicates remorse and appeasement (Vaish et al., 2011).
 Moral Emotions  457

Moral emotions and child characteristics Not all children feel equally guilty
when they violate a moral rule, however. Children with more fearful temperaments
experience more guilt after violating a rule. In Kochanska’s research, for example,
children who were more fearful in scary situations, such as climbing a ladder, fall-
ing backward on a trampoline, or interacting with a clown, displayed more guilt
when they “broke” the toy (Kochanska & Aksan, 2006). Similarly, in another study,
parents rated their children who had been fearful as infants as more prone to guilt
and shame at age 6 (Rothbart et al., 1994). Gender plays a role in moral emotions,
too. Girls display more guilt and shame than boys and men (Else-Quest et al., 2012;
Kochanska et al., 2002; Lewis, 2014). Perhaps this reflects the fact that girls are
expected to adhere more closely to rules than are boys and thus may experience
more upset when they violate them.

Moral emotions and parents’ behavior Parents influence children’s moral

emotions in a number of ways. One way is by creating a positive or negative emotional
climate in the home. In a warm and supportive climate, children are motivated to
listen to their parents’ messages and internalize affective reactions such as guilt and
shame as positive means of regulating their actions (Kochanska et al., 2008). On the
other hand, children may develop maladaptive forms of shame and guilt in a home
environment in which there is high marital dissatisfaction, in part, because they may
blame themselves for the parental conflict (Parisette-Sparks et al., 2017).
A second way parents contribute to children’s development of moral emotions
is by providing explanations. If parents simply assert their power and punish their
children for wrongdoing, the children are less likely to feel guilt; if parents explain
the rules and provide reasons for not violating them, children exhibit more guilt
and remorse when they transgress (Forman et al., 2004). When the parent says, “You
know better than to hit your sister—you should be ashamed of yourself,” the child
connects the transgression with a moral emotion. When the parent says, “You were
a bad boy for hitting her,” the child learns to evaluate himself in emotional terms
(Stipek et al., 1992). Through these exchanges, children learn to react with guilt or
shame after a rule violation, and they use memories of these emotions as deterrents
to future misdeeds.
A third way parents contribute to children’s development of moral emotions is
by forcefully expressing their own emotions. When mothers respond to their chil-
dren’s moral transgressions with intense negative affect, their children are more
likely to make reparations than when the mother’s message is affectively neutral
(Grusec et al., 1982). When parents dramatize their distress and express their
anger, children’s attention focuses on the harm or injustice they have caused
(Arsenio, 2014; Arsenio & Lemerise, 2004). This does not mean that parents
should throw screaming fits. Too much parental anger is negatively arousing for
children and is likely to inhibit their focus on feelings. Too much emotional
arousal leads children to self-oriented, aversive emotional reactions, such as fear
or sadness, rather than other-oriented reactions, such as sympathy (Eisenberg
et al., 2015).
Fourth and finally, parents contribute to children’s development of moral
­emotions by responding to the children’s emotional expressions. If parents respond
positively when their children express remorse, shame, or guilt, the children learn
that expressing these emotions is a way of mitigating parental reprimands and
restoring or repairing their relationship with the parent (Thompson, 2015).
Parents’ behavior is particularly important for children who do not have a tem-
perament that predisposes them to develop moral emotions. Researchers have
found that children with inhibited temperaments are generally likely to develop
 458  Chapter 11 Morality

95
Inhibited
Uninhibited
90

Parent-rated guilt
FIGURE 11.3 Interaction between temperament and 85
discipline in the prediction of parent-rated guilt.
Source: Cornell, A. H., & Frick, P. J. (2007). The moderat-
ing effects of parenting styles in the association between
80
behavioral inhibition and parent-reported guilt and
empathy in preschool children. Journal of Clinical Child
& Adolescent Psychology, 36, 305–318. Taylor & Francis, 75
Low Medium High
reprinted by permission of the publisher, Taylor & Francis
Group, http://www.informaworld.com. Inconsistent discipline

feelings of guilt, and their parents’ behavior doesn’t make a significant difference.
But children with uninhibited temperaments develop feelings of guilt only if their
parents provide consistent discipline (see Figure 11.3; Cornell & Frick, 2007).

Do Moral Emotions Affect Moral Behavior?

Does feeling guilty after a moral transgression predict that the child will not repeat
it? When Kochanska and her colleagues observed whether children obeyed their
mother’s prohibition not to touch a set of attractive toys after she left the room, those
children who had displayed more guilty reactions at earlier ages continued to be less
likely to play with the forbidden toys when they were 4½ years old (­Kochanska &
Aksan, 2006). Their anticipation of guilt apparently served as a deterrent to sub-
sequent misbehavior and rule violations. Children who showed early signs of guilt
also developed stronger moral selves; they described themselves as more concerned
about rules, more committed to rule-compatible behavior, and generally more mor-
ally concerned at age 4½ (Kochanska, 2002). Although the moral emotions of guilt,
shame, and remorse make children uncomfortable, they clearly serve a positive
function in their moral development.
This link between moral emotions and moral
behavior has also been observed in older children
and adolescents. Children prone to guilt in the
fifth-grade had fewer sexual partners, had less use
Barbara Smaller/The New Yorker Collection/The Cartoon Bank

of illegal drugs and alcohol, and were less involved

with the criminal justice system at age 18 (Stuewig
et al., 2015). Shame does not appear to serve the
same inhibitory functions as guilt and may even be a
detrimental factor. Shame-proneness is a risk factor
for later deviant behavior. Shame-prone fifth-grade
children were more likely to have unprotected sex
and use illegal drugs in young adulthood (Stuewig
et al., 2015). Guilt, not shame, is most effective in
motivating people to choose the moral path (Tangney
et al., 2015). Whether feeling too much guilt is det-
rimental to children’s development remains to be
determined. But it has been suggested that children
who are excessively guilt prone may become self-
berating, depressed, and anxious (Zahn-Waxler &
Kochanska, 1990).
 Moral Emotions  459

eal-World Application: Adolescents’ Competence

to Stand Trial as Adults
than adults to indicate that they would engage
in illegal behaviors such as shoplifting, smoking
marijuana, or joy riding in a stolen car. They also
score lower on measures of psychosocial matu-
rity, including responsibility (the capacity to make
an independent decision), perspective (the
capacity to place a decision within a broad
temporal and interpersonal context), and
temperance (the capacity to exercise self-
restraint and impulse control). Individuals who

Miguel Villagran/Getty Images Inc

score lower on these measures of psychosocial
maturity are less likely to make socially responsi-
ble decisions in hypothetical situations. In short,
because they are less psychosocially mature,
adolescents make poorer decisions and are
more likely to say that they would engage in
illegal activities than adults. The implication of
these findings is not that adolescents should not
be held responsible for their crimes but that their
In this photo, a teenage boy sits by his lawyer diminished ability to make prudent decisions can
waiting to hear his sentence. He was convicted of be a mitigating factor that should be recognized
murder for dropping stones onto passing cars in their legal treatment.
from a highway overpass, killing two women and Second, people who have committed a crime
injuring four other motorists (CBS News, 2000). In must possess the cognitive, social, and emotional
spite of evidence that children’s moral judgment competence to stand trial. They must have the
improves with age, it is not clear whether adoles- ability to consult a lawyer with a reasonable
cents are as morally capable or culpable as degree of understanding and the ability to make
adults and, therefore, how they should be treated decisions about waiving their rights, entering
by the legal system. Laurence Steinberg, Elizabeth pleas, and other procedural matters. Going to
Cauffman, and their colleagues have tried to court is a complex matter that requires sophisti-
determine whether young people meet the cated understanding and reasoning skills to
criteria for adult blameworthiness and should be assist counsel in mounting a defense: logical
tried in adult courts and have concluded that decision-making skills, reliable memory to provide
they should not be (Albert & Steinberg, 2011; accurate information about the offense, future-
Cauffman et al., 2015; Monahan et al., 2015). oriented thinking to understand the conse-
Several factors are necessary to determine quences of different pleas, social perspective
guilt. First, to be guilty of a crime, a person must taking to understand the roles and motives of
commit the act voluntarily, knowingly, and with lawyers and judges, and awareness of their own
some ability to form a reasonable expectation of motives and psychological states. Adolescents
the potential consequences of the action. under age 15 are unlikely to have these skills.
Cognitive abilities, such as the competency to More than one-third cannot define the word
make logical decisions and to foresee the rights, and most do not understand court
implications of those decisions, are necessary. proceedings well enough to protect themselves
These cognitive abilities are unlikely to have in adversarial legal settings. They do not fully
developed before age 15. Emotional capacities appreciate the implications of the right to remain
are also important. Adolescents are more likely silent, to accept a plea bargain, or to testify as a
460  Chapter 11 Morality

defendant. A significant number do not under- and minimize the seriousness of the risks if
stand the roles of different court personnel and they do occur. Together, these findings suggest
a defendant’s rights at trial. Adolescents are that trying an adolescent in an adult court
more likely to confess rather than remain silent without careful evaluation of his or her compe-
in response to interrogation by an authority tence is likely to place a young offender at
figure, and they are more likely to accept a serious risk for unfair legal treatment. Because
plea bargain rather than go to trial even the rules of juvenile court are more flexible
though doing so may not be in their best and permit judges more leeway in sentencing,
interest. They think fewer risks are involved in they provide a more appropriate venue than
various decision options, are less likely to adult courts for providing justice for juvenile
believe that the risks will actually happen, offenders.

The Whole Moral Child

We have examined cognitive, behavioral, and emotional components of moral devel-
opment separately. However, in real life, these components occur together, interact,
and sometimes even conflict, and one of the tasks of development is to integrate
them. The separate components begin to come together to guide children’s decision
making and action in the late preschool period. From 3 to 4 years of age, children
show increasing coherence across the components of moral conduct and emotion.
Children who are able to follow moral rules in the absence of external surveillance
(moral behavior) are more likely to experience guilt in anticipation of or after com-
mitting a transgression (moral emotion). Cognitive aspects (understanding moral
rules and social conventions) are integrated next. By the time they enter school,
most children have connected the moral dots and developed a coherent moral self
or conscience (Kochanska & Aksan, 2006). They can refrain from prohibited acts,
follow rules in games, and feel guilty when they transgress; they have a cognitive
appreciation of rules and standards of conduct and are able to cognitively represent
consequences of violations of those standards for themselves and others.
The process of integrating these components and developing a conscience con-
tinues through childhood. About half of the 6-year-olds in one study still expected
that people who violated a moral rule, for example by stealing, would feel happy
because they had satisfied their own desire rather than experiencing the moral
emotions of remorse or guilt (Nunner-Winkler, 2007). They were also not likely
to behave morally by resisting a real-life temptation to cheat. As they matured,
the children were increasingly likely to understand that moral transgressions lead
to remorse and were less likely to violate moral rules by stealing or cheating (the
percentage who recognized that rule violation would lead to remorse or guilt was
65 percent at age 8, 75 percent at age 17, and 80 percent at age 22).
Children’s integration of moral components is also reflected in the fact that their
knowledge of social domains is related to their moral behavior and moral emotions.
Whether children define a real-life dilemma as personal, conventional, or moral
influences how they act and how they feel (Killen & Smetana, 2015). For example, if
children think that excluding a child from their social group is a social-conventional
issue because it demonstrates group loyalty and maintains group solidarity, they are
likely to actually exclude the other child and are unlikely to feel remorse, shame, or
guilt. If they see exclusion as a moral issue because it violates the other child’s rights,
they are deterred by their anticipation of feeling a negative emotion such as guilt or
shame and are less likely to exclude the child.
 Prosocial and Altruistic Behavior  461

Not all children are successful in integrating the components of morality and
developing a strong moral self. Some have limited cognitive understanding, don’t
anticipate how their actions will harm others, and experience little remorse or guilt
when they commit a moral misdeed. In the extreme, these children may grow up
to become psychopaths. They illustrate what happens when individuals fail to inte-
grate the cognitive, affective, and behavioral aspects of the moral system that serves
as a regulatory guide for most socialized individuals.

Prosocial and Altruistic Behavior

Being able to resist the temptation to violate moral rules is only part of the story
of moral development; the other part is behaving in a positive way. Moral develop-
ment is more than “knowing right”; it is also “doing good.” Prosocial behavior is
voluntary behavior intended to benefit another person. It includes sharing, caring,
comforting, cooperating, helping, sympathizing, and performing “random acts of
kindness.” Prosocial behavior can also include actions designed to help groups of
people, societies, nations, even the world. Altruistic behavior is prosocial behavior
that is performed without thought for one’s own immediate welfare, without expec-
tation of reciprocity or acknowledgment (often anonymously), and sometimes even
at the sacrifice of one’s own long-term needs and wishes. The beginnings of proso-
cial behavior appear in quite young children; truly altruistic behavior occurs only at
later ages (Eisenberg et al., 2015).

How Prosocial Behavior and Reasoning Develop

In this section, we discuss how children’s prosocial behavior and reasoning about
prosocial actions vary with age and gender and how stable their prosocial behavior
is over time.

Age changes in prosocial behavior Research suggests that even infants pre-
fer prosocial behavior. As early as 3 months of age, infants who watched a puppet
show preferred a helpful puppet over an unhelpful puppet, and at 6 months of age,
they were more likely to help a puppet who had previously been cooperative in a
game in which puppets were supposed to throw a ball back and forth rather than
a puppet who had run off with the ball in the game (Hamlin et al., 2007; Hamlin &
Wynn, 2011).
Courtesy of Kiley Hamlin at the University of

In experiments to determine
whether infants understand
helpfulness, they were shown
British Columbia

puppets that performed either

helpful or unhelpful actions
and then the infants pointed to
or reached for the puppet they
preferred.
462  Chapter 11 Morality

Thus, even before the end of the first year of life, babies apparently have some
appreciation or understanding of prosocial behavior. And this preference for fair
or prosocial figures persists into the preschool years. When presented with a char-
acter who helped a protagonist achieve his goal and a character who thwarted
the protagonist’s goal, 3- to 5-year-olds indicated that they preferred the helper,
evaluated the helper as nicer than the hinderer, and selectively allocated punish-
ment to the hinderer. When asked to justify their allocation of punishment, chil-
dren typically appealed to social considerations—primarily the selected puppet’s
performance of an unhelpful action. This evidence suggests that young children
not only prefer fair play but also appreciate the moral basis of their preference as
well (Van de Vondervoort & Hamlin, 2017). Some have suggested that this early
ability to discriminate between prosocial and nonprosocial others may be evolu-
tionarily adaptive (Hamlin, 2015). Moreover, it is not simply an understanding
or appreciation of prosocial behavior that develops early, but prosocial behavior
itself is also observed in infants. For example, infants exhibit early signs of sharing
by pointing to interesting sights and objects, and by the time they are 1 year old
they are sharing by showing and giving toys to mothers and fathers and even stran-
gers (Brownell, 2016; Hay, 2009). Children engage in these early sharing activities
without prompting or direction and without being reinforced by praise or gifts. By
the time they are 2 years old, they display a wide range of prosocial actions, such
as giving verbal advice (“Be careful”), offering comfort (hugging a hurt parent),
indirectly helping (getting an adult to retrieve another child’s toy), sharing (giving
food to their sister or a pet), providing distraction (closing a book that has made
their mother sad), and protecting or defending (trying to prevent another person
from being injured, distressed, or attacked) (Brownell, 2016; Garner et al., 1994).
However, all is not positive among the toddler set as they are often not kind but
take their siblings toys or food and even pinch and punch to get their way, as we
will see in Chapter 12 where we examine the emergence of aggression. Children
become increasingly likely to engage in prosocial behavior as they grow older and
become more cognitively mature (Eisenberg et al., 2006, 2015). Increasing emo-
tional knowledge helps them detect other people’s subtle emotional cues and real-
ize when they need help. See Table 11.2 for more details about age changes in
prosocial and altruistic behavior.

Stability in prosocial behavior Individual differences in prosocial behavior

appear early in childhood and are quite stable as children develop. Researchers
have found that children’s nurturant and sympathetic behavior toward peers is
moderately stable from preschool through elementary school. Their willingness to
donate to needy children, assist an adult (e.g., by helping pick up paper clips), and
offer help to others are consistent across elementary school (Eisenberg et al., 2015).
Prosocial behavior toward peers is also relatively stable in adolescence (Wentzel
et al., 2004), as is valuing the concern for others in young adulthood (Pratt & Hardy,
2015). There is even consistency in children’s prosocial dispositions from the time
they are 4 or 5 years old and observed in preschool into early adulthood (Eisenberg
et al., 2015). Prosocial behavior seems fairly consistent across time: Children who
start out being generous, helpful, and kind are likely to continue to exhibit these
prosocial qualities as they mature.

Prosocial reasoning Nancy Eisenberg and her colleagues formulated a model

of the development of prosocial reasoning that parallels Kohlberg’s model of
moral reasoning. To test the model, they devised a number of hypothetical
 Prosocial and Altruistic Behavior  463

TABLE 11.2

Prosocial and Altruistic Behaviors

Age Behavior
Birth to 6 months Reacts emotionally to others’ distress (crying or general upset)
Prefers helpful behavior in others
6–12 months Exhibits sharing behavior
Displays affection to familiar persons
Prefers cooperative behavior in others
1–2 years Plays cooperative games
Comforts people in distress
Helps parents with household tasks
Shows and gives toys to adults
2–3 years Shares
Exhibits increasingly planned caregiving and helping
Verbally expresses intention to help
Gives helpful verbal advice
Tries to protect others
3–10 years Is hedonistically motivated to perform prosocial acts
Recognizes others’ needs even when they conflict with own
Justifies prosocial behavior by reference to notions of good and bad and consideration of approval
and acceptance from others
10–17 years Justifies helping according to internalized values and concern with rights and dignity of others
May believe in individual and social obligations and the equality of all individuals
May base self-respect on living up to own values and accepted norms

Note: These data represent overall trends identified in research studies. Children vary in the exact ages at which they exhibit these behaviors. Sources:
Brownell and the Early Social Development Research Lab, 2016; Eisenberg et al., 2015; Hay & Rheingold, 1983; Hamlin et al., 2007; Hamlin & Wynn, 2011.

scenarios about prosocial dilemmas. Here is an example (Eisenberg-Berg &

Hand, 1979, p. 358):

“One day a girl named Mary was going to a friend’s birthday party. On her way she saw a
girl who had fallen down and hurt her leg. The girl asked Mary to go to her house and
tell her parents so they could come and take her to the doctor. But if Mary did run and
get the child’s parents, she would be late to the birthday party and miss the ice cream,
cake, and all the games. What should Mary do? Why?”

When Eisenberg and her colleagues interviewed children using these scenarios,
the youngest children (age 4) used hedonistic reasoning to justify prosocial actions;
they said that people should behave prosocially because they would get material
rewards. This type of reasoning decreased with age. The second type of reasoning
children used was needs-oriented reasoning, in which they expressed concern about
the needs of others even if these needs conflicted with their own. This reasoning
type peaked in middle childhood and then leveled off. The most advanced types of
prosocial reasoning were empathic reasoning (involving sympathetic responding)
and internalized reasoning (justifying prosocial behavior based on internalized val-
ues to maintain societal obligations or to treat all people as equal). These types of
prosocial reasoning, like Kohlberg’s Stage 5 moral reasoning, did not occur until
adolescence or later (Eisenberg et al., 2005). Other researchers using Eisenberg’s
464  Chapter 11 Morality

model found that adolescents’ prosocial reasoning was related to their prosocial
behavior: hedonistic reasoning was related to less sharing and empathy; needs-­
oriented reasoning was related to more prosocial behavior; internalized prosocial rea-
soning was related to prosocial behavior requiring some cognitive reflection beyond
simple acts such as helping someone pick up dropped books (Carlo et al., 2003).

Are girls more prosocial than boys? Some people have suggested that girls are
more prosocial than boys, but gender differences in prosocial behavior depend on
the particular action. Differences are most noticeable for acts of kindness and con-
sideration; Girls consistently display more of these types of prosocial behavior than
boys do (Eisenberg et al., 2015). Girls are also more empathic than boys; they have
more capacity to experience the emotions that others feel (Zahn-Waxler et al., 2001),
especially as they get older. Girls are somewhat more likely than boys to engage in
instrumental helping, comforting, sharing, and donating, but gender differences in
these behaviors are smaller. No gender differences have been observed in situations
in which prosocial actions are anonymous (Carlo et al., 2003). Men have even been
observed to behave more prosocially than women in extreme circumstances, such
as making life-risking rescues from floods or mountaintops (Becker & Eagly, 2004;
Eagly, 2013). In less-risky situations, such as donating an organ or volunteering for
the Peace Corps, men and women are similar.
Gender differences are more pronounced when data come from self-reports
and reports by family members and peers rather than in data gathered by objective
observers (Hastings, Rubin, et al., 2005). This suggests that some gender differences
reflect people’s conceptions of what boys and girls are supposed to be like rather
than how they actually behave (Eisenberg et al., 2015). Parents stress the importance
of politeness and prosocial behavior more for daughters than for sons (Maccoby,
1998). Moreover, when girls behave prosocially, parents attribute these behaviors
to inborn tendencies, whereas they attribute boys’ prosocial behaviors to the influ-
ences of socialization. These findings do not mean that gender differences are only
in the eye of the self or the beholder, but apparently they are affected by gender
stereotypes and the belief that girls are made of “everything nice” (Grusec et al.,
2011; Hastings et al., 2007). Gender differences in prosocial behavior also increase
with age, presumably because children become more aware of gender stereotypes
and internalize these in their self-image (Eisenberg et al., 2015).

Determinants of Prosocial Development

Prosocial behavior and development are rooted in biology, environmental factors,
culture, empathy, and perspective taking. We discuss each of these types of influ-
ence in this section.

Biological influences Prosocial behavior is linked to biology in a number of

ways: It is foreshadowed in infancy, rooted in evolution, affected by genes, evident
in brain activity, and associated with temperament. As we discussed in Chapter 5,
“Emotions,” newborn babies are distressed when they hear another baby cry. They
also show signs of sharing in their first year, as we noted earlier in this chapter. These
behaviors are precursors of prosocial emotions and actions. Because they appear so
early in life, their existence suggests that human beings are biologically prepared to
respond empathically and to engage in prosocial activities.
The fact that behaviors such as helping, sharing, and consoling are seen even
among nonhuman animals suggests evolutionary roots of prosocial behavior
 Prosocial and Altruistic Behavior  465

(Preston & de Waal, 2002; Silk & House, 2016). Evolutionists explain these ­prosocial
behaviors with the notion of “kin selection.” Animals’ cooperation and, if necessary,
sacrifice of their own interests for those of others increase the probability that their
kin will survive and reproduce. Thus, even if they die, their surviving relatives will
pass their genes to the next generation. It follows that individuals should direct
more prosocial behavior to closely related relatives than to distant relatives or unre-
lated individuals (Hastings, Zahn-Waxler, et al., 2005). In fact, research shows this
to be the case: People are more willing to help others who are genetically related
to them than to help nonrelatives, and the closer the relationship, the more willing
they are to help (Eisenberg et al., 2015).
Evidence that genes influence prosocial behavior comes from studies show-
ing that identical twins are more alike in their prosocial behavior and empathic
concern than fraternal twins (Fortuna & Knafo, 2014; Knafo-Noam et al., 2015).
It also comes from studies showing that extremes of prosocial behavior are exhib-
ited by children with certain genetic abnormalities. For example, children who
have Williams syndrome (marked by loss of the long arm of chromosome 7) are
more empathic and prosocial than normal children (Konrath & Grynberg, 2013),
while empathic and prosocial behavior are less common among young children with
autism (Campbell et al., 2015).
According to genetic studies, the contribution of genetic factors to prosocial
behavior is evident in childhood (Knafo & Plomin, 2006) but increases across ado-
lescence and in adulthood the contribution is even more pronounced (Fortuna
& Knafo, 2014). This pattern of heritability increasing with age accompanied by
decreasing shared environment effects was found in a meta-analysis of twin studies
of empathy (Knafo & Uzefovsky, 2013). A process of evocative gene–environment
correlation, in which children’s genetically influenced behavior affects the input
they receive from the environment (Scarr & McCartney, 1983), can account in part
for this increase in heritability. The search for specific genes underlying prosocial
behavior is just beginning. Some single genes, such as the dopamine receptor gene
DRD4 (Bachner-Melman et al., 2005), and variants of the arginine vasopressin 1a
receptor gene (Knafo et al., 2008) have been linked to adult’s prosocial behavior.
Moreover, variation in the oxytocin receptor gene (see Chapter 4 for discussion
of oxytocin—the love hormone) is linked with higher maternal responsiveness to
the cries of their toddlers (Bakermans-Kranenburg & Van IJzendoorn, 2008). A
recent study found that variation in the oxytocin receptor gene indirectly predicted
prosocial behavior through empathic concern, which suggests that genetics affect
empathy which, in turn, alters prosocial behavior. Genetics affect prosocial behavior
indirectly by increasing empathy. However, the search is complicated and the mag-
nitude of the effects for specific genes is quite small (Conway & Slavich, 2017) or
not detectable (Bakermans-Kranenburg & Van IJzendoorn, 2014). Because multiple
genes are associated with prosocial behavior, the search for specific genetic factors
will undoubtedly continue for some time. Moreover, the fact that genetic factors
contribute to prosocial behavior in adolescents and adults more than in children
suggests that some of the contributing genes become active only with maturation
(Knafo & Plomin, 2006), and this complicates the search even further. So there is a
continuing challenge: it is clear that prosocial behavior has a genetic basis as dem-
onstrated by the twin studies but the discovery of the specific genes that account for
these effects is still poorly understood.
Various types of brain studies have demonstrated the neurological basis of
prosocial behavior. Even in infancy distinct neural patterns were related to differ-
ent aspects of prosocial behavior. Among 18- and 24-month-old infants greater left
466  Chapter 11 Morality

frontal cortical activation was associated with infants’ understanding of the other’s
distress as well as empathic responding in a comforting task, whereas greater right
temporal activation was related to infants’ instrumental helping (Paulus et al., 2013).
Brain-imaging studies reveal that specific brain regions are activated when people
hear sad stories (Decety & Howard, 2014), feel empathy (Amodio & Frith, 2006;
Overgaauw et al., 2014) and compassion (King et al., 2006), take another person’s
perspective (Ruby & Decety, 2001), donate money to a food bank (Harbaugh et al.,
2007), and make moral decisions (Ayram et al., 2014). The mirror neuron system
that we discussed in Chapter 3, “Biological Foundations,” could be a ­neurological
mechanism underlying these connections (Iacoboni, 2009). The correlation between
the activation of the mirror neuron system and empathic concern in a number of
studies supports this view (e.g., Flournoy et al., 2016).
Temperament also plays a role in children’s prosocial behavior. Another person’s
distress has been found to make children with highly inhibited temperaments more
upset than children with less-inhibited temperaments (Young et al., 1999) and chil-
dren with a highly reactive temperament (likely to be startled by unfamiliar things,
or they’re very shy, or they tend to get scared of things like clowns or the dark) were
less prosocial than less reactive children (Laible et al., 2017). Similarly, children
who can regulate their emotions better, as indexed by measures of their heart rate,
are more likely to exhibit comforting behavior (Eisenberg et al., 2015).
In sum, various biological factors—innate preparation, evolution, genetics,
neurology, and temperament—predispose children to behave prosocially. These
biological influences interact with the environment in determining how prosocial
children are.

Environmental influences Environmental input from family, peers, teachers,

and the mass media all contribute to children’s prosocial development. Parents
encourage the development of prosocial behavior in a variety of ways (Brownell
et al., 2016). Even in the earliest years of life, parents can promote children’s proso-
cial behavior by giving them opportunities to perform prosocial acts. For example,
they can assign the children household tasks. For example, 93 percent of mothers
reported that they encouraged their 13–24-month-olds to help in household rou-
tines such as sweeping, cleaning, and setting the table (Dahl, 2015). Children who
have the chance to participate in chores are more likely to help another person
later (Hammond & Carpendale, 2015; Pettigrove et al., 2013). Perhaps related to this
helpfulness, if mothers emphasize relational socialization goals for their children—
especially obedience—this predicts toddlers’ prosocial behavior (Kärtner et al.,
2010). Allowing children to help in these ways is consistent with Vygotsky’s socio­
cultural theory of development (Chapter 1) in which children learn by being
apprentices and through maternal scaffolding. Adults typically signal that they need
help by reaching for a dropped object or by telling a toddler that help is needed
(Look, she dropped something, can you help?) (Brownell et al., 2016).

“From the time that I was a toddler,” recalled Aiden, “my parents gave me tasks and
chores to do. I was in charge of feeding my kitty when I was young and when I got older,
I got garbage duty and then lawn mowing. I didn’t always like it but it taught me to be
responsible so I guess it was a good thing in the long run.”

Consistent with cognitive social-learning theory (Bandura, 2006), children

acquire prosocial concepts and behavior by watching and imitating prosocial
models. In laboratory experiments, children who see people donate or share with
others are likely to do the same (Hart & Fegley, 1995). Children whose parents
 Prosocial and Altruistic Behavior  467

model prosocial behavior by being warm, supportive, and positive to them are
more prosocial and altruistic (Eisenberg et al., 2015). Parents who act as proso-
cial models in the community also foster their children’s prosocial behavior. For
example, when parents are engaged in volunteer service, their children follow by
becoming involved in volunteer work of the same kind, such as working in a home-
less shelter or for an environmental cause (McLellan & Youniss, 2003). Carolyn
Zahn-Waxler and her colleagues had mothers tape-record their children’s reactions
to distress over a 9-month period, beginning when the children were 18 months old
(Zahn-Waxler et al., 1979). They also asked the mothers to simulate distress from
time to time. For example, the mother might pretend to be sad (sobbing briefly),
in pain (bumping her head and saying “ouch”), or suffering respiratory distress
(coughing and choking). Overall, the children reacted to distress in a prosocial
way about one-third of the time. However, there were substantial individual differ-
ences among the children; some children responded to most distressing situations
(60 percent to 70 percent of the time), whereas others never did. Children were
more likely to respond helpfully if their mothers had taught them to pay atten-
tion to the consequences of their behavior. These mothers might say, for example,
“Tom is crying because you pushed him,” or, even more strongly and effectively, “When
you hurt me, I don’t want to be near you.”
Consistent with these findings, other researchers have found that children
whose mothers pointed out a peer’s distress in an affectively charged manner
tended to react empathically (Denham et al., 1994). In contrast, mothers’ use of
physical restraint (moving away from the child or moving the child away from the
victim), physical punishment (“swatting him a good one”), unexplained prohibi-
tions (“Stop that!”), or angry explanations (“I’ve told you and told you not to do
that. You’re not a nice person.”) was likely to interfere with the development of
prosocial behavior.
A further way parents can encourage their children’s prosocial behavior is by
responding to emotions in a sensitive way. Children behave more prosocially if their
parents show a sensitivity toward injustice toward others (Cowell & Decety, 2015),
encourage the expression of emotions (positive and negative) in their children, tol-
erate the children’s emotional distress rather than punishing them for it (Strayer &
Roberts, 2004), if the parents try to find out why their children are feeling anxious
or upset (Eisenberg et al., 1993), and if the parents explain their own feelings of
sadness to their children (Denham et al., 2007).
Parents can also encourage their children’s prosocial behavior by providing
them with opportunities to help outside the home (Lam, 2012). Children who have
opportunities to engage in volunteer activities develop more prosocial attitudes and
behavior (Metz et al., 2003). And in spite of some concern that the recent gen-
erations are more self-focused than earlier ones (Konrath, 2010; Twenge, 2006), a
survey of 12 colleges revealed that Millennials are actually more engaged in the com-
munity than their parent’s generation (Kiesa et al., 2007). In Canada, 46 percent of
the population aged 15 and over volunteered in the year of 2007 and the highest
rates of volunteering were found among young Canadians (Statistics Canada, 2009).
Volunteerism among American college students has reached a high record; with
intended participation in community service being 30.8 percent (Pryor et al., 2010).

As Emma’s parents recalled, “When Emma was growing up, we took on lots of commu-
nity volunteer activities such as cleaning up the beach and helping young children at
the elementary school learn to read. We felt that it was important to provide good exam-
ples for Emma to follow and it worked. As a teenager Emma followed in our footsteps
and started a project with her friends to help poor African orphans.”
468  Chapter 11 Morality

Parents can encourage prosocial behavior in their older children and adoles-
cents when they go to religious services regularly (Bartkowski et al., 2008; Saroglou,
2013). This encourages the children to go to church as well (Regnerus et al., 2004),
particularly if both mother and father attend (Elder & Conger, 2000), and children
and parents who go to church are more prosocial in the community (Van Cappellen
et al., 2016).
Peers and friends also influence children’s prosocial behavior. In general, like
“birds of a feather,” children flock together with others who are similar to them.
Children who are not very prosocial spend their time with peers who lack a spirit of
kindness; highly prosocial children play with peers who are kind and cooperative.
As a result of this “prosocial segregation,” children who are not particularly gener-
ous or helpful have few chances to learn prosocial practices.
However, if given the chance, peers can act as models of prosocial behavior. In
one study, preschoolers who were exposed to prosocial peers at the beginning of
the school year were observed to engage in more prosocial peer interactions later in the
year (Fabes et al., 2002). Moreover, prosocial behavior is often reciprocal. Preschoolers
who initiated more prosocial behavior toward their peers received more prosocial
behavior from peers a year later (Persson, 2005). Friendship choices matter too.
Children with friends who were rated as more prosocial than themselves, were rated
as more helpful and considerate 2 years later, whereas children with friends who
were rated as less prosocial showed diminished prosocial behavior (Wentzel et al.,
2004). Adolescents whose close friends were more prosocial increased more in their
prosocial goals and behavior over a 1-year period, especially if their relationship
was very positive and they interacted frequently (Barry & Wentzel, 2006). Finally, as
adolescents get older, friends become more important than parents in determining
whether they volunteer to help others or not (van Goethem et al., 2014).
Teachers also can influence children’s prosocial behavior (Jennings &
Greenberg, 2009). Training elementary school teachers to encourage and reward
children’s prosocial behavior as part of a schoolwide violence-prevention effort (the
PeaceBuilders Program) led to increases in students’ reports of their own prosocial
behavior 1 year later (Flannery et al., 2003). And the very simple intervention of
having middle school teachers ask 7th graders to reflect on and write about their
three most important values increased students’ prosocial feelings and behaviors
for a period of several months (Thomaes et al., 2012).
Television is yet another learning medium for prosocial behavior (Calvert, 2015).
As we pointed out in Chapter 9, “Schools, Mentors, and Media,” when children
watch programs focused on understanding the feelings of others, expressing sym-
pathy, and helping, they learn general rules about prosocial behavior and apply that
learning to interactions with their peers. This is especially true for children whose
parents watch the programs with them and encourage altruistic behavior (Mares &
Woodward, 2001). The links between prosocial media images and children’s
prosocial behaviors is evident across a variety of cultures (Australia, China, Croatia,
Germany, Japan, Romania, and the United States) (Prot et al., 2013).
Finally, pets offer an opportunity for children to learn prosocial behavior. Young
children who have a dog or a cat at home have been found to have higher scores
on measures of prosocial behavior and empathy, especially if they have a bond with
their pet (Toeplitz et al., 1995; Zhou et al., 2010). In fact, even playing with and
caring for a virtual pet online for 3 weeks increased children’s empathy and proso-
cial attitudes in one experiment (Tsai & Kaufman, 2010)!

Cultural influences In some cultures, children are given a major responsibil-

ity for taking care of siblings and performing household tasks. In rural areas of
 Prosocial and Altruistic Behavior  469

non-Western countries, social interactions and prosocial behaviors are guided by

interpersonal responsibilities aimed at benefiting the community, while, in western
societies, prosocial actions are guided by an emphasis on personal choice (Koster
et al., 2015). Cross-cultural studies conducted in Mexico, Japan, India, and Kenya
suggest that children who perform more domestic chores and spend more time
caring for their infant brothers, sisters, and cousins are more altruistic (Whiting &
Edwards, 1988). Similar results have been found in cultures that stress communal
values, such as the Aitutaki of Polynesia, the Papago Indian tribe in Arizona, the
Matsigenka, a traditional, egalitarian community in the Amazon, and many Asian
cultures (Chen, 2000; Eisenberg et al., 2006; Zaff et al., 2003). Children raised in
communal Israeli kibbutzim, which stress prosocial and cooperative values, are more
prosocial than their city-reared peers (Aviezer et al., 1994), and Mexican American
children are more prosocial than European American children (Knight & Carlo,
2012) until they grow older and are acculturated to U.S. norms (de Guzman &
Carlo, 2004). Latino adolescents who retain a commitment to their native Latino
roots are more prosocial than those who do not (Davis et al., 2015).

Empathy and perspective taking Two final important contributors to prosocial

behavior are empathy and perspective taking (Eisenberg et al., 2015; M. L. Hoffman,
2000). By the time they are 2 years old, children have the capacity to empathize with
another person’s emotional state. Another person’s expression of distress elicits a
similar emotion in a child who is watching. This empathic ability often motivates
children to engage in prosocial actions that relieve not only the other person’s dis-
tress but also the child’s own emotional upset.
Prosocial acts that result in the other person’s having positive feelings can
vicariously produce similar positive emotions in the helping child. In one study,
children could help an adult in three different contexts (Svetlova et al., 2010).
One context was simply instrumental; for example, the experimenter was clipping
pieces of fabric to a clothesline and dropped a clothespin out of reach; the proso-
cial behavior was for the child to hand the clothespin to the adult. The second
context required empathy; for example, an experimenter placed a hairclip on a
tray near the child and left the room; another adult then entered the room with
her hair in her eyes, sat on the floor out of reach of the tray, and demonstrated her
frustration and distress with actions, moans, and sighs as she tries unsuccessfully
to move her messy hair away from her face; the child’s prosocial behavior was to hand
the hairclip to the adult. The third context was altruistic; the tasks were the same as
the second context but involved the child’s own objects. Both 18-month-olds and
30-month-olds helped readily in the instrumental tasks. However, empathic helping
was significantly more difficult than instrumental helping for 18-month-olds and
required more communication from the adult about her needs. Altruistic helping
was the most difficult at both ages.
Findings suggest that over the second year of life, prosocial behavior develops
from relying on actions and explicit communications to understanding others’ emo-
tions and feeling empathy (Svetlova et al., 2010). Researchers have also found that
children who are particularly empathic are also more prosocial (Eisenberg et al.,
2015). Even when empathy is elicited in the lab (i.e., hearing about a child who
lost a dog) children behave in a more prosocial manner (Williams et al., 2014). The
relation between empathy and prosocial behavior is found in a variety of cultures
including Italy, Japan, Turkey, as well as the United States (Asakawa & Matsuoka,
1987; Bandura et al., 2003; Kumru & Edwards, 2003; Vitaglione & Barnett, 2003).
Countries which are more collectivistic in orientation rather than individualistic are
generally higher in empathy and prosocial behavior (Chopik et al., 2016).
470  Chapter 11 Morality

Researchers have also found links between prosocial behavior and the capacity
for perspective taking (Eisenberg et al., 2015; Farrant et al., 2012; Knafo et al., 2011;
Strayer & Roberts, 2004). Children who are able to take another person’s perspec-
tive are more prosocial than those who don’t have this ability. And perspective tak-
ing can be improved. Preschoolers who are trained to be better perspective takers
show greater prosocial behavior (Cigala et al., 2015). However, perspective-taking
ability alone may not be enough to produce prosocial behavior if a child doesn’t
have the motivation or the social assertiveness necessary to act prosocially. Several
researchers have found that children who demonstrated perspective-taking ability
and were socially assertive or sympathetic toward others were more prosocial than
children who were good at perspective taking alone. In one study, for example, the
children who donated the most money to help a child who was burned in a fire were
the ones who had good perspective-taking ability and, in addition, were sympathetic
and understood the value of money (Knight et. al., 1994). In another study, juvenile
delinquent adolescents who were more prosocial were more concerned with, could
identify with, and understood a victim’s situation, feelings, and perspective (Stams
et al., 2008).
In the final analysis, prosocial behavior is best viewed as multidetermined. A
number of biological influences, including neurological and genetic factors, as well
as environmental influences, including family, peers, and culture, all need to be
considered to understand variations in children’s prosocial behavior.

earning from Living Leaders: Elliot Turiel

customs and for his discovery of the different
types of social experiences that contribute to
different domains of judgment. His formulation of
social domain theory, a framework that recog-
Courtesy of Elliot Turiel

nizes the different domains of social develop-

ment, is his proudest accomplishment. His recent
work concerns how people deal with institu-
tionalized injustices that go against their moral
judgments. His interest in morality and justice was
inspired by his own early childhood experiences
in Greece during World War II when he benefited
Elliot Turiel is Jerome A. Hutto Professor of Edu- from the actions of individuals who were willing
cation at the University of California, Berkeley. to resist the social system and combat persons
After deciding to be a psychologist in his junior in power and authority who were engaging in
year of college, his career path was set during serious injustices. Turiel is esteemed around the
graduate school at Yale when he discovered globe for his work; he is past president of the
Lawrence Kohlberg’s influential work on children’s Jean Piaget society and an honorary member of
moral reasoning. His goal since then has been the Italian Society for Research in Child Develop-
to discover how human beings develop under- ment. His hope for the future is that researchers
standings of right and wrong and how morality will take more seriously the capacity of humans
can be distinguished from other types of norms for reasoning and making moral choices. Finally,
and preferences. He is widely recognized for his he cautions the field about drawing premature
pioneering insight that morality is distinguished conclusions about psychological phenomena
early in childhood from social conventions and and findings from neuroscience.
 Prosocial and Altruistic Behavior  471

Further Reading implications because it helps parents understand

Turiel, E. (2015). Moral development. In R. Lerner (Series Ed.), why they have conflicts with their adolescent
& W. F. Overton & P. C. M. Molenaar (Vol. Eds.), Handbook children and how they can best handle these
of child psychology, Vol. 1: Theory and Method (7th ed.,
pp. 484–522). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
disputes.
Smetana hopes that in the future researchers
will integrate the study of cultural and ethnic
Judith G. Smetana variations in development with the study of basic
developmental processes. She received an early
career award from the Foundation for Child
Development and recently completed a term as
secretary of the Society for Research in Child
Development.

Courtesy of Judith G. Smetana Further Reading

Smetana, J. G., Jambon, M., & Ball, C. (2014). The social
domain approach to children’s moral and social judg-
ments. In M. Killen & J. G. Smetana (Eds.), Handbook of
moral development (2nd ed., pp. 23–45). Mahwah, NJ:
Taylor & Francis.

Grazyna Kochanska
Judith Smetana, Professor of Psychology at the
University of Rochester, earned a bachelor’s
degree from the University of California at
Berkeley and master’s and doctoral degrees from

Courtesy of Grazyna Kochanska

the University of California at Santa Cruz. The
overall purpose of her research is to determine
how people form ideas about right and wrong
and make moral choices.
In the 1970s and 1980s, she published widely
on women’s decision making about abortion.
Since then, she has written about preschoolers’
understanding of right and wrong and how they
distinguish between moral imperatives (stealing is
wrong) and social conventions (boys don’t wear Grazyna Kochanska is Professor of Develop-
dresses). She is conducting studies of disclosure mental Psychology at the University of Iowa. Her
and secrecy in adolescent–parent relationships proudest accomplishment is that she overcame
including a daily-diary study of Latino American, the disadvantages and difficulties of arriving in
African American, and European American high the United States from Poland and was able to
school students. She is also interested in selfish- achieve success. With her PhD from the Univer-
ness and selflessness and how spirituality, religios- sity of Warsaw she obtained a position at the
ity, compassionate love, and concepts of social National Institutes of Health in Washington, D.C.,
justice are related to adolescents’ civic involve- where she pursued an interest in social develop-
ment and service on behalf of others. Experience ment, particularly moral behavior. Her focus was
with her own children shaped some of her on how children develop a conscience—an
research on selfishness: “It was striking to me how inner sense of right and wrong that becomes
my kids were cited in their high school as the kind an effective guide for conduct—and why some
of kids who go out of their way to help other children become callous, disruptive, and antiso-
people, and yet at home they didn’t always cial while others become rule abiding, respon-
act that way with me.” Her work has practical sible, prosocial, and regulated. In a series of
472  Chapter 11 Morality

longitudinal studies, she showed how family inter- been engaged in trying to understand the
action patterns and children’s temperaments development of prosocial behavior in children
contribute to the development of conscience. for several decades. Her graduate studies at the
She believes that in the future, research in University of California at Berkeley and her early
social-emotional development will involve a book The Roots of Prosocial Behavior in Children,
richer integration of constructs measured at made her one of the world’s leading figures in
multiple levels—from biological to ecological— this area. Her specific goal is to understand the
and an in-depth understanding of developmen- factors that account for individual differences in
tal mechanisms and processes over time. Her children’s altruism, empathy, and sympathy. She
message for undergraduate students suggests uses multiple methods and designs including
that a research career is not for everyone: “It is psychophysiology, naturalistic observations, lab-
not a leisurely lifestyle. You should ask yourself: Do based experiments, and cross-cultural compari-
you believe you can work very hard all day, every sons. Her work has taken her to China, Indonesia,
day? Are you willing to face constant challenges France, and Brazil in search of commonalities
and setbacks and strive hard to overcome them? and differences in prosocial understanding
Do you enjoy working toward distant, self- and behavior.
imposed goals with little or no immediate One of her proudest achievements was an
gratification? Do you see research activity as a invitation to share her insights about the origins
path of personal commitment rather than ‘work’? of altruism and compassion with the Buddhist
If you answered ‘yes’ to these questions—go for it! spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama, in India. A
If they gave you pause—choose another career.” selection of dialogues from this conference
appears in Visions of Compassion: Western
Further Reading Scientists and Tibetan Buddhists Examine Human
Kochanska, G., Brock, R. L., & Boldt, L. J. (2017). A cascade Nature. She is the founding editor of Child
from disregard for rules of conduct at preschool age to Development Perspectives, a journal devoted to
parental power assertion at early school age to antiso-
cial behavior in early preadolescence: Interplay with summaries of new and emerging topics, and is
the child’s skin conductance level. Development and the recipient of several awards for her scholarly
Psychopathology, 29, 875–885. work including the 2007 Ernest R. Hilgard Award
for Career Contribution to General Psychology
Nancy Eisenberg from the American Psychological Association. Her
advice : “We need to better understand the
factors that affect if children and adults have
sympathy for, and act in moral ways toward,
people who are not in their ingroup (e.g., family,
Courtesy of Nancy Eisenberg

friends, people like themselves), and factors that

relate to the degree to which people are likely to
view strangers and those different from them as
out-group members.”

Further Reading
Eisenberg, N., Spinrad, T. L., & Knafo-Noam, A. (2015). Proso-
cial development. In M. E. Lamb & C. Garcia Coll (Vol.
Eds.) and R. M. Lerner (Series Ed.), Handbook of Child
Nancy Eisenberg is Regents Professor of Psychol- Psychology and Developmental Science: Vol. 3. Social,
Emotional, and Personality Development (7th ed.,
ogy at Arizona State University, where she has pp. 610–658). New York: Wiley.
 Chapter Summary  473

Chapter Summary
Components of Moral Development
• Three aspects of moral development are cognition, behavior, and emotion.
Moral Judgment
• Piaget and Kohlberg proposed theories of moral development involving stages
through which children progress as their cognitive capacities increase.
• In Piaget’s premoral stage, young children show little concern for rules. In the
moral realism stage, children judge rightness and wrongness based on imma-
nent justice and objective consequences and believe that rules are unchanging
and unquestionable. In the moral reciprocity stage, children recognize inten-
tionality and the arbitrariness of social rules.
• Piaget underestimated children’s abilities: Young children can distinguish
between intentions and consequences if material is presented in a less complex
manner than he used.
• In Kohlberg’s preconventional level of development, moral judgment is based
on the desire to avoid punishment (Stage 1) or gain rewards (Stage 2). At the
conventional level, moral judgment is based on conformity to obtain approval
(Stage 3) or to comply with society’s rules (Stage 4). At the postconventional
level, moral judgment is based on society’s consensus about human rights
(Stage 5) or abstract principles of justice (Stage 6). Moral judgment continues
to develop in adulthood, but few individuals reach the postconventional level.
• Kohlberg’s theory was criticized because it ignored the effects of cultural and
historical circumstances. The theory has been expanded to include interper-
sonal caring and civil rights.
• Turiel’s social domain theory suggested that moral reasoning is one of several
domains of social knowledge. Other domains include social conventions (e.g.,
knowledge about table manners) and the psychological domain (personal pref-
erences, prudential concerns, and knowledge about self and others). Children
learn quite early to distinguish among these domains. They judge violations of
moral rules as being worse than violations in other domains because the for-
mer result in harm to another person and violate norms of justice and fairness.
• Moral reasoning often involves multiple domains. Moral considerations gener-
ally take priority over social-conventional and personal issues.
Moral Behavior
• Moral behavior is more likely to be related to moral judgment in older children
and when the person views the issue as moral rather than social-conventional
or personal.
• Self-regulation is the ability to inhibit impulses and behave in accord with social
and moral rules in the absence of external control.
• The development of self-regulation is fostered by a positive, responsive mother–
child relationship and a temperament characterized by active inhibition and
effortful control.
• There is a high degree of consistency in children’s moral or immoral behavior
across time and situations. However, factors such as fear of detection, peer sup-
port for deviant behavior, and the importance of the outcome for the child do
influence children’s willingness to cheat, lie, or steal.
Moral Emotions
• Emotions such as remorse, shame, and guilt are frequent responses to commit-
ted or anticipated moral transgressions.
474  Chapter 11 Morality

• Girls and children with fearful temperaments are more likely to experience
moral emotions.
• Parents encourage children’s development of moral emotions by providing
a warm and supportive climate in the home and offering emotion-charged
explanations when children violate a rule.
• Moral emotions are related to moral behavior beginning at age 3 or 4.
• Cognitive, behavioral, and emotional aspects of moral development co-occur,
interact, and sometimes even conflict. Whether children define a dilemma as
personal, conventional, or moral (a cognitive process) influences how they act
(behavior) and how they feel (emotion).
Prosocial and Altruistic Behavior
• Helping, sharing, and empathizing appear by the time children are 2. Altruis-
tic behavior appears later in development.
• Individual differences in styles of prosocial behavior are relatively stable over
time.
• Children’s prosocial reasoning develops through a number of stages before it
becomes based on internalized values and norms.
• Girls tend to be kinder and more considerate than boys.
• Evidence of helping and sharing in infrahuman animals suggests that evolu-
tion has prepared us for prosocial behavior. Genetic factors influence indi-
vidual differences in prosocial behavior.
• Parents, peers, television, pets, and culture all influence the likelihood of chil-
dren’s acting prosocially.
• Empathy and perspective taking contribute to children’s capacity for prosocial
and altruistic behavior.

Key Terms
altruistic behavior internalized reasoning prosocial behavior
conscience moral absolutism prosocial reasoning
conventional level moral realism psychological domain
delay of gratification moral reciprocity self-regulation
empathic reasoning needs-oriented reasoning social-conventional domain
hedonistic reasoning postconventional level sympathy
immanent justice preconventional level
internalize premoral stage

At th e M ov i e s

Many movies illuminate moral issues. They vividly convey moral reasoning. His leadership and example inspired
moral—or immoral—acts, portray moral and immoral many people and many governments throughout the world
characters, and provoke the audience to think deeply about to have higher levels of morality. Another film about a moral
morality. Those noted here are just a few of such movies. leader is Selma (2014), which follows the events leading up
Gandhi (1982) is a biography of Mahatma Gandhi, the man to 1965’s momentous Selma-to-Montgomery civil rights
who used nonviolent civil disobedience to end the subju- march organized by Martin Luther King Jr.’s campaign
gation of the Indian people. Gandhi was one of the few for voters’ rights for all races. Other movies focus on the
individuals whom Kohlberg considered to exemplify the moral behavior of less known individuals. A Dry White Season
abstract principles of justice and equality found in Stage 6 (1989) is the story of a white man in South Africa who is
 Key Terms  475

awakened to the brutality and injustice of apartheid. Hotel through empathy, cooperation, and concern about the lives
Rwanda (2004) focuses on the hotel manager who pro- of other people.
tected more than 1,200 people from killers’ machetes in Moral issues are not always embedded in stories
the Rwandan genocide in 1994. Sophie Scholl: The Final Days about life and death, crime, and crisis; however, they are
(2005) follows college student Sophie Scholl’s last 6 days also expressed in fiction and fantasy. Groundhog Day (1993)
from the time she was arrested for distributing anti-Nazi is a hilarious movie with a moral message: Doing good has
leaflets until she was found guilty of treason and executed. benefits. Pay It Forward (2000) has the same message. The
All these true stories challenge you to evaluate your own pay-it-forward concept came from the personal experience
strength of moral character. Would you risk your life the of the woman who wrote the novel and adapted it for the
way these people did? screen. When her car caught fire at the side of a road, two
A movie that contrasts different levels of moral men put out the fire, but before she could thank them,
reasoning in the United States is Gone Baby Gone (2007). A they disappeared. She later returned the favor by helping
young child has been kidnapped, and a massive search is a woman stranded at the side of the road, and instead of
conducted to find her. The child’s aunt enlists the aid of a accepting thanks, she asked the stranger to pay it forward to
private detective. The movie contrasts the absolute moral the next person in need of help. Although this movie is pure
standard espoused by that detective: “Murder’s wrong, plain Hollywood, the notion of paying it forward reinforces the
and simple,” with the situational moral standard expressed idea that individuals are responsible for the welfare of the
by some police officers: “Depends on who you’re killing.” community and encourages an optimistic and prosocial out-
This movie is more than just a crime drama about the uneth- look on life. Today, the Pay It Forward Foundation focuses
ical methods by which some cops solve crimes; it is a moral on inspiring and assisting young people to make a positive
tale suggesting the superiority of developing community contribution to society.
 CHAPTE
C H APT E R 12

Aggression
Insult and Injury

Jason wants to get on a swing in the preschool

playground, so he pushes Tom off. Cindy spreads
a rumor about Hannah, and as a result, Hannah
Erich Auerbach/Hulton Archive/Getty Images, Inc.

is excluded from the junior high school lunch

group. A 14-year-old in Moses Lake, Washington,
walks into a math class armed with a high-
powered rifle and two handguns, opens fire,
and kills the teacher and two students. These
three examples illustrate children’s aggression.
In this chapter, we discuss the types and causes
of aggression and how aggression can be
controlled.

Aggression comes in many forms: some merely annoying, others injurious or even
deadly. What is the common thread that unites such diverse actions? The term
aggression refers to behavior that is intended to and in fact does harm another per-
son by inflicting pain or injury. The notion of intention is crucial: It separates acts of
aggression from the actions of doctors and dentists who must at times cause pain
to preserve and protect people’s health. Of course, a definition that involves intent
is problematic because it is sometimes difficult to determine whether an action was
intentional or accidental. An alternative definition focuses simply on the form of
the act; for example, biting, kicking, swatting, and punching would be considered
aggressive. Ethologists Konrad Lorenz and Nikolaas Tinbergen used the term this
way to describe the actions of animals, birds, and fish, but it is more difficult to apply
to humans; for us, sometimes a punch on the shoulder is merely a friendly greet-
ing. Another approach is to focus on the action’s outcome; if a person is harmed
or injured, the behavior would be classified as aggression regardless of the hitter’s
intention. This definition has problems, too. It includes accidental injuries, which
most people would not consider to be the result of aggression, but not behavior

476
 Types of Aggression  477

intended to cause harm that results in no injury. The best approach is to consider
the aggressor, the victim, and the community: An act is aggressive if the aggres-
sor intends it to harm the victim, the victim perceives it to be harmful, and it is
considered aggressive according to the norms of the community. People use local
standards in applying the term aggression just as courts and jurors use local standards
to judge guilt in criminal actions (Dodge, Coie, et al., 2006). Understanding the fac-
tors that determine whether an act is considered aggressive is important because the
way we label actions influences the way we react to them.

Types of Aggression
Aggression can be categorized into different types. First, the function of aggression
may be reactive or proactive. A desire to achieve a specific goal motivates proactive
aggression. For example, a younger child hits another child to get a toy or pushes
the other child off a swing in order to use it; an older child bullies a classmate to
achieve the goal of increased social power. This type of aggression is also sometimes
referred to as instrumental aggression because it is instrumental in achieving a goal.
It is often premeditated and calculating. Reactive aggression occurs in response to
a threat, attack, or frustration. For example, a child hits another child who has just
insulted him or her or calls the other child a bad name. This type of aggression is
usually motivated by anger or hostility, and for this reason is sometimes called hostile
aggression. It is often impulsive.
Second, aggression has different forms. Physical aggression involves inflicting
physical damage or discomfort on another person by hitting, shoving, poking, or
shooting. Verbal aggression is using words to inflict pain: yelling, insulting, ridicul-
ing, humiliating, name-calling, arguing, and teasing. Relational aggression refers to
excluding others from a social group, hurtfully manipulating or sabotaging their
Erich Auerbach/Hulton Archive/Getty Images, Inc.

A direct physical attack

such as this may be what
we think of first when we
hear the word aggression, but
more subtle forms of mean
behavior are also common in
childhood.
478  Chapter 12 Aggression

social relationships, or damaging their social position (Crick & Grotpeter, 1995;
Underwood, Galen, et al., 2001). Social aggression includes many of the same
behaviors as relational aggression and also specifically includes hurtful nonverbal
gestures, such as rolling the eyes or sticking out the tongue, (Coyne et al., 2011;
Underwood, 2004). Each of these types of aggression can be expressed either
directly or indirectly (Dodge, Coie, et al., 2006). Direct aggression means that the
attack (with either physical means or words) is made directly to the person. Indi-
rect aggression involves inflicting pain by destroying the person’s property, getting
another person to carry out the attack, or damaging the person’s social standing
through rumors or lies; the perpetrator’s identity is not known (Eisner & Malti,
2015; see Table 12.1). Although it is possible to distinguish among these different
types of aggression, children who are aggressive tend to use all of them; the correla-
tion between children’s frequency of indirect (or relational) aggression and direct
aggression in a meta-analysis of 98 studies was an exceptionally high 0.76 (Card
et al., 2008).
Aggression can be maladaptive or adaptive. Although it is common to focus on
the maladaptive aspects, ethological and evolutionary theories suggest that aggres-
sion can have adaptive value because of its role in protection, survival, and even
developmental growth (Bjorklund & Hawley, 2014; Hawley, 2003b; Hawley et al.,
2007). In early childhood, aggressive interchanges can teach young children how
to ­settle conflicts and disputes and promote their social–cognitive growth (Hawley,
2003b; Vaughn et al., 2003). In middle childhood, aggression can be used as a way to
attract peers and impress them with the aggressor’s toughness (Rodkin et al., 2000).
In adolescence, demonstration of aggressive prowess may be a key to maintaining
membership or rising in the status hierarchy of a gang (Prinstein & Cillessen, 2003;
Thornberry et al., 2003). These adaptive advantages may be mixed with maladaptive
outcomes, however: Gaining status with peers can lead to increases in deviant activi-
ties and increased contact with authorities including law enforcement.
In brief, aggression is a multifaceted set of behaviors varying in form, function,
and adaptiveness. In this chapter, we discuss the ways different forms of aggression
change over the course of development, the causes and consequences of aggres-
sive behavior, and strategies for reducing or preventing aggression in children and
youth.

TABLE 12.1

Examples of Direct and Indirect Physical, Verbal, and Relational Aggression

Type Direct Indirect
Physical aggression Pushing, hitting, kicking, punching, Destroying a person’s property, getting someone
or shoving a person else to physically hurt the person
Verbal aggression Insulting, putting down, name-calling, Gossiping, saying mean things behind a person’s
or teasing a person back, urging someone else to verbally abuse the
person
Relational aggression Excluding, threatening to stop liking Spreading rumors or lies, exposing secrets about
a person a person, ignoring or betraying the person,
building an alliance that excludes the person

Sources: Dodge, Coie, et al., 2006; Eisner & Malti, 2015; Hay, 2017; Ostrov & Crick, 2007; Underwood, Galen, et al., 2001.
 Patterns of Aggression  479

Patterns of Aggression
In this section, we discuss patterns of aggression related to age, gender, and stability
over time.

Developmental Changes in Aggression

Age brings about dramatic differences in the frequency, forms, and functions of
aggression (Eisner & Malti, 2015; see Table 12.2). Aggression in infancy, which usu-
ally begins by the end of the first year, most often involves squabbles over toys and
is therefore considered proactive or instrumental (Caplan et al., 1991; Hay, 2017).
Aggression in these earliest disputes is physical and direct—hitting, tugging, grab-
bing, and poking—not verbal or indirect. Over the next year, conflicts over posses-
sions continue and the frequency of physical aggression increases. In one study, 87
percent of peer encounters at 21 months were marked by physical conflict (Hay &
Ross, 1982) but declines after this age (Hay et al., 2011; Hay, 2017).
During the preschool period, proactive aggression continues to be more frequent
than reactive or hostile aggression, but instances of reactive aggression occur as
well (Ostrov & Crick, 2007). Verbal aggression begins and becomes more f­ requent
(Caplan et al., 1991). Aggressive outbursts—tantrums, peer conflicts, and sibling
battles—peak in 2- to 3-year-olds but, to the relief of parents everywhere, decline
thereafter (Dodge, Coie, et al., 2006; Tremblay et al., 2005). Most obvious is the

TABLE 12.2

Development of Aggressive Behavior

Infancy: 0–2 years Children express anger and frustration
Some early signs of aggression (pushing, shoving) appear
Differences in irritability predict later aggression
Preschool years: 2–6 years Proactive/instrumental aggression occurs
Expressions of verbal aggression increase
Boys are more physically aggressive than girls
Relational aggression (excluding from playgroup, ignoring) begins to appear
Elementary years: Reactive/hostile aggression occurs
6–10 years Proactive aggression decreases
Boys use both physical aggression and relational aggression
Girls’ reliance on relational aggression becomes more marked
Relational aggression (gossip, rumors) becomes more sophisticated
Physical aggression declines
Aggressive children may do poorly in school and be rejected by peers
Parents’ monitoring becomes important to deter delinquency
Adolescence Aggressive children select aggressive, deviant peer groups
Relational aggression continues (excluding from clique, alliance building)
Violent aggression increases among some youth
Rates of violent behavior are much higher for boys than girls
Hormonal changes are associated with increases in reactive aggression in boys
Individual differences in hormone levels are important determinants of levels of aggression

Note: These age approximations are based on trends identified in research studies. The age at which developmental changes occur in individual chil-
dren varies greatly. Sources: Coie & Dodge, 1998; Dodge, Coie, et al., 2006; Eisner & Malti, 2015; Ostrov & Crick, 2007; Underwood, 2004.
480  Chapter 12 Aggression

decrease in physical aggression. Researchers in the NICHD Study of Early Child

Care and Youth Development identified a clear decline in physical aggression over
the preschool years: Mothers reported that when their children were 2 to 3 years
old, 70 percent hit, pushed, or kicked others, but only 20 percent did so when
they were 4 to 5 years old (NICHD Early Child Care Research Network, 2004a,b).
Children’s increased abilities to regulate and control their actions and to delay
­gratification are linked to these decreases in aggression. Acquiring strategies such
as distracting themselves from an object they want helps children reduce their
impulse to take toys or punch peers. Children who are able to shift their attention
and ignore frustrating stimuli have better anger control and exhibit less aggres-
sion (Gilliom et al., 2002).
The decline in physical aggression continues through elementary school. Only
14 percent of children in the Study of Early Child Care and Youth Development
exhibited physical aggression when they were in first grade and only 12 percent
did so in third grade (NICHD Early Child Care Research Network, 2004a,b). In
this age period, children are able to attain most of their goals without using aggres-
sive tactics. They can set a goal, decide on a plan of action, and monitor progress
toward the goal because development of their prefrontal cortex increases their
executive-functioning capacity (Barkley et al., 2002; Bjorklund, 2011). For this
reason, in this age period aggression changes from predominantly proactive to
predominantly reactive. Instead of using aggression to gain or maintain control
over toys and territory, children increasingly use it to settle interpersonal scores
that arise from perceived threats and personal insults. They realize that their
peers may act purposely to hurt them and make them feel bad, and they become
increasingly likely to retaliate (Gifford-Smith & Rabiner, 2004). Direct verbal
insults and name-calling and indirect verbal aggression by gossiping or saying
mean things behind someone’s back become more common in this period. Rela-
tional aggression also becomes more frequent as children threaten not to play
with other children or spread rumors and lies about them (Coyne et al., 2011;
Underwood, 2003).
During adolescence, physical aggression continues to decline in frequency for
most children (Cleverley et al., 2012). Verbal insults and taunts persist and more
sophisticated forms of relational aggression such as forming cliques and building
coalitions increase (Coyne et al., 2011). For a small minority of adolescents uptick
in serious aggressive incidents occurs. In part, this reflects adolescents’ lack of a
fully mature prefrontal cortex (Steinberg, 2007). The percentage of individuals who
first engage in a serious violent offense, such as aggravated assault and robbery or
rape that results in injury and may involve a weapon, increases from almost zero
in the preteen years to 5 percent at age 16 (Dodge, Coie, et al., 2006). The overall
prevalence rate of violent offenses also increases in adolescence, peaking at age 17,
when 19 percent of boys and 12 percent of girls report having committed at least
one serious violent attack. African American and Latino adolescents are particularly
likely to be arrested and incarcerated for such offenses (Guerra & Smith, 2006).
Minority youth make up 69 percent of the youth in the juvenile justice system (Chil-
dren’s Defense Fund, 2017). African American youth make up only 16 percent of
the adolescent population but they account for 30 percent of juvenile court refer-
rals, 38 percent of youth in juvenile placement, and 58 percent of youth in adult
prison; they are incarcerated at six times the rate of white youth (Children’s Defense
Fund, 2011; Hodgdon, 2008). Limited economic opportunities, dangerous neigh-
borhoods, and a color-biased legal system all contribute to these ethnic disparities.
 Patterns of Aggression  481

Gender Differences in Aggression

Gender is another important source of differences in aggression. Few differences
appear in infancy, but by the time they are toddlers, boys are more likely than girls
to instigate and to be involved in direct physical aggressive incidents, such as hitting,
pushing, and tripping, as well as overt verbal attacks, such as name-calling, taunting,
and threatening (Card et al., 2008; Hay et al., 2011).

The kid up the street is harassing Aiden. Yesterday when Aiden refused to carry his
books home for him, he ground a baseball bat into Aiden’s toe.

This difference is evident across all socioeconomic groups in the United States and
across a wide variety of other countries, including Great Britain, Canada, China,
Columbia, Switzerland, Israel, Italy, Ethiopia, Kenya, India, Japan, Jordan, the
­Philippines, Mexico, New Zealand, Spain, Sweden, and Thailand (Archer, 2004;
Broidy et al., 2003; Lansford et al., 2012).
The forms of aggression boys and girls favor also differ in important ways.
Even among 17- to 29-month-olds, boys are more physically aggressive than girls
(­Baillargeon et al., 2007), and these differences persist throughout the preschool
years (Crick et al., 2006; Lussier et al., 2012). In a six-site cross-national study,
researchers found that on average, boys were more physically aggressive than girls
from childhood through adolescence, and even the most aggressive girls were
not as aggressive as the most aggressive boys (Broidy et al., 2003). In the National
­Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth in Canada, about 4 percent of the
boys exhibited frequent physical aggression from age 5 to age 11, but for girls only
2 percent exhibited frequent physical aggression at age 5, and by age 11, less than
1 percent did (Lee et al., 2007). Hence, the results showed a decreasing trend in
the prevalence of physical aggression for girls but not for boys. In adolescence,
approximately five times as many boys as girls were arrested for violent crimes such
as aggravated assault and criminal homicide in a longitudinal study of children
in New Zealand from age 5 to age 21, and these marked differences in physical
aggression continued into adulthood (Moffitt et al., 2001). For comparable rates
of self-reported violent crimes in the United States see Figure 12.1 (Coie & Dodge,
1998). Recent findings continue to support this profile: males vastly outnumber
females in arrests (70 percent), particularly for violent crimes (80 percent) (U.S.
Department of Justice, 2014). In addition, men who were aggressive boys were
likely to commit violent offenses including drunk driving, spousal abuse, and
criminal traffic violations, whereas women who were aggressive girls were likely
to commit nonviolent offenses, such as drug use (Bushman & Huesmann, 2001;
Huesmann et al., 1984).
Boys’ aggression exceeds girls’ in other ways too. Rates of nonphysical antisocial
behavior, including lying, cheating, and stealing, were higher for boys than for
girls in a study of children in the United States and 12 other countries (Crijnen
et al., 1997) and in the longitudinal study in New Zealand (Moffitt et al., 2001).
Boys are also about twice as likely as girls to violate the rights of others and break
age-­appropriate social norms and rules (Dodge, Coie, et al., 2006), and they are
more likely than girls to retaliate after being attacked (Darvill & Cheyne, 1981).
Although girls are sometimes the victims of male aggression in childhood (­Rodkin &
Berger, 2008) and in later dating and romantic relationships (Archer, 2002;
­Fernández-Fuertes & Fuertes, 2010), boys are more likely to attack other boys than
482  Chapter 12 Aggression

Self-reported serious violent crimes (percent)

30
Males
25 Females

20

15

10

0
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Age (in years)

FIGURE 12.1 Self-reported rates of violent crimes among adolescents and young adults. Although more males than
females commit violent offenses such as aggravated assault (assault with intent to commit a crime), robbery, and rape,
girls’ involvement in criminal behavior peaks when they are about 2 years younger than boys.
Source: Coie, J. D., & Dodge, K. A. (1998). Aggression and antisocial behavior. In W. Damon (Series Ed.), & N. Eisenberg (Vol. Ed.),
Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 3. Social, emotional, and personal development (5th ed., pp. 779–862). New York: Wiley.

to attack a girl (Barrett, 1979). Teen dating violence is clearly a cause for concern
as well. According to a national survey in 2013, among students who dated,
20.9 percent of female students and 10.4 percent of male students experienced
some form of teen dating violence during the 12 months before the survey (Vagi
et al., 2015). Notably, this is a context in which aggression is often bidirectional,
meaning that males also are victims of aggression from females (Langhinrichsen-
Rohling et al., 2012).
Girls are more likely than boys to disapprove of aggression and to anticipate
parents’ disapproval for acting aggressively (Huesmann & Guerra, 1997; Perry
et al., 1989). They are more likely than boys to use strategies such as verbal objec-
tion and negotiation to resolve their conflicts, methods that make the escalation
of a quarrel into overt verbal or physical aggression less likely (Eisenberg et al.,
1994). This does not mean that girls are not aggressive, but they use different
tactics to achieve their goals. In the preschool period, girls use concrete and rel-
atively unsophisticated forms of relational aggression, such as excluding (“You
can’t come to my birthday party.”) or ignoring (covering their ears when a peer is
talking), more often than they use direct verbal or physical aggression (Card et al.,
2008; Nelson et al., 2005). In the elementary school years, girls increase their use
of relational aggression by damaging or destroying interpersonal relationships
(Card et al., 2008; Cote et al., 2007; Crick et al., 2004; Underwood, 2003). They
might exclude other girls:

I’ll never forget walking home from school on my birthday followed by a group of girls
from my class. As we passed another little girl, I said with a smirk, “We’re going to my
birthday party and you’re not invited.” How could I have said that? What a brat I was.
But she got even later. She borrowed one of my books and never returned it.
 Patterns of Aggression  483

They might also besmirch other girls’ reputations or gossip about their negative
qualities (Dodge, Coie, et al., 2006):

“Did you hear that she really do be stinkin’ sometimes?”

One girl was really vicious in her gossip about someone she disliked:

“Her dad’s a druggie.” “I saw her cheat.” “She’s a thief.”

In middle school, girls prefer to harm others by indirect means of social ostra-
cism rather than direct confrontation, and as girls enter adolescence, they make
increasing use of the aggressive strategy of excluding peers from their social clique
(Crick et al., 1999, 2004; Underwood, 2003; Xie et al., 2005). They use relational
aggression as a way to solidify their status in the group by undermining someone
else’s.
Although girls use relational aggression more often than physical or verbal
aggression, they do not use it more than boys do. Boys use relational aggression
just as much as girls, but they use other aggressive tactics even more (Card et al.,
2008; Pepler et al., 2005; Underwood, 2003). What are the reasons that girls pre-
fer relational slights whereas boys prefer physical slaps? First, girls are more ori-
ented toward social relationships and value social ties more than boys do (Leaper &
­Farkas, 2015). Therefore, a form of aggression that harms social relationships is a
more reasonable social strategy for girls (Crick et al., 1999; Coyne et al., 2011). Sec-
ond, in mid-adolescence, girls’ relational aggression predicts greater liking by boys
(Smith et al., 2010)—an important goal according to evolutionary theory (Artz,
2005; Bjorklund & Pellegrini, 2011). Third, relational aggression is a more socially
acceptable way for girls to be mean (Crick et al., 1999; Dodge, Coie, et al., 2006).
Physical aggression is not viewed as “ladylike.” When boys are physically aggressive,
they are perceived as “behaving like men.”
Relational aggression might not be as blatantly obvious or physically injurious
as punching or pummeling, but it is still a problem. Children know that relational
aggression hurts. Preschool girls and boys think that relational and physical aggres-
sion are equally hurtful and likely to make a person feel sad (Crick et al., 2004).
Older girls continue to view relational aggression as just as hurtful as physical
aggression, but boys believe that physical aggression hurts more (Galen & Under-
wood, 1997; Underwood, 2003). Another problem with relational aggression is that
girls and boys who engage in it, like those who use physical aggression, are more
likely to be rejected by their peers than children who do not (Crick et al., 2004,
2006). Relational aggression also leads to decreases in friendship quality between
friends (Banny et al., 2011). It may lead to later anxiety and depression for girls, to
higher risk-taking for boys, and to more delinquency for both boys and girls (Mar-
shall et al., 2015; Spieker et al., 2012). Clearly, relational aggression has negative
consequences.

Stability of Individual Differences in Aggression

From an early age, some children display more anger and aggression than oth-
ers. Do these children end up being more aggressive later on? In other words,
how stable are individual differences in aggression? Researchers have found that
484  Chapter 12 Aggression

aggression is stable over time for both boys and girls (Cairns & Cairns, 1994; Dodge,
Coie, et al., 2006; Eisner & Malti, 2015; Olweus, 1979). A child who is rated as
being highly aggressive compared with classmates in first grade is likely to be rated
as highly aggressive compared with classmates in 12th grade (Huesmann et al.,
1984) and to exhibit more rule-breaking, internalizing symptoms, and narcissism
at the end of high school (Ehrenreich et al., 2016). Highly aggressive children
even have more trouble with the law, less stable job histories, and more partner
violence in adulthood (Bushman & Huesmann, 2001; Olson & Ip, 2017). Notably,
aggressiveness is as stable as intelligence. Although both physical and relational
aggression are stable, physical aggression is especially so (Vaillancourt, Brendgen,
et al., 2003).

Jason is a poster child for aggression. From the time he was in preschool, he was always
getting into fights with his peers. But unlike most kids, his aggression continued into
adolescence when he got into trouble not just with his classmates but with the law too.
By 16, he had been arrested several times for fighting and stealing. Sometimes stability
is not so great!

However, although aggression is stable, it is not 100 percent so. Only a small
percentage of children are very aggressive in early childhood and maintain this
high level of aggression for their entire lives. In the NICHD Study of Early Child
Care and Youth Development, about 18 percent of children remained consist-
ently high in aggressiveness between toddlerhood and third grade (NICHD Early
Child Care Research Network, 2004a,b). In research in Canada, about 13 percent of
highly aggressive 5-year-olds were still highly aggressive in adolescence (Nagin &
­Tremblay, 1999); more boys (11 percent) than girls (1 percent) remained in the sta-
ble high physical aggression group between 6 and 12 years (Joussemet et al., 2008).
Children who start to behave aggressively early in development and remain
­aggressive—early starters—are at most risk for negative outcomes (Hyde et al., 2015;
Patterson et al., 1989). For example, children who remained aggressive from toddler-
hood to third grade in the NICHD study showed the most severe adjustment problems
at age 12 compared with children who either remained low in aggression or decreased
in aggressiveness (Campbell et al., 2006). Similarly, in the six-site study mentioned ear-
lier, children who displayed high levels of aggression in the early years and consistently
high levels of physical aggression throughout childhood were likely to show both vio-
lent and nonviolent delinquency in adolescence (Broidy et al., 2003). In contrast, late
starters, also referred to as adolescence-onset aggressive youth, are those who began
to act aggressively only in adolescence, engaged in delinquent behavior for a limited
time during their teen years but tended not to do so in adulthood. As Jamie said:

“Acting out by stealing hubcaps and harassing other kids was part of being a teenager,
but as I got older, the thrill of doing this stuff wore off. By the time I graduated, I real-
ized that it was dumb and would really screw up my future so I stopped.”

The late starters probably avoided the social rejection and school failure that
plagued early starters, and this may have protected them. Gender differences are par-
ticularly evident for early starters. Researchers in the New Zealand study found that
almost all the children who began their aggressive behavior early in life were boys
(10 percent boys versus 1 percent girls), whereas those who started later were more
equal by gender (26 percent boys versus 18 percent girls) (Moffitt & Caspi, 2001).
 Patterns of Aggression  485

nto Adulthood: From Childhood Aggression

to Road Rage
Aggression in adulthood girls with temper problems married men with low
includes a wide variety of occupational mobility, were less competent and
behaviors, from reckless driving more ill-tempered as mothers, and were more
to premeditated murder. Violent likely to be divorced (Caspi et al., 1987). A third
road rage and abuse of a spouse or a son or study found that children in Finland who were
daughter are forms of aggression that are more aggressive at age 8 were more likely to
unique to adulthood. Fortunately, overall rates of suffer from drinking problems and unemploy-
aggression decline in early adulthood. In one ment in adulthood (Kokko & Pulkkinen, 2000).
large British sample, for example, David Not every aggressive child becomes an
Farrington (1993) found that the likelihood that a aggressive adult who batters his or her spouse
man would commit a burglary dropped from and speeds on the highway. Researchers have
11 percent at age 18, to 5 percent at age 21, to found that two factors can protect against a
2 percent by age 32. U.S. researchers also found lifelong pattern of aggression. The first factor is a
that aggression decreases between the ages of stable marriage. When an adult who is at risk of
18 and 25 years, and violent crimes decline even becoming a criminal is fortunate enough to find
more after age 35 (Sampson & Laub, 2003). and marry a person—who is socially positive
Adults are expected to rely less on physical force and not aggressive—he or she is less likely to
and more on nonconfrontational methods for commit a crime, engage in violence, or divorce
settling their disputes. They continue to use (Andersen et al., 2015; Rutter, 1989; Sampson &
indirect or relational methods to express aggres- Laub, 2003). Rodney, age 34, reflecting on his
sion (Xie et al., 2005), but these methods are past, mused:
preferable to physical attacks and are less likely
to lead to criminal prosecution. “I used to be a real hot head when I was
Although aggression declines overall, some a kid and a teenager but luckily I married
people are more likely than others to continue Louise who is really calm and even tem-
their aggressive ways. Children who begin their pered. She taught me that there are more
aggressive careers early (early starters) are most constructive ways to deal with stressful situa-
likely to persist in using aggression in adulthood tions. She was right and my life is a lot easier
(Dodge, Coie, et al., 2006; Farrington, 1995). To and more peaceful now.”
illustrate, researchers in one longitudinal study
found that children who were highly aggressive Adults whose partners are involved in deviant or
at age 8 were more likely than their less-­ criminal activity, in contrast, are likely to engage
aggressive peers to abuse their spouse or child, in criminal activity and become more poorly
get a traffic ticket, drive while drunk, and engage adjusted (Giordano et al., 2003; Ronka et al.,
in criminal activities in early adulthood 2001). The second factor that disrupts an aggres-
(Huesmann et al., 1984). In another study, sive trajectory is employment. Having a steady
researchers observed broader consequences of and especially a high occupational level job
early aggression: Boys who had problems with lowers the likelihood of violent criminal activity in
anger and aggression when they were 8 to adulthood; it helps to lift people out of poverty,
10 years old had erratic work lives, held lower- makes it less likely that they will associate
status jobs than their parents, and were more with deviant peers, and enhances their self-
likely to be divorced when they were 40 years old responsibility (Ramakers et al., 2016; Sampson &
compared with their more even-tempered peers; Laub, 2003).
486  Chapter 12 Aggression

Causes of Aggression
What makes some children more aggressive and starts them on an aggressive tra-
jectory? Factors in several domains—biological, environmental, sociocultural, and
sociocognitive—influence development in a transactional, interactive process.
­Figure 12.2 presents a model of aggression that can serve as a guide for understand-
ing these causes.

Biological Origins of Aggressive Behavior

Genetics and aggression Interest in the genetic roots of aggression is enor-
mous, and researchers discover new facts every year. Researchers in one study found
that mothers’ ratings of their 18-month-olds’ physical aggression were more similar
for identical (MZ) twins than nonidentical (DZ) twins, suggesting a genetic predis-
position is involved (Dionne et al., 2003). Studies of adolescents also produced evi-
dence of genetic involvement. Responding to a questionnaire that contained such
items as “Some people think that I have a violent temper,” identical twins rated
themselves more similarly than did fraternal twins (Gottesman & Goldsmith, 1994).
Researchers in the Netherlands, Sweden, and Britain have obtained similar results
(Eley et al., 1999; Van Den Oord et al., 1996). In a Canadian study of twins, the
heritability for social aggression was about 20 percent; for physical aggression, it was
50 percent (Brendgen et al., 2005). A meta-analysis of 42 twin studies and 10 adop-
tion studies revealed a moderate association (effect size = .41) between genetics
and antisocial behavior (Rhee & Waldman, 2002). The antisocial behavior of early

Biological factors Biological factors

Genetic predisposition Psychophysiological reactivity to
Prenatal problems conflict (e.g., anxiety, arousal)
Difficult temperament Hormonal levels
Parenting Neurological deficits
Inconsistency
Coerciveness
Abusiveness
Poor monitoring Sociocognitive processes
Knowledge of norms about
aggression Aggression in
Social information processing adolescence
Peers (e.g., encoding, interpretation)
Rejection
Deviancy
Gangs

Sociocultural context
Sociocultural context Subcultural values/beliefs
Subcultural values/beliefs Impoverished schools
High-risk neighborhood High-risk neighborhoods
Poverty Limited after-school care
Poor child care Exposure to TV violence

FIGURE 12.2 A biopsychological model of the transactional development of aggression is shown, starting with the earliest
age on the left side of the figure and ending with adolescent aggression on the right side.
Source: Copyright © 2010 by the American Psychological Association. Reproduced with permission. Dodge, K. A., & Pettit, G. S. (2003).
A biopsychosocial model of the development of chronic conduct problems in adolescence. Developmental Psychology, 39, 349–371.
The use of APA information does not imply endorsement by APA.
 Causes of Aggression  487

starters is more heritable than that of late starters (Moffitt, 2006). Interestingly, the
impact of these genetic effects seems to be different for youth who live in differ-
ent environments. For example, in one study, the effect of shared environment on
aggression was stronger, and the effect of genetics was weaker, for youth living in
high-risk disadvantaged neighborhoods than for youth living in safer, more affluent
neighborhoods (Tuvblad et al., 2006, Grann, & Lichtenstein, 2006). Interestingly,
these findings suggest that the influence of genetics may play a more powerful role
in when children are raised in a safe, stable environment. Finally, as suggested by
differential susceptibility theory (see Chapter 3, “Biological Foundations”) recent
work has found that adverse life events are only likely to trigger aggression in indi-
viduals with certain gene patterns (Hygen et al., 2015).

Temperament and aggression One way that genes start a child on a path to
aggression is evident soon after birth when parents discover that the infant has an
irritable, irregular, and difficult temperament. Infants with these temperament
traits in the first year of life are more hostile as preschoolers (Bates, 1987). Chil-
dren whose temperaments are noncompliant, overactive, and ill-tempered at age 3
also have more externalizing behavior problems, including physical aggression,
when they are 9 years old (Campbell, 2000). Impulsive temperaments, too, predict
aggressiveness (Raine et al., 1998; Tremblay et al., 1994). Young children who lack
self-control are more likely to become aggressive at an early age and to remain so
(Moffitt & Caspi, 2001); preschool children with less inhibited temperaments score
higher on a combined measure of physical and relational aggression in elementary
school (Park et al., 2005). Among Chinese adolescents, angry and sensation-seeking
temperaments have been linked with higher expressions of direct physical and ver-
bal aggression (Dong-Ping et al., 2012). Another temperament quality linked to
aggression is fearfulness: Fearful toddlers are more likely to persist in aggressiveness
through age 8 compared with toddlers who are less fearful (Shaw et al., 2003). In
brief, aggressiveness is more likely if children have difficult, ill-tempered, impulsive,
or fearful temperaments.

The Neurological correlates of aggression Links have been found between

aggression and neurotransmitters—chemicals in the body that facilitate or inhibit
the transmission of neural impulses within the central nervous system (CNS) (Booij
et al., 2015; Moeller, 2001). Serotonin is one neurotransmitter that is involved in
snapphoto/iStockphoto

An early temperament
characterized by anger
and irritability increases
the likelihood a child
will be aggressive.
488  Chapter 12 Aggression

regulating the activity of the endocrine glands. It affects attention and emotional
states and may be involved in aggression in both animals and humans (Herbert &
Martinez, 2001). Studies with rats and rhesus monkeys have shown that deficits in
CNS serotonin are linked to heightened levels of severe aggression (Ferrari et al.,
2005; Suomi, 2003). Men and women with poor impulse control and high rates of
criminality, explosive aggression, and impulsive violence also have low CNS seroto-
nin (Linnoila & Virkkunen, 1992; Virkkunen et al., 1994). The monoamine oxidase
A (MAOA) gene, which regulates levels of serotonin, is linked with reduced volume
in the prefrontal cortex and the amygdala, brain structures associated with antiso-
cial behavior (Raine, 2008). The link between serotonin and aggression has not
been as clear in research with children, but some studies suggest that children with
low levels of serotonin have higher levels of physical aggression (Halperin et al.,
2006; Mitsis et al., 2000).

Hormonal correlates Testosterone is the major hormone that has been linked to
aggression in nonhuman animals, and the links are evident, although less dramatic,
among humans as well (Carré et al., 2017; Nguyen et al., 2016). Researchers in
the United States observed that adolescent violent offenders have higher levels of
testosterone than nonviolent offenders (Brooks & Reddon, 1996). Researchers in
Sweden, similarly, found that 15- to 17-year-old boys whose blood contained higher
levels of testosterone were more impatient and irritable, and this impatience, in
turn, increased the boys’ readiness to engage in unprovoked and destructive aggres-
sive behavior (Olweus et al., 1988). This study suggested that testosterone has an
indirect effect on aggression; it leads to irritability, and irritability increases aggres-
sive behavior. Another study that demonstrated an indirect effect of testosterone on
aggression was conducted in Canada. Its researchers found that testosterone was
related to larger body mass and this, in turn, was linked to increased physical aggres-
sion (Tremblay et al., 1998).
Perhaps the most convincing evidence that testosterone is related to aggression
comes from an experimental study in which adolescents who were deficient in tes-
tosterone received doses of the hormone (Finkelstein et al., 1997). Increases in
physical aggression and aggressive impulses resulted. Even when the researchers
controlled for such factors as the child’s temperament and the parents’ child-­rearing
practices, hormonal effects were evident. Hormones affect aggression in girls as well
as boys. In one study, researchers discovered that increases in girls’ estradiol (a form
of estrogen) during puberty were positively linked with expressions of anger and
aggression in interactions with parents (Inoff-Germain et al., 1988), and in a meta-
analysis, researchers confirmed that testosterone was linked with aggression in both
boys and girls (Book et al., 2001). Recent evidence suggests that testosterone effects
on aggression in childhood through young adulthood are, in part, due to changes
in the brain (i.e., the amygdala; Nguyen et al., 2016).
The link between testosterone and aggression is not a one-way street, though.
Although increasing testosterone levels increases children’s aggression, the reverse
is also true. Dominance in conflict leads to a rise in testosterone levels. For example,
winners of judo or coin-tossing contests have been observed to have elevated levels
of testosterone after they win, whereas losers show no change in testosterone level
(Dodge, Coie, et al., 2006; McCaul et al., 1992).

Prenatal conditions Conditions in the prenatal environment that lead to physical

problems in the child can also increase the likelihood of later antisocial behavior.
Most notably, smoking by women who are pregnant lowers their babies’ birth weight
 Causes of Aggression  489

and doubles the risk that the children will later exhibit antisocial, aggressive behav-
ior (Fergusson et al., 1998; Weissman et al., 1999). Children are also more aggres-
sive if they were exposed to cocaine prenatally (Bendersky et al., 2006). Finally, high
exposure to serotonin prenatally is linked with less aggression but more anxious
and internalizing behaviors at 6 years of age (Hanley et al., 2015).

Social Influences on the Development of Aggression

The likelihood that children will develop patterns of aggressive behavior also
depends on the environment. In the meta-analysis of 42 twin studies and 10 adop-
tion studies mentioned earlier (Rhee & Waldman, 2002), the researchers found
significant associations between antisocial behavior and children’s environments as
well as their genes. In this section, we explore how family, peers, neighborhoods,
culture, and mass media are related to the development of aggression.

Parents as interactive partners The family provides the first opportunities for
children to learn how to act either aggressively or peacefully. These opportuni-
ties begin in infancy. Children are less likely to become aggressive if they establish
secure relationships with their parents in their first year. If they develop insecure,
especially disorganized, attachments, they are more likely to have aggressive behav-
ior problems when they are 5 to 7 years old (Eisner & Malti, 2015; Lyons-Ruth &
Jacobvitz, 2016; Moss et al., 2006). This is especially true if the family has problems,
for example, is poor or the mother is a single parent and the level of family stress is
high (Dodge, Coie, et al., 2006; Tremblay et al., 2017).
After infancy, if the parents are critical and negative or controlling and limit-
ing of the child’s autonomy the child is more likely to exhibit physical and rela-
tional aggression (Deater-Deckard, 2000; Moffitt et al., 2006; Sandstrom, 2007);
if the parents are warm and supportive children are less likely to be aggressive
(Joussemet et al., 2008; Nelson et al., 2006). A controlling parental style also
contributes to a stable aggressive pattern over time (Joussemet et al., 2008). The
reason for this connection between parenting style and child aggression may be
that aggressive children imitate their parents’ negative behavior or that the par-
ents’ negative emotional expression and limits on autonomy interfere with the
children’s ability to regulate their own emotions, which, in turn, leads to more
aggressive behavior (Eisenberg et al., 2001; Grolnick, 2003). Parents’ harshness
may, in part, be due to marital conflict and hostility (Graham et al., 2012; Minze
et al., 2010).
Parents who are punitive in their discipline of their children can increase their
children’s negativity. In spite of bumper stickers reminding them that “children are
not for hitting,” many parents—94 percent of parents of 3- to 4-year-olds, according
to one estimate—spank their children (Straus & Stewart, 1999). As we suggested in
Chapter 7, “Family,” mild or judicious spanking is not a problem, but severe and
unremitting physical punishment is associated with increases in children’s aggres-
sion (Larzelere & Kuhn, 2005). The impact of physical punishment on children’s
aggressiveness also depends on the quality of the parent–child relationship. Physical
punishment is especially likely to lead to aggressive behavior when the parent–child
relationship lacks warmth (Deater-Deckard & Dodge, 1997) or when the use of this
tactic is unusual in the culture (Lansford et al., 2005). Harsh discipline directed
toward adolescents has long-term consequences as well. Young adults who experi-
enced parents’ aggression in their adolescence were more likely to be aggressive
romantic partners (Cui et al., 2010). Moreover, the links between spanking and
490  Chapter 12 Aggression

aggression across time are evident for Latino and African American families as well
as European American families (Gershoff et al., 2012).
Finally, parents’ attitudes toward aggression are important. When parents are
highly involved with their children and support nonviolent solutions to problems,
their adolescents are less physically aggressive, which suggests that parents can play
a protective role in helping their children control their aggressiveness (Farrell
et al., 2011).

“My mom was really down on aggression. She wouldn’t even let us play with toy guns and
was really strict about not hitting other kids. It worked cuz I seldom get into fights with
other people. Maybe mom was right after all.” (Peter, age 15)

Abusive parenting and aggression Abusive parenting increases children’s

aggression and other antisocial behavior (Dodge, Coie, et al., 2006; Luntz & Widom
1994). Preschool children who are physically maltreated are more aggressive in kin-
dergarten and display more physical violence in late adolescence (Lansford et al.,
2002). Even after considering genetic transmission, researchers have found that
the link between physical abuse and aggressiveness is significant. In a British study
of more than 1,000 pairs of twins, researchers found that although genetic factors
accounted for approximately two-thirds of the variation in children’s antisocial
behavior at age 7, the effect of physical maltreatment was still significant after they
controlled for this genetic effect (Jaffee et al., 2004). In addition, genetic factors
did not account for significant variation in children’s experience of physical mal-
treatment, which reduces the possibility that heritable characteristics of the child
provoked the abuse. Some researchers have suggested that abuse interferes with
children’s development of empathy and perhaps their ability to correctly “read”
other people’s emotions (Pollak & Tolley-Schell, 2003); these deficits could lead
to increased aggression (Main & George, 1985; Manly et al., 1994). It is likely that
abuse has both direct and indirect effects on children’s aggression. Moreover, find-
ings indicating that abused children are especially likely to make suicide attempts
in adulthood speak to the severity of the problem (Harford et al., 2014; Milaniak &
Widom, 2015).

A coercion model of aggression Gerald Patterson and his colleagues at the

Social Learning Center in Eugene, Oregon, have been studying the effects of family
environments on the development of aggression in children since the 1970s. They
have found that parents and children inadvertently “train” each other by means of
cycles of mutually coercive behavior (Patterson, 1982, 2002, 2016). First, parents
interfere with children’s ongoing activity; they turn off the TV or scold the children
for not finishing homework. Second, the children respond by complaining, whin-
ing, and protesting; they counterattack and defy the parents. Third, the parents give
in to the children’s complaints and stop scolding and demanding. From the chil-
dren’s viewpoint, this is experienced as a small “victory” because their counteroffen-
sive worked. Therefore, in the fourth turn of the cycle, children stop their defiance
and noncompliance. This works the first time around, but later, when parents try to
discipline the children again, the children again engage in counteroffensive behav-
ior, and with each subsequent “battle” their behavior becomes increasingly aggres-
sive. The children have learned that coercive (and ultimately aggressive) behavior
helps them control their parents; the parents have learned that to get their children
to do what they want them to do, they have to exert firmer and firmer control.
 Causes of Aggression  491

These coercive cycles expand to include siblings as well. Children learn that the
coercive behaviors that help them control their parents’ behavior also work with
their siblings. When brothers or sisters engage in coercive exchanges, especially if
the older sibling is already aggressive, the younger sibling is likely to become aggres-
sive too (Slomkowski et al., 2001). A combination of sibling conflict and rejection
by parents is an especially potent recipe for fostering the development of conduct
problems (Garcia et al., 2000). These patterns of coercive behavior can continue
across generations as children on the receiving end of coercive parenting repeat
this style of discipline with their own children and increase the children’s aggres-
sion (Scaramella & Conger, 2003). Fortunately, cross-generational continuity is not
inevitable. When children are less emotionally reactive, no link across generations is
observed (Scaramella & Conger, 2003; see Figure 7.3 in Chapter 7, “Family”).

Parents as providers of opportunities for aggression Parents also shape their

children’s aggressive development through their management of the children’s
activities. Some parents can accurately report what their children are doing and
with whom at all hours of the day and night; other parents don’t know if their
children are hanging out on a street corner, playing hooky, doing homework, or
attending a school dance. The failure of these parents to monitor their children’s
whereabouts, activities, and social contacts can increase the children’s aggressive
behavior (­Patterson & Stouthamer-Loeber, 1984). By the time they go to middle
school, children whose parents are not closely monitoring them are more likely
to develop aggressive behavior patterns; they exhibit higher rates of delinquency,
engage in more theft and vandalism, and have poorer relations with peers and
teachers (Pettit et al., 2001; Snyder et al., 2003).
Parents’ monitoring is more likely and adolescents’ antisocial behavior is less
likely when parents and adolescents spend time together and have an enjoyable
relationship and when the adolescent views monitoring as appropriate (Laird et al.,
2003). Parents who act as gatekeepers can keep their children away from harmful
influences that increase their aggression (O’Neil et al., 2001). Children are more
likely to develop aggressive patterns of behavior if their parents are unaware of their
activities and make no effort to prevent negative experiences. Nevertheless, it also
should be noted that some youth make it very difficult for parents to monitor their
behavior. In some cases, parents try to monitor their children but their children’s
failure to disclose important information and evasiveness about their whereabouts
and activities result in their parents having little accurate knowledge about their
children’s behavior (Stattin & Kerr, 2000).

The influence of peers Children can also learn aggressive behavior patterns from
their peers. When early-starter aggressive children enter school, two things are likely
to happen: Their peers reject them, and they experience academic failure. Both of
these disappointments lead children to behave more aggressively (Buhs & Ladd,
2001; Ladd et al., 1999). Peer rejection is a painful and unwelcome experience for
children, and those who are rejected become more aggressive over time (Dodge
et al., 2003; Snyder et al., 2008). In turn, this aggressiveness leads to more rejection
in a vicious cycle of rejection and aggression that continues through childhood.
Not surprisingly, high-status peers are particularly influential in raising the levels
of social aggression in low-status boys and girls and elevating physical aggression
among low-status boys (Shi & Xie, 2012).
In adolescence, children also can learn aggressive behavior patterns from their
peers by hanging out with pals who pick on other kids or break the law. If the peer
492  Chapter 12 Aggression

group supports relational aggression, adolescents become increasingly mean in this

way (Werner & Hill, 2010); if the peer group supports delinquent activity, adoles-
cents become more delinquent (Coie, 2004; Evans et al., 2016).

“My buddies in high school were great tutors and really taught me how to intimidate
people. It was all part of how our group operated. We were the “bad guys” at our school.
Everyone was afraid of us and it made us all feel close to each other.” (Jason, age 17)

Aggressive youth seek each other out and amplify each other’s deviance.
They train each other in antisocial behavior and foster positive attitudes toward
delinquency (Dishion, 2014; Dishion & Tiscord, 2011). In this deviancy training,
adolescents talk about, rehearse, and plan negative activities, usually with lots of
positive feedback from each other (Dodge, Dishion, et al., 2006; Snyder et al.,
2008). Ironically, deviancy training is especially strong in friendships between
youth with behavior problems when the friendships are well-functioning and
the conversations are characterized by reciprocity and responsiveness (Piehler &
Dishion, 2007). Aggressive peers also increase adolescents’ antisocial aggressive
conduct by modeling deviant actions and by providing opportunities for disrup-
tive, aggressive behavior. Researchers in one study found youth with that friends
who engaged in disruptive behavior, such as disobedience or truancy, were more
likely to engage in delinquent behavior, both at the time and a year later (Keenan
et al., 1995). Their delinquent behavior included both overt aggression, such as
fighting, and covert aggression, such as stealing. The most extreme deviancy train-
ing occurs when adolescents are members of a gang (Densley & Petersen, 2016).
Teenagers in gangs are three times more likely to engage in violent offenses than
adolescents who are not gang members (Spergel et al., 1989). Joining a gang
increases children’s illegal and violent activity; dropping out of the gang reduces
the incidence of these activities (Densley & Petersen, 2016; Thornberry et al.,
2003; Zimring, 1998).

Neighborhoods as contexts for aggression Children can also pick up aggres-

sive behavior in their neighborhood. Adults living in neighborhoods with high lev-
els of poverty and unemployment tend to be more aggressive (Beyers et al., 2003;
Zahnow & Wickes, 2017). They direct this aggression toward one another and
toward the children. Mothers in these neighborhoods are likely to use coercive and
punitive parenting techniques (Guerra et al., 1995; McLoyd et al., 2006), which, in
turn, lead their children to behave more aggressively and become involved in gangs
(Tolan et al., 2003).
Exposure to violence in the neighborhood distresses children, especially young
children, and increases their aggressive tendencies. Researchers have observed a
consistent link between neighborhood violence and children’s aggression. Low-
income urban African American children who are exposed to more neighborhood
violence have more externalizing problems including aggression and, later, violence
(Farver et al., 2005; Jones et al., 2005; Ozer, 2005; Zahnow & Wickes, 2017) and are
more likely to belong to gangs than children who are exposed to less neighborhood
violence (Howell & Egley, 2005). Children from dangerous neighborhoods are also
more likely to be bullies than children from safe neighborhoods (Espelage et al.,
2000). Here are Jason’s thoughts about his neighborhood:

“You had to learn to stick up for yourself or else you would get whipped all the time. I
learned early on that my neighborhood is a rough place and sissies don’t survive.”
 Causes of Aggression  493

In a large-scale study of nearly 1,000 adolescents living in 78 Chicago neighbor-

hoods, researchers found a link between exposure to firearms violence and sub-
sequent aggressive behavior (Bingenheimer et al., 2005). Adolescents who were
exposed to firearm violence within the last year—that is, who had been shot at or
had seen someone else shot at—were twice as likely to engage in violent activities
such as attacking someone with a weapon, shooting someone, or being in a gang
fight in which someone was hurt than were adolescents who were not exposed to
gun violence. These investigators carefully controlled for other factors that might
have contributed to adolescents’ aggression including growing up in a single-parent
family, spending more time with deviant peers, and living in a dangerous neigh-
borhood, yet they still found a link between aggression and exposure to gun vio-
lence. Even more surprising, repeated exposure to gun violence wasn’t necessary to
have an effect on adolescent aggression; a single exposure was enough. The effects
of witnessing gun violence speak to the importance of taking steps to limit youths
access to guns. In addition to protecting youths’ psychological well-being, such steps
would save lives. In the United States, gun violence is the leading cause of death

Insights from Extremes: Child Soldiers

More than 250,000 children camps. Those who can’t carry their loads or keep
around the world are child pace with the others are killed. Those who
soldiers. Thousands of children attempt escape are severely punished.
are recruited and trained as
armed soldiers in civil wars in “One boy tried to escape, but he was
25 countries from Chad and caught. His hands were tied, and then they
Colombia to Sri Lanka and Somalia (Flock, 2012; made us, the other new captives, kill him
and see map). According to the Child Soldiers with a stick.” (S., age 15; Singer, 2005, p. 91)
Global Report (Coalition to Stop the Use of Child
Soldiers, 2008), 21 territories around the globe Girls are routinely raped.
engaged children in conflicts between 2004 and
2007. Government armed forces in Angola, “There was no one in charge . . . and . . . the
Burundi, Congo, Rwanda, Sudan, and Uganda men and youths would come . . . in the
recruited children as young as 7 and 8 years of dark, and they would just rape us. You would
age; in Sierra Leone, rebel forces recruited just have a man on top of you, and you
children as young as 5 years old. Governments could not even see who it was. If we cried
and armed groups use children because they afterwards, we were beaten with hosepipes.”
are a cheap and plentiful resource and easier to (http://www.child-soldiers.org)
condition into fearless killing and unthinking
obedience than adolescents and adults. The In the training camps, children go through
children’s underdeveloped ability to assess brutal indoctrination to transform them into
danger makes them more willing to take risks combat soldiers and cold-blooded killers. They
that teenagers and adults refuse. They are more are exposed to violence, torture, mutilation, and
impressionable, and their value systems and rape. New recruits are often forced to kill or
consciences are not yet fully developed. Many of perpetrate acts of violence against others, even
these children are abducted or kidnapped by members of their own village or family. Some
the armed groups. Often they are forced to groups also practice cannibalism, making young
watch the soldiers kill their parents. The young recruits drink the blood or eat the flesh of their
recruits are then forced to march to training victims. The recruits are often told “it will make you
494  Chapter 12 Aggression

stronger,” but the real motivation is to “force you” (Beah, 2007). Initially most children experi-
children to quiet their emotional reactions to ence a mixture of disgust, guilt, and self-­
seeing people killed and demolish their sense of contempt (Wessells, 2006). But as time goes on,
the sanctity of life” (Wessells, 2006). Drugs such they are likely to rationalize their actions by telling
as brown-brown (cocaine mixed with gun themselves, “I didn’t want to do it. I had to follow
powder) help disengage the child’s actions from orders or I would be killed,” or they see their acts
any sense of reality. Children who refuse to take as surreal, as if in a dream.
the drugs are beaten or killed.
“It’s like magic. I killed people and it doesn’t
“We smoked jambaa [marijuana] all the stick to me. I still go to heaven.” (Bad Pay
time. Before a battle, they would make a Bad, age unknown; Singer, 2005, p.73)
shallow cut here [on the temple, beside the
eye] and put powder in and cover it with By tracing what happens to children who go
plaster. After I did not see anything having through this dehumanizing experience we gain a
any value. I did not see any human being better understanding of the impact of brutality
having any value. I felt light.” (A., age 15; and a keener appreciation of children’s resilience
Singer, 2005, p. 82) and capacity to overcome adversity (Masten
et al., 2015; Masten & Narayan, 2012). Several
studies have tracked the fate of child soldiers. In
one, child soldiers in Sierra Leone who had
wounded or killed others during the war demon-
AP Photo/Adam Butler/Wide World Photos

strated increases in hostility 2 years after their war

experiences. Youth who had been raped had
higher levels of anxiety and hostility. Those who
experienced community acceptance were less
depressed at follow-up and had more confidence
and prosocial attitudes regardless of their level of
exposure to violence (Betancourt et al., 2010).
In another study, 39 boys in Mozambique, who
had been forced to become soldiers but then
had been rescued were examined to assess their
readjustment to normal life (Boothby, 2006). The
length of time in the base camp was a major
determinant of how well they adapted. Those
who spent less than 6 months in the camp
tended to define themselves as victims rather
than soldiers. Although they were aggressive and
distrustful, they showed feelings of remorse and
experienced rapid decreases in antisocial
behavior after their rescue. In contrast, children
who were in the camp for a longer period had
crossed some type of identity threshold; they
identified with their captors and viewed them-
selves as members of the National Resistance
Movement. After they were rescued, however,
Revenge is also used as a motivator. Children are most of these boys gradually experienced
told to “visualize the enemy, the rebels who killed remorse and control over their aggression and
your parents, your family, and those who are formed positive attachments to their new adult
responsible for everything that has happened to caregivers while a few boys continued to exhibit
 Causes of Aggression  495

hostility and a desire for revenge which made Our current theories of risk and resilience
successful re-entry difficult. However, the success- have been supported by these insights from
ful reentry and adjustment of the other child extremes (Luthar, 2006; Masten, 2014). Today, aid
soldiers not only in Mozambique but in Uganda organizations such as UNICEF recognize that
as well illustrates the amazing capacity of children who have been soldiers need more than
children to recover—with the social support of physical help to recover from their experiences.
caring adults and communities—even after They need healing from emotional difficulties
exposure to a life of violence and inhumanity and traumatic experiences, protection from
(Klasen et al., 2010). Recent evidence suggests re-recruitment, training in peaceful roles, careful
that genes may play a role in the recovery reintroduction into their communities, and
process: Nepali child soldiers who have genes opportunities to build trust and practice nonvio-
that buffer them from trauma were able to lent conflict resolution. Moreover, this may be true
recover more quickly from their war-related for many of the millions of children exposed to
experiences than those who are genetically political violence and armed conflict around the
more negatively responsive to early traumatic world, even if they are not participating as
events (Brandon et al., 2016). soldiers (Cummings et al., 2017).

among boys 15–19 (see Figure 12.3). Among these boys who die from gun violence,
60 percent were homicides. The remaining deaths were suicides (33 percent) or
other causes (e.g., accidents, 7 percent; Child Trends, 2018).

Culture as a determinant of aggression The frequency of aggression var-

ies around the world; it is common in some societies and virtually nonexistent
in others (Bergeron & Schneider, 2005; Eisner & Malti, 2015). Rates of death by
homicide illustrate this variation, ranging from 1.0 or fewer per 100,000 people in
most Western European countries (including Norway, Sweden, Austria, Germany,
­Switzerland, Italy) as well as China and Japan, to 1.6 in Canada and 5 in the United
States, to 10 in Russia, 24 in Mexico, 38 in Zambia, and 92 in Honduras (UN Data,
2012). Anthropologists have identified peaceful and violent traditional cultures: The

Causes of death for young men ages 15 to 19, 2016

50%

other
40%
homicide

30% suicide
30% 2%

20% 18% 23%

21% FIGURE 12.3 Gun violence
is the most common cause
14% of death for young men.
10% 12%
10% Source: Center for Disease
Control and Prevention,
0% National Center for Injury
Guns Motor Illness Non- Non- Prevention and Control,
vehicle and motor firearm (2017). Ten leading causes of
accidents disease vehicle suicide death and injury. Atlanta, GA:
accidents and Center for Disease Control
homicide and Prevention.
496  Chapter 12 Aggression

Semai and Chewong of Malaysia, the Buid of the Philippines, certain Inuit socie-
ties in Canada, and some Zapotec communities in Mexico have very low levels of
aggression among children and adults (Howell & Willis, 1989; Sponsel & Gregor,
1994). In contrast, among the Waorani and Jivaro of Ecuador and the Mae Enga
of the New Guinea highlands, homicide, warfare, blood feuds, physical punish-
ment of children, infanticide, and head-taking raids are common (Robarchek &
Robarchek, 1998). In one study of 62 countries, Bergmüller (2013) found more
student aggression reported by school principals for fourth- and eighth-grade chil-
dren in individualistic than collectivist countries. Likewise, in a comparison of 28
different cultures, researchers found that those focused on individualism, ambition,
and success, such as the United States, Australia, and Greece, had more child and
adolescent aggression than collectivist cultures with their focus on group solidarity,
such as Taiwan, Thailand, and Indonesia (Bergeron & Schneider, 2005). Societies
that placed a high value on hierarchy, status, and power also had higher levels of
aggression than cultures in which members cooperated voluntarily and had a high
level of egalitarian commitment. Clearly cultural values and practices play a role in
fostering or minimizing aggression.

Violence in the electronic media Children are bombarded by violent images

as they view movies, watch television, play video games, and surf the Internet. It has
been estimated that by the end of elementary school, the average U.S. child has
seen more than 8,000 murders and 100,000 other violent acts on network television
(Bushman & Anderson, 2001). Nor is media fare limited to physical violence; nearly
all Disney movies and 77 percent of television programs contain portrayals of rela-
tional aggression (Coyne & Whitehead, 2008; Linder & Gentile, 2009).
Exposure to TV violence contributes to children’s aggressive behavior (Bushman
et al., 2015; Comstock & Powers, 2012). In one correlational study in northern New
York State, for example, television viewing and aggressive behavior were assessed
in a sample of 707 families over a 17-year period (Johnson et al., 2002). Adoles-
cents who spent more time watching television were more aggressive in subsequent
years—even after researchers controlled for their earlier aggressive behavior, family
disadvantage, and neighborhood violence. Effects may be particularly strong effect
for children who are already aggressive (Bushman, 1995; Leyens et al., 1975). Nota-
bly, exposure to relational aggression on television, especially if it is rewarded, is also
linked to increased relational aggression (Linder & Gentile, 2009). Childhood view-
ing of TV violence may have long-term effects as well as immediate ones. When chil-
dren were retested as adults in their early 20s, those who had watched a great many
violent television programs in early elementary school were more aggressive than
infrequent viewers of violence (Huesmann et al., 2003). They displayed more physi-
cal aggression, more verbal aggression, and had more traffic violations and arrests.
Exposure to violent media also may affect children more if they believe it por-
trays real events. Children who were told that a violent film clip was real (a newsreel
of an actual riot) later reacted more aggressively than children who believed that
the film was a Hollywood production (Atkin, 1983). As children develop and are
able to make the distinction between fiction and reality, TV violence has less effect
on their aggressive behavior (Bushman & Huesmann, 2001).
Video games and computer games offer children images of violence and the
opportunity to act aggressively in a virtual world. It has been suggested that these
games, too, can increase children’s aggressiveness (Anderson et al., 2012; Bushman
et al., 2015). The results of one survey indicated that young adolescents who played
violent video games reported more frequent aggressive behavior, such as arguing
 Causes of Aggression  497

with their teachers and getting involved in physical fights (Gentile et al., 2004).
Importantly, the effects of playing violent video games on aggression are not limited
to North America: Similar effects of exposure to video games on child aggression
were found in other countries (i.e., Singapore) as well (Gentile et al., 2014). This
was true for both adolescents whose usual level of aggression was high and those
who were not usually aggressive. Moreover, these links between violent video games
and aggression are evident across time and culture. Children and adolescents in
both the United States and Japan who habitually played violent video games were
more aggressive 3 to 6 months later, even after controlling for their earlier level
of aggression (Anderson et al., 2008). Experimental studies confirm these correla-
tional results: Children who played video games with aggressive themes in an experi-
ment acted more aggressively in free play and when faced with frustration than did
children who played games with nonaggressive themes (Polman et al., 2008). In
a meta-analysis of studies in this area involving 130,000 participants, researchers
found a link between violent game play and aggressive behavior, as well as a link
with aggressive thoughts, angry feelings, and physiological arousal (e.g., heart rate
and blood pressure) (Anderson et al., 2010). Although boys reported that they liked
violent video games more than girls did, the effect of exposure was similar for both
sexes and was found in both Western and Eastern countries. The Internet is another
source of violent images. YouTube, for example, offers provocative and disturbing
videos of young people fighting; more than 30,000 videos of “kids fighting” and
75,000 of “girls fighting” are only a click away.
We are just beginning to understand the neurological underpinnings of exposure
to media violence (Murray, 2012). Repeated exposure to violent video games led to
decreased brain activity, which suggests that desensitization occurs with long-term
exposure (Engelhardt et al., 2011). Neuroimaging studies using functional mag-
netic resonance imaging (fMRI) techniques show that some regions of the brain
(such as the prefrontal cortex) are less activated when children are exposed to vio-
lent video games (Weber et al., 2006) and violent scenes in movies compared with
nonviolent scenes (Murray et al., 2006, Murray, 2012). This brain region is related
to reduced activation of neural mechanisms associated with self-control, which may,
in part, explain why exposure to violence increases aggression.

Combined Biological and Social Influences

on Aggression
To understand the development of aggression, all these factors must be considered
together: genetic and other biological predispositions toward anger; disciplinary
harshness, coercive interactions, and physical abuse in the family; association with
deviant peers; living in a dangerous neighborhood; and exposure to media violence.
Any one of these factors can push a child toward aggressive behavior; experiencing
a multitude of them almost certainly ensures an aggressive outcome as these factors
pile up and pile on the child.
Researchers have investigated the effects of combinations of these factors. They
have studied the combined effects of genes and environments. A study of 6,000
Dutch families with adopted children showed the cumulative effect of genes and
environment clearly (Mednick & Christiansen, 1977). Of children who had both an
adoptive parent and a biological parent who were convicted of a criminal offense,
25 percent were themselves convicted of an offense; of children who had only a
biological parent who was a convicted criminal, 20 percent were convicted; among
498  Chapter 12 Aggression

children with only an adoptive parent who had a criminal record, 15 percent were
convicted; and of children with neither an adoptive parent nor a biological parent
who had a criminal record, only 14 percent were convicted. Results of a study in
Sweden were similar but even more striking, probably because it included only boys
(Cloninger et al., 1982): If both biological and adoptive parents were criminals,
40 percent of the adopted boys engaged in a criminal act; if only the biological
parent was a criminal, only 12 percent did; if only the adoptive parent was a crimi-
nal, only 7 percent did; and if neither parent was a criminal, a mere 3 percent of
adopted boys engaged in criminal acts. Another way researchers have demonstrated
the combined effects of genes and environments is by showing that when children
experience adverse events at home, those who are genetically at risk for antisocial
behavior are more likely to become aggressive than those who are not genetically
at risk (Dodge, Coie, et al., 2006). One study of twins found that physical abuse
by parents increased the chance that a child would have a conduct disorder by 24
percent if his or her twin had a conduct disorder but by only by 2 percent if the
twin did not (Jaffee et al., 2005). Among MZ twins, the twin who had an aggressive
friend became more aggressive over time than the twin without an aggressive friend
(Vitaro et al., 2011). Finally, children who are high in testosterone and who experi-
ence harsh discipline are more likely to behave aggressively than those who are high
in testosterone but do not experience a harsh child rearing environment (Chen
et al., 2018). Clearly, when adverse environmental conditions team up with genetic
or hormonal factors, aggressive outcomes are more likely.
Researchers also have studied how adverse environments exacerbate aggres-
siveness in children who begin life with biological problems linked to aggression.
They have found that a difficult, ill-tempered, or impulsive early temperament is
more likely to predict later aggression when conditions in the environment sup-
port aggressive behavior. For example, impulsive boys who grew up in poor neigh-
borhoods were more likely to become violent offenders than impulsive boys who
lived in affluent neighborhoods (Lyman et al., 2000). They have found that envi-
ronmental conditions interact with neurotransmitters. For example, in one lon-
gitudinal study, children who had both low levels of serotonin and a history of
family conflict developed into the most violent offenders by age 21 (Moffitt et al.,
1997). Researchers also have found that prenatal biological problems interact with
postnatal environmental conditions (Raine, 2002). For example, in a study in Fin-
land, the children of mothers who smoked before they were born (prenatal prob-
lem) and who grew up without a father (environmental problem) exhibited violent
behavior 12 times more than did children without these problems (Rasanen et al.,
1999). In a study in Denmark, researchers found that children were twice as likely
to have a record of violent offenses at age 19 if they experienced complications
before birth and maternal rejection after birth (Raine et al., 1994, 1997). A study
in Australia indicated that the most aggressive adolescents at age 15 had been
exposed to both biological risks—such as maternal illness, low birth weight, or a
difficult temperament—and environmental risks—for example, poverty, maternal
rejection, or harsh discipline (Brennan et al., 2003). Biological and environmental
conditions clearly combined to produce antisocial outcomes in this study. This was
especially true for physical aggression that started early and continued through
adolescence: Two-thirds of the early starters had experienced combined biological
and environmental adversity. Finally, in a study in the United States, adolescents
who were more aroused by family hostility, as measured by shifts in cortisol levels,
exhibited more antisocial behavior than youth who were less reactive to family
conflict (Saxbe et al., 2012).
 Causes of Aggression  499

Early childhood Middle childhood Late childhood and adolescence

Rejection by
normal peers
Poor parental discipline Child conduct Commitment to Delinquent/aggressive
and monitoring problems deviant peer group behavior
Academic
failure

FIGURE 12.4 Developmental progression of aggressive behavior. Parents and peers both play a part in the development of chil-
dren’s antisocial behavior but at different points in time.
Source: Patterson, G. R., DeBarshyshe, B., & Ramsey, R. (1989). A developmental perspective on antisocial behavior. American Psychologist, 44,
329–335. Copyright © 2010 by the American Psychological Association. Reproduced with permission. The use of APA information does not imply
endorsement by APA.

Researchers have also studied how combinations of different environmental fac-

tors operate in concert to increase children’s aggressiveness. In one series of studies,
researchers found that aggressive adolescents were likely to have experienced puni-
tive discipline in early childhood, negative peer interactions in middle childhood,
and association with deviant peers in late childhood (see Figure 12.4; Patterson et al.,
1989). In another study, researchers found that adolescents who lived in poor neigh-
borhoods and were involved with antisocial peers at age 15 were more likely to be
violent at age 18 (Herrenkohl et al., 2003). Researchers have also shown that chil-
dren who have at least one good thing going for them can be protected from a spiral
into aggression. For example, adolescents who lived in poor neighborhoods were
less likely to be affected by exposure to community violence if they had positive rela-
tionships with their parents (Kliewer et al., 2004; Ozer, 2005). Aggressive children
were less likely to be violent at age 18 if their parents monitored their activities and
they attended religious services at age 15 (Herrenkohl et al., 2003). Even physically
abused children were less likely to be violent if they were involved in a religious com-
munity and had parents and peers who disapproved of antisocial behavior (Herren-
kohl et al., 2005). The more of these “protective factors” children experienced, the
less likely they were to be aggressive (Herrenkohl et al., 2003). In brief, the develop-
ment of either high or low levels of aggression is best accounted for by multiple influ-
ences across a range of domains, not by single factors or single domains.

esearch Up Close: Genes, Environmental Triggers,

and Aggressive Behavior
Researchers Avshalom Caspi, gene, MAOA. This gene encodes the MAOA
Terrie Moffitt, and their collabo- enzyme, which metabolizes neurotransmitters
rators have documented how such as norepinephrine, serotonin, and dopa-
genes and environments work mine, rendering them inactive. Genetic defi-
together to increase the likelihood that children ciencies in MAOA activity have been linked to
will be aggressive (Caspi et al., 2002). Unlike aggression in both animals and humans. Caspi
earlier studies using parents’ histories of vio- and Moffitt expected that low MAOA activity—
lence as a proxy for children’s genetic propen- insufficient to temper the neurotransmitters
sity for aggression, their study involved a associated with aggression—would predispose
specific “candidate gene” thought to be related a person to developing a high level of vio-
to aggression—the monoamine oxidase A lent behavior.
500  Chapter 12 Aggression

Because they knew that genes don’t act on only 20 percent displayed antisocial behavior
their own, Caspi and Moffitt looked for environ- (Figure 12.5). Caspi and Moffitt’s finding has
mental conditions that might lead to expression been replicated in several other studies demon-
of this genetic predisposition, and they chose strating the combined effects of the MAOA gene
child abuse as a likely trigger. They knew that and childhood adversity (Foley et al., 2004;
children who are physically abused are at risk for Kim-Cohen et al., 2006) including a study which
developing aggressive and antisocial behaviors followed children from 16 to 30 years of age and
(Rutter et al., 1998; Keiley et al., 2001) but that found support for the interaction between the
only half of them do so (Widom, 1989). Caspi MAOA gene and child abuse as a predictor of
and Moffitt reasoned that being reared under later offending, conduct problems, and hostility
abusive circumstances would be more likely to (Fergusson et al., 2011). Similarly, researchers
result in aggressive tendencies if the children have found that youth with a gene that
were also genetically programmed for aggres- increases susceptibility to alcohol dependence
sion. They then tested whether the MAOA gene are more likely to develop externalizing behavior
was a genetic factor that made abused children problems if their parents also fail to monitor their
more prone to exhibit violent behavior. activities (Dick et al., 2009).
Using a sample of 442 boys from their longitu-
dinal study in New Zealand, Caspi and Moffitt
compared the boys who had been physically 1
abused by a family member with those who had Low MAOA
activity, n = 163
not. They were interested in whether the chances
0.75 High MAOA
that boys with low MAOA activity (representing a
activity, n = 279
predisposition for aggression) would be aggres-
Antisocial behavior

sive differed depending on whether or not they 0.5

were abused. Only boys were included in the
study because the MAOA gene is X-linked, and 0.25
therefore its effect would be more evident in boys
than girls. The researchers measured four out-
0
comes as indicators of violent behaviors: con-
duct disorders assessed according to criteria of
the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental –0.25
Disorders, 4th edition (DSM-IV); convictions for
violent crimes identified by the police; a person- –0.5
ality disposition toward violence measured by a None Probable Severe
Childhood maltreatment
psychological test; and symptoms of antisocial
personality disorder identified by people who FIGURE 12.5 Antisocial behavior as a function of genes
knew the boys well. Of the boys with the gene for and environment. Children who were most aggressive had
low MAOA who had a history of childhood the gene for low MAOA activity and experienced severe
maltreatment 85 percent displayed a pattern of maltreatment.
aggressive-antisocial behavior in adolescence Source: From Caspi, A., McClay, J., Moffitt, T. E., Mill, J., Martin, J.,
Craig, I. W., Taylor, A., & Poulton, R. (2002). Role of genotype in
and early adulthood. However, of the boys with the cycle of violence in maltreated children. Science, 297, 851–854.
the gene for low MAOA who were not abused, Reprinted with permission from AAAS.

Sociocognitive Factors in the Development

of Aggression
Genes, hormones, parents, peers, neighborhoods, and media all contribute to the
development of aggression, but the final component involves children’s cognitive
processes. Cognitive encoding, interpretation, and understanding guide children’s
 Causes of Aggression  501

social behavior and affect decision making in potentially aggressive situations. To

illustrate, consider the reactions of two different children to the same encounter in
the school lunchroom. A classmate spills milk on Harry’s new tennis shoes. Harry
realizes it was an accident, accepts his classmate’s apology, and jokes about the
incident—“Got milk?!” When a classmate spills milk on Jerome’s new tennis shoes,
in contrast, Jerome jumps to the conclusion that his classmate did it on purpose;
he turns around, gives the boy a shove, and knocks the boy’s lunch tray on the
floor. Clearly, Harry and Jerome see the world through different lenses. Harry views
his social environment as friendly and benign where sometimes “stuff happens.”
Jerome sees the world as a hostile place where other people purposely do mean and
hurtful things. These two profiles characterize the cognitive outlooks of nonaggres-
sive and aggressive children.
Social information-processing theory is a useful framework for examining these
two different outlooks (see Figure 1.3 in Chapter 1, “Introduction”; Crick & Dodge,
1994; Dodge & Pettit, 2003; Gifford-Smith & Rabiner, 2004). According to this the-
ory, children come to a social situation with a set of neural capabilities that have
been honed over time and are represented in memory. When the children are pre-
sented with a new set of social cues, for example, someone spilling milk on their
shoes, their response depends on how they process these cues.
First, they encode the cues. Aggressive children do not notice the full range of
cues because of their poor attentional and encoding skills; they attend selectively
to aggressive cues. For example, children who have been physically abused attend
more to angry threatening faces than to happy faces (Pollak & Tolley-Schell, 2003).
In the case of Harry and Jerome, Harry notices his classmate’s stricken face as well as
the milk spilled on his shoes, whereas Jerome doesn’t notice the classmate’s expres-
sion but focuses his attention solely on his damaged shoes.
Second, children interpret the cues as intentional and threatening or accidental
and harmless. In our example, Harry interpreted the spilling as accidental; Jerome,
as intentional and threatening. This may be, at least in part, because aggressive chil-
dren have more difficulty accurately interpreting others’ emotions (Trentacosta &
Fine, 2010). Aggressive children are more likely than nonaggressive children to
interpret other people’s behavior as intentionally hostile (Crick & Dodge, 1994;
Dodge, Coie, et al., 2006; Gifford-Smith & Rabiner, 2004). They have a hostile attri-
bution bias; that is, they tend to assume that ambiguous acts are intentionally mean.
Interpreting cues in this way increases the likelihood of aggressive behavior. Listen
to this 8-year-old, Eli, who has a well-developed hostile attribution bias:

“Whenever a kid bumps me or knocks my stuff off my desk or even looks at me funny,
I assume that he meant it and it was no accident. I usually go after the other kid pretty
quickly to get back at him.”

Children’s prior relationship history with the perpetrator matters, too. If the per-
son who caused the harm is an enemy, the child is more likely to make a hostile
attribution than if the perpetrator is a friend or neutral peer (Peets et al., 2007).
The hostile attribution bias of the child’s friends matter too: they are likely to show
a similar level of hostile attribution as their close friends (Halligan & Philips, 2010).
Third, children review possible behavioral responses. Aggressive children gen-
erate fewer responses than nonaggressive children, and the responses they gener-
ate are of lower quality (Dodge, Coie, et al., 2006; Shure & Spivack, 1980). Harry
considers options such as ignoring the incident, laughing it off, or minimizing its
importance. Jerome’s options focus on retaliation in the form of hitting or verbally
attacking the perpetrator.
502  Chapter 12 Aggression

Fourth, children choose a response. They might evaluate the response for its
moral acceptability or its likely reaction from the other person. They weigh possi-
ble consequences and pick the response that they evaluate most positively. Aggres-
sive children are less likely to consider possible consequences, and when they do
consider the costs and benefits, their “mental arithmetic” leads them to choose
an aggressive action (Dodge, Coie, et al., 2006). Aggressive children view aggres-
sive responses as more legitimate, less morally “bad,” and more acceptable than do
nonaggressive children (Erdley & Asher, 1998; Werner & Hill, 2010). They expect
more positive payoff for behaving aggressively (Fontaine et al., 2002). Thus, Jerome
thinks that hitting his classmate will save face, which is more important than being
reprimanded by the lunchroom monitor, whereas Harry decides that the negative
consequences (violation of his moral standards or getting a detention) are too great.
Finally, children translate the selected response into action. Even here, aggres-
sive and nonaggressive children differ. Aggressive ones are less competent at enact-
ing and role-playing socially appropriate nonaggressive actions (Burleson, 1982;
Dodge, Coie, et al., 2006).
As children go through these steps, they receive feedback from other people’s
facial expressions and behavioral responses, and the steps recycle. Over time, chil-
dren develop characteristic styles of processing cues at each step. They develop
social information-processing “templates” or “working models” that serve as maps
to guide them in their social encounters and exchanges with other children. These
cognitive–social processes are the final piece of the larger puzzle that constitutes the
causes of aggressive behavior.

Bullies and Victims

One particular expression of aggression is bullying, a form of aggression that involves
repeated abuse of power in a relationship. Researchers have identified some children
who regularly act as bullies and others who are consistently victims. In a national sur-
vey of nearly 16,000 children in sixth to tenth grades in the United States, 13 percent
were identified as bullies and 11 percent as victims (Nansel et al., 2001). A third
group of children, 6 percent in the survey, were “bully–victims”: They were victimized
by other children but also acted as bullies, often against weaker children. Although
bullying has decreased, it remains a significant challenge. In 2005, 28 percent of chil-
dren reported that they were bullied, whereas 21 percent reported being bullied in
2014–15 (Child Trends, 2017). Children of different ethnicities—African ­American,
European-American, and Hispanic-American—are equally likely to be targets of bul-
lying while Asian American students are less likely to be bullied (Child Trends, 2016).
The issue of bullying is a widespread problem (see Figure 12.6) and has attracted
worldwide attention. In 2007, a group of scholars from Switzerland, South Korea,
Italy, Norway, Finland, the Netherlands, Portugal, Austria, Australia, Canada, Spain,
the United Kingdom, and the United States met in Switzerland and signed the
Kandersteg Declaration Against Bullying in Children and Youth to increase recogni-
tion of the problem and develop ways to reduce or prevent it. This declaration states
that bullying is a violation of the basic human right to be respected and safe and that
it the moral responsibility of adults to ensure that these rights are honored. By 2015,
nearly all U.S. schools have written policies prohibiting bullying but the definitions
and nature of the policies vary across states (Cornell & Limber, 2016). Similarly in
Canada, federal and provincial policies against bullying are in place (Pareé & Collins,
2016), but in both countries clearer definitions and widespread implementation of
anti-bullying programs are still needed.
 Bullies and Victims  503

Sweden (n = 2158) 8.6 Victim Sweden (n = 2208) 4.8

Czech Republic (n = 2367) 9.7 Bully Iceland (n = 4600) 5.4
Spain (n = 4217) 10.2 Bully-Victim Malta (n = 669) 6.3
Iceland (n = 4664) 10.3 Czech Republic (n = 2335) 6.6
Hungary (n = 1648) 12.0 Spain (n = 4445) 8.0
Finland (n = 2468) 13.3 Norway (n = 2211) 8.4
Wales (n = 2116) 14.0 Finland (n = 2715) 8.8
Ireland (n = 2389) 14.8 Ireland (n = 2357) 8.9
Scotland (n = 2985) 15.1 Hungary (n = 1802) 8.9
Malta (n = 667) 15.1 Croatia (n = 2500) 9.9
Norway (n = 2357) 15.3 Slovenia (n = 2508) 10.1
Croatia (n = 2401) 15.7 Netherlands (n = 2096) 10.6
England (n = 2243) 16.5 Denmark (n = 2958) 10.9
Belgium Flemish (n = 2158) 17.0 Macedonia (n = 2638) 11.0
Denmark (n = 2715) 17.0 Italy (n = 1944) 11.3
Slovenia (n = 2493) 18.0 Poland (n = 2836) 11.5
Netherlands (n = 2104) 18.8 Scotland (n = 3066) 11.9
Italy (n = 1965) 19.6 England (n = 2415) 12.1
Macedonia (n = 2616) 20.3 Belgium Flemish (n = 2067) 12.2
USA (n = 1782) 22.2 Wales (n = 2197) 13.7
Canada (n = 2744) 23.3 Israel (n = 3123) 15.3
France (n = 3270) 24.0 Belgium French (n = 2041) 16.0
Poland (n = 2632) 24.6 Switzerland (n = 2337) 16.5
Portugal (n = 1802) 24.9 USA (n = 1973) 16.6
Luxembourg (n = 2035) 26.8 Portugal (n = 1986) 16.7
Switzerland (n = 2217) 27.0 Canada (n = 3051) 17.0
Germany (n = 3597) 27.1 Germany (n = 3569) 18.2
Belgium French (n = 2159) 28.5 Austria (n = 2437) 18.3
Israel (n = 2230) 30.5 Bulgaria (n = 2410) 18.8
Russia (n = 3829) 30.8 France (n = 3545) 18.8
Austria (n = 2338) 33.2 Luxembourg (n = 2051) 19.5
Bulgaria (n = 2327) 33.3 Russia (n = 4269) 23.4
Ukraine (n = 2324) 34.4 Estonia (n = 2246) 25.6
Turkey (n = 2752) 36.4 Romania (n = 2518) 26.7
Romania (n = 2040) 38.0 Greece (n = 1926) 28.3
Greenland (n = 636) 38.2 Turkey (n = 2543) 28.7
Greece (n = 1713) 41.3 Ukraine (n = 2650) 28.8
Estonia (n = 2192) 42.8 Greenland (n = 676) 32.0
Latvia (n = 1996) 43.5 Latvia (n = 2173) 32.0
Lithuania (n = 2792) 45.2 Lithuania (n = 2684) 35.8

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 10 20 30 40 50
Proportion of boys Proportion of girls

FIGURE 12.6 Proportion of boys (left) and girls (right) from different nations who report that they are victims, bullies, and
bully–victims.
Source: Craig, W., Harel-Fisch, Y., Fogel-Grinvald, H., Dostaler, S., Hetland, J., & Simons-Morton, B., The HBSC Bullying Writing Group. (2009).
A cross-national profile of bullying and victimization among adolescents in 40 countries. International Journal of Public Health, 54, S216–S224.
Reprinted with permission.

Behavior of Bullies and Victims

Bullies use both direct aggression—hitting, pushing, threatening, taunting—and
indirect aggression—spreading rumors and breaking lunchboxes. They use both
physical aggression and relational aggression. Girl bullies are relatively more likely
to use relational tactics; boy bullies to be physical (Crick & Bigbee, 1998). Bully-
ing can be adaptive if it gains status and power over the victim and popularity and
admiration from peers (Caravita et al., 2009; Salmivalli & Peets, 2018; Veenstra
et al., 2007; Volk et al., 2014). Bullies tend to choose their victims carefully to avoid
any loss of peer affection by selecting targets who are not likely to be defended
by socially significant others (Veenstra et al., 2010). This finding suggests that
504  Chapter 12 Aggression

peers play a role in bullying incidents. In fact, Canadian researchers found that
peers were involved in 85 percent of bullying episodes on the playground (Craig &
­Pepler, 1997; O’Connell et al., 1999). Of these peers, 21 percent actively supported
the bullies; another 54 percent watched passively; only 25 percent intervened on
behalf of the victims. Furthermore, as they mature, children who witness bullying
are increasingly likely to reinforce the bully and decreasingly likely to defend the
victim (­Pöyhönen & Salmivalli, 2008; Salmivalli & Peets, 2018). This is consistent
with findings showing that acceptance of bullying increases with age (Salmivalli &
Voeten, 2004), whereas intentions to help the victims decrease, at least up to age 15
(Rigby & Johnson, 2006). Changes in attitudes toward greater acceptance of bully-
ing are also linked with increases in bullying behavior (Guerra et al., 2011).
Victimization can take several forms. Boys and girls are equally likely to be vic-
tims of physical bullying (e.g., hit, pushed, or slapped); in one survey 13 percent
of boys were hit, pushed, or slapped by their peers within the past year compared
with 12 percent of girls (Child Trends, 2016). However, girls are more likely to
be targets of relational victimization than boys (Crick et al., 1999); 38 percent
of girls were teased or emotionally harassed compared with 33 percent of boys
(Child Trends, 2016). Children who are bullied may be either passive victims who
are nonaggressive in response to bullying or provocative victims who engage in
aggressive behavior when they are attacked. Most victims are passive. These chil-
dren send implicit signals that they will not defend themselves or retaliate against
the bully. They may cry easily and often appear anxious or weak (Hodges & Perry,
1999). They are more likely to be dependent on their teachers (Troop-Gordon &
Kopp, 2011). In fact, victims are weak (Card & Hodges, 2008; Olweus, 2001;
Salmivalli & Peets, 2018); if they were members of the school football squad or
wrestling team, bullies would probably leave them alone. They are also anxious
and unsure of themselves and have low self-esteem (Card & Hodges, 2008). Here
is how a group of high school students summed up factors linked to victimization
(Guerra et al., 2011, p. 306):

“You can get bullied because you are weak or annoying or because you are different.
Kids with big ears get bullied. Dorks get bullied. You can also get bullied because you
think too much of yourself and try to show off. Teacher’s pet gets bullied. If you say
the right answer too many times in class you can get bullied. There are lots of popular
groups who bully each other and other groups, but you can get bullied within your
group, too. If you do not want to get bullied you have to stay under the radar, but then
you might feel sad because no one pays attention to you.”

In one study, children in first grade who had more internalizing symptoms—
including crying easily, worrying excessively, being overly fearful, and feeling sad—
were targets of bullying in third grade (Leadbeater & Hoglund, 2009). Without
realizing it, passive victims encourage their attackers by acting submissive, making
a feeble effort to persuade the bully to stop, or giving in to the bully’s demands
and surrendering their possessions (Crick et al., 1999; Juvonen et al., 2003). The
shy, timid nature of anxious, withdrawn children makes them easy targets. They
might evoke victimization precisely because they present themselves as physically
and emotionally weak and unlikely to retaliate (Salmivalli & Peets, 2018). Research-
ers have found that these children are at high risk for peer victimization (Grills &
Ollendick, 2002; Hanish & Guerra, 2004; Kochenderfer-Ladd, 2003). Because social
withdrawal is a strategy often used to cope with victimization (Gazelle & Rudolph,
2004), it has been suggested that these children experience a transactional cycle: They
 Bullies and Victims  505

are initially withdrawn and then experience victimization, and this, in turn, increases
their withdrawal (Rubin et al., 2009).
Provocative victims are more outgoing in their response to bullying than are the
passive victims: They argue, disrupt the bully’s actions, and try to return the attack.
Even so, they are not very effective. They somehow manage to provoke and irritate
other children without convincing them that they’ll follow through on their hostile
threats. Aggressive children in first grade are themselves likely to become victims by
third grade despite their continued aggressiveness (Leadbeater & Hoglund, 2009).
Simply being aggressive is not enough to avoid being victimized; being effectively
aggressive is essential for stopping a bully.

Consequences of Bullying
Bullying can have negative effects on both bullies and victims. Bullies can develop
conduct disorders and elevated levels of school disengagement (Juvonen et al., 2003),
suffer from severe depression even in adolescence and young adulthood (Klomek
et al., 2008, 2009), and experience increased risk for substance abuse (Moore et al.,
2014, 2017). They also may attempt suicide. Nearly 40 years later in adulthood,
childhood bullies have a history of smoking and long-term illness (­Stuart & Jose,
2014). Victims are likely to be rejected by other peers and experience problems in

eal-World Application: Cyberfighting

and Cyberbullying
Electronic media offer children out. They also include attacks in which a group of
and adolescents experiences young people gang up on a classmate and
that were never possible before. pummel the victim into unconsciousness. Posting
Today young people can see the record of the fight on the Internet gives the
what it’s like to live at the North Pole or in a attackers their 15 minutes of fame, torments the
village in Laos; they can communicate with a victim by showing his or her defeat and distress
stranger on the other side of the world or share to the world, and provokes copycat conflicts in a
shorthand messages with a friend after lights out. vicious cycle of “cyberfighting.” Another form of
New electronic technologies have broken cyber aggression is a “flash mob”—a crowd of
boundaries between people. But these new adolescents connected through Facebook and
electronic tools have a dark side as well. They Twitter who descend on a location and attack
expose children to aggressive models and the people they find there.
opportunities to act aggressively. Not only do The aggression may also be verbal. In cyberbul-
children engage in aggressive acts against lying, a child or adolescent is picked on, tor-
fantasy figures while playing Grand Theft Auto but mented, threatened, harassed, humiliated,
also they engage in aggression against real embarrassed, or otherwise targeted by another
people using the Internet as a venue. child or adolescent using the Internet, a mobile
This aggression may be a physical assault, as phone, or other interactive digital device.
when children or adolescents videotape a fight Everything from text messaging to e-mail can be
and post it on YouTube, MySpace, or girlfights- used to cyberbully victims. Instant messaging is the
dump.com. These fights include the dangerous most common medium for cyber aggression;
“sport” of helmet boxing, in which two children 56 percent of perpetrators and 67 percent of
don helmets and gloves and hit each other in victims said the cyberbullying was through instant
the head until one of them gives up or passes ­messaging (David-Ferdon & Hertz, 2009).
506  Chapter 12 Aggression

Some people even create Web sites solely dedi- 35 percent of teens and 51 percent of preteens
cated to harassment. Other sites, such as juicyca- who had been cyberbullied had told their
mpus.com, become venues for cyberbullying. parents (Fight Crime: Invest in Kids, 2006). In fact,
Methods of cyberbullying include sending mean it may be difficult for a child to know that he or
or vulgar messages or images; posting sensitive, she is a victim of cyberbullying. In 2006, 13-year-
private information about another person; pre- old Megan Meier met a “cute boy” named “Josh
tending to be someone else to make that person Evans” on MySpace. He flattered her and she fell
look bad; spreading malicious rumors; intention- hard. But then “Josh” turned on Megan, saying
ally excluding someone from an online group; and he heard she was cruel to her friends, and he
even sending death threats. As use of electronic posted messages saying things like “Megan
media has increased, so has cyberbullying. Twice Meier is a slut,” and eventually, “This world would
as many children and adolescents in 2005 said be a better place without you.” The cyber
they were victims of online harassment as had in exchange devastated Megan, and she commit-
2000 (Wolak et al., 2006). According to a summary ted suicide. Later, it was discovered that an adult
of available studies, 27 percent of teens report that neighbor was behind the online “relationship”
they have been targets of cyberbullying at some and Josh Evans did not exist. After this tragedy,
point in their lives (Patchin & Hinduja, 2012). Megan’s parents pushed hard for measures to
Cyberbullying differs from in-person bullying in protect children online, and several jurisdictions
a number of ways: It can occur at any time of the implemented legislation prohibiting harassment
day or night, its messages and images can be over the Internet. In March 2007, the American
distributed quickly to a wide audience, and it is Advertising Council in partnership with the
often done anonymously, which makes it difficult National Crime Prevention Council, the U.S.
(and sometimes impossible) to trace. Department of Justice, and Crime Prevention
Cybervictims and cyberbullies spend much of Coalition of America, launched a public service
their time online. They have poorer relationships campaign to educate preteens and teens about
with their parents, are more likely to run away from how to help end cyberbullying. Web sites provid-
home, skip school, cheat on tests, and use drugs ing information about how to prevent cyberbully-
and alcohol than children and adolescents who ing have proliferated since Megan Meier’s
are not harassed online (Hinduja & Patchin, 2015; suicide, and StopCyberBullying.org has created
Ybarra & Mitchell, 2004). Of particular interest, they a pledge in Megan’s honor, which it encourages
engage in more aggressive behavior and are the everyone to sign.
target of bullying offline as well as online.
Cybervictims are especially likely to have social The Megan Pledge
problems (e.g., less socially connected), mental By taking this pledge:
health issues (e.g., anxiety, depression, elevated
stress), and to be victims offline (Spears et al., • I agree to take a stand against
2016); cyberbullies are especially likely to have cyberbullying.
problems with rule breaking and aggression • I agree not to use technology as a weapon
offline (Ybarra & Mitchell, 2007) as well as depres- to hurt others.
sion, anxiety, loneliness and low self-worth • I agree to think before I click.
(Schoffstall & Cohen, 2011; Spears et al., 2016). • I agree to think about the person on the
Cyberbullies are also likely to go to schools where other side.
most students approve of bullying (Williams & • I agree not to join in cyberbullying tactics or
Guerra, 2007). Families who are supportive can be used by cyberbullies to hurt others.
buffer their adolescents from being victims of • I agree to be part of the solution, not part of
cyberbullying (Fanti et al., 2012). the problem.
When children are bullied online, they do not Cyberbullying is an urgent real-world problem
always tell adults what is happening, so it is that demands and is receiving attention. All
difficult for parents to intervene and offer guid- states have laws against cyberbullying
ance or protection. One survey found that only (Hinduja & Patchin, 2012).
 Bullies and Victims  507

school (Ladd & Troop-Gordon, 2003; Olweus, 2001). They have low social status and
low self-esteem, and they, too, experience depression (Juvonen et al., 2003; Ladd,
2005; Leadbeater & Hoglund, 2009; Nangle et al., 2003; Schwartz et al., 2001). They
have difficulty forming new friendships (Ellis & Zarbatany, 2007) and suffer in terms
of academic achievement (Moore et al., 2017; Thijs & Verkuyten, 2008). Even just
witnessing other children being bullied can take a toll, especially for children who
have poor emotion-regulating skills (Kelly et al., 2008). Children who are regular
targets of victimization often remain victims through their school years (Cillessen &
Lansu, 2015; Kochenderfer-Ladd & Wardrop, 2001), and, not surprisingly, the
longer they are victims, the more serious are the consequences in terms of increas-
ing depression, anxiety, and social withdrawal (Goldbaum et al., 2003). In extreme
cases, victims commit suicide. Even in adulthood, people who were abused by their
peers in early adolescence report depression and low self-esteem (Olweus, 1999;
Rigby, 2001). Bully–victims are even more likely than either bullies or victims to be
avoided by their classmates and to show high rates of conduct problems and school
disengagement (Junoven et al., 2003).
Bullying affects children’s hormone levels as well as their psychological well-
being. The immediate aftermath of being bullied once or twice is a rise in stress
indexed by an increased cortisol level (Carney & Hazler, 2007). However, when chil-
dren are exposed to bullying on a regular basis, their cortisol levels drop, suggesting
that they have become numb or desensitized to the stress of being bullied. Having a
lower-than-normal cortisol level can have physical and psychological consequences,
including chronic anxiety, mood problems, and fearfulness.

Conditions Leading to Bullying

Bullies and victims are created by both their own genetic makeup and conditions
in the environment. According to a British study of 1,116 families with 10-year-old
twins, genetic factors accounted for 61 percent of the variation in bullying and
72 percent of the variation in victimization (Ball et al., 2008). Even before bullying
begins, children who will become bullies or victims can be identified (Rodkin et al.,
2015). Elementary school bullies or bully/victims were more likely to be aggressive
in preschool (Jansen et al., 2011), more likely to have experienced higher levels
of sibling aggression (Tippett & Wolke, 2015), and to either have been a victim of
abuse or a witness to family violence (Mustanoja et al., 2011). They have trouble
regulating their emotions, and provocative victims have poor social skills and low
levels of inhibition (Burk et al., 2008). In their early years, victimized children tend
to have anxious attachments to their mothers (Perry et al., 2001), and provoca-
tive victims are likely to be exposed to physical abuse, harsh discipline, and marital
violence (Schwartz et al., 1997). Victimized boys are likely to have overprotective
mothers who hinder their development of autonomy or encourage their expres-
sions of fear and anxiety (Curtner-Smith et al., 2010; Georgiou, 2008). Victimized
girls are likely to have coercive, rejecting, and unresponsive mothers who make the
girls vulnerable to victimization by impeding their ability to form close social ties
(Curtner-Smith et al., 2010; Finnegan et al., 1998). Bullies’ mothers also tend to
be unresponsive (Georgiou, 2008), and bullies who continue their attacks through
high school have parents who communicate with them less, have more conflicts with
them, and are poorer at monitoring their activities than the parents of children who
stop their bullying ways (Pepler et al., 2008).
Children can be protected by having positive relationships with their peers. In
one study, the more friends children had, the less likely they were to be victimized
508  Chapter 12 Aggression

(Hodges et al., 1997). But not just any friends will do; friends who were physically
strong or aggressive and were not victimized themselves were the ones who served
a protective function (Laursen et al., 2007). Having friends not only protected
children from victimization but also increased the likelihood that they would have
high self-esteem and would not “invite” an attack or submit to it (Hodges et al.,
1999). In another study, researchers found that children who lost a best friend and
failed to replace him or her by the end of the school year were at increased risk of
being victimized (Bowker et al., 2006). Apparently having friends—the right type of
friends—can buffer children from victimization.

Control of Aggression
So far in this chapter we have discussed the many factors that push children toward
aggressiveness. In this final section we focus on ways to reduce or control aggression.

et You Thought That . . .: You Could Reduce

Aggressive Feelings by “Letting off Steam”
For many years, psychologists “My younger brother used to kick the furni-
and the general public believed ture when he got mad. He’s 32 . . . now and
that one way to reduce aggres- still kicking the furniture [and] . . . his wife,
sion was to “let off steam” or “let the cat, the kids. . . . Why don’t you tell moth-
your feelings out.” ers that children must be taught to control
One of the most persistent beliefs about their anger? This is what separates civilized
aggression was that if people had ample human beings from savages.”
opportunity to engage in aggressive acts,
whether actually or symbolically—a process Despite the popularity of the catharsis notion,
known as catharsis—they would be less likely to research evidence tends to support the view of
act on hostile aggressive urges. This belief was this sensible Ann Landers reader. Most studies
based on the idea that aggressive urges build suggest that aggressive experiences promote
up in a person and unless this accumulating rather than “drain off” aggressive urges. In one
reservoir of aggressive energies is drained, a study, researchers allowed third-grade children to
violent outburst might occur. The implications shoot a toy gun after being frustrated by a peer
were clear: Provide people with a safe opportu- who interfered with a task they were working on
nity to behave aggressively—such as hitting a (Mallick & McCandless, 1966). Another group of
punching bag—and decrease the likelihood of children was allowed to work on a nonaggression-
antisocial aggression. Therapists bought punch- related task—arithmetic problems—after the peer
ing bags for their offices and Bobo dolls, pound- upset them. Then all the children were given a
ing boards, and toy guns and rubber knives for chance to express their aggression toward the
their playrooms. Advice columnists agreed. For peer who had upset them. The researchers used
example, Ann Landers (1969) once advised a a rigged procedure in which the children
reader that hostile feelings must be released and thought they were delivering a shock to the other
went on to recommend that children be taught child. Results of the study demonstrated that
to vent their anger against furniture rather than whether the children shot the toy gun or worked
against people. A reader was shocked at advice on math problems after they were frustrated by
given to a mother of a 3-year-old who was the peer made little difference in the delivery of
having temper tantrums: “shocks.” Catharsis did not reduce aggression.
 Control of Aggression  509

Cognitive Modification Strategies

One effective way to reduce children’s aggression is to change their thinking about
social situations. As noted earlier, aggressive children often process other people’s
behavior incorrectly and do not know how to solve social problems (Dodge & Petit,
2003; Lansford et al., 2010). Teaching them how to read other people’s behav-
ioral cues has led to decreased hostile attribution bias and decreased aggression
(Hudley & Graham, 1993). This approach was especially effective with reactively
aggressive children, who are particularly poor at reading other people’s cues and
intentions. A more comprehensive program that taught children to distract them-
selves and use relaxation methods when they were provoked, take another person’s
perspective and make accurate attributions about intentions, say “no” to peer pres-
sure, and reach nonviolent solutions to social problems was also successful in reduc-
ing boys’ aggression (Lochman & Wells, 2004). Making aggressive children stop and
think about social problems, consider alternative responses, and contemplate nega-
tive consequences of aggression for themselves and others and teaching children
to cooperate and take turns are also strategies that can reduce aggression (Guerra
et al., 1997; Kazdin, 2013). One 10-year-old boy in such a program recalled:

“Learning to stop and ponder my next move when someone did something that upset
me was really good advice; now I am better able to control my aggressive outbursts. It
really helped me to control myself more and keep me out of trouble not only with other
kids but with the teachers too.”

Another effective approach is to teach children that aggression is not a fixed per-
sonality trait but one that can be changed (Yeager et al., 2013).

Parents as Agents for Reducing Aggression

Another way to reduce children’s aggression is to improve their parents’ behav-
ior. Many programs based on the model of coercive interaction cycles identified
by ­Patterson (2016) have attempted to do this. Often termed Parent Management
Training (PMT), the goal in these programs is to extinguish parents’ coercive
behavior in favor of contingent, consistent, and clear rules that lead to children’s
compliance. These programs do reduce children’s aggression (Dishion, 2014;
­Dishion & Kavanaugh, 2000) and probably improve the quality of life for parents
too. Meta-analyses show that PMT programs are very effective for families with chil-
dren younger than 10 years (Serketich & Dumas, 1996) and moderately effective for
families with 10- to 17-year-olds (Woolfendon et al., 2002).
Other parenting programs have been used to reduce aggressive behavior in pre-
school children attending Head Start programs (Webster-Stratton, 1998) and to
reduce the delinquent behavior of juveniles in the court system (Chamberlain et al.,
2007; Eddy et al., 2004). In a third program, parents of 3- to 8-year-old children
referred to a clinic because of their antisocial behavior were taught to praise and
reward their children, provide clear rules, and give consistent and nonharsh conse-
quences when the children violated the rules (Scott, 2005). A year after the program
ended, only half as many children had clinical levels of aggression as before the
program started (37 percent versus 68 percent). In yet another program, parents
of children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) were taught to
use less-punitive disciplinary strategies; their children subsequently exhibited lower
levels of aggressive and disruptive behavior, but only if they also received stimulant
510  Chapter 12 Aggression

medication, such as Ritalin (Hinshaw et al., 2000). This study supports the view that
although parents’ discipline affects children’s aggressive behavior, biological factors
matter as well.

Schools as Venues for Intervention

School-based programs have also been used to improve aggressive children’s social
problem-solving skills and reduce their aggression (Juvonen & Graham, 2014;
Kress & Elias, 2006). An evaluation of children in 15 elementary schools in New
York that were participating in the Resolving Conflict Creatively Program indicated
that children whose teachers taught them lessons in creative conflict resolution had
slower rates of growth in hostile attribution bias, aggressive negotiation strategies,
self-reported conduct problems, aggressive fantasies, and teacher-reported aggres-
sive behavior (Aber et al., 2003). In another school-based program, teachers were
taught to reduce children’s disruptive behavior by using the Good Behavior Game
(Flower et al., 2014; Ialongo et al., 2001; van Lier et al., 2004), a program that
rewarded the whole class—with a pizza party or a day without homework—if any
child in the class improved. However, if a few wiseguys (or gals) disrupted the class,
everyone suffered—the teacher canceled recess, increased homework, or gave the
class a detention. This program reduced aggression for 1st graders, and the effects
lasted until at least the end of elementary school.
In a school-based project specifically targeted at reducing children’s bullying,
Karin Frey and her colleagues implemented a program for 3rd through 6th graders
(Frey et al., 2005, 2009). The Steps to Respect program had three components: (a)
schoolwide antibullying policies and procedures; (b) a classroom-based cognitive-
behavioral curriculum to address peer norms about bullying and teach children
social-emotional skills for responding to bullying and increasing peer acceptance;
and (c) a selective coaching intervention for students involved in bullying. After
2 years, bullying dropped by 31 percent, and bully-supportive bystander behavior
decreased 73 percent in comparison with bullying and bully support in control
schools. The effects were most pronounced for students who did the most bullying
before the program started and for students who received individual coaching.
In Canada, a school-based program aimed at reducing peer conflict and vic-
timization has been developed—the WITS program in which teachers and parents
encourage elementary school students to use their WITS in confrontational situa-
tions by W-Walking away, I-Ignoring, T-Talk it out, and S-Seek Help. The WITS acro-
nym provides a common language and strategies that children and the adults in
their environments can use to talk about and respond to peer victimization. Eval-
uations of this school-based program found that the rate of decline from fall to
spring in physical and relational victimization was greater in program than in con-
trol schools (Leadbeater & Sukhawathanakul, 2011). The program has been used
across Canada as a way to reduce interpersonal peer conflict.

Aggression Prevention: A Multipronged Effort

Olweus bullying prevention program Because many factors determine aggres-
sion, taking a multifaceted approach to reducing it may be most effective. An
antibullying program in Norway exemplifies such an approach. After three boys
committed suicide as a result of extreme harassment by classmates in 1982, school
officials launched a national campaign against bullying and implemented a preven-
tion program in every school. The program developed by Dan Olweus had four
 Control of Aggression  511

goals: to increase public awareness of the problem, to actively involve teachers and
parents, to provide support and protection for victims of aggression, and to develop
clear classroom rules to combat aggressive behavior. Teachers were given a booklet
that described the nature and scope of aggression in the schools and offered practi-
cal suggestions about what they could do to control or prevent aggressive behavior.
The booklet encouraged teachers to intervene in bullying situations and give stu-
dents the clear message that “aggression is not acceptable in our school.” Parents
also received basic information about bullying and were offered assistance if their
child was either a bully or a victim. Children participated in class meetings where
they discussed bullying and the class rules. Based on data from about 2,500 students
in fourth through seventh grades, researchers found that the frequency of bully and
victim problems decreased by 50 to 70 percent at both 8 months and 20 months
after the program began. Fewer children reported being attacked by others or act-
ing aggressively themselves. In addition, vandalism, theft, and truancy declined sig-
nificantly, and student satisfaction with school life rose appreciably (Olweus, 1993,
1997, 2004).
A replication and extension of this program in Finland further illustrates the value
of a multipronged school-based approach to the problem of bullying. To increase
program effectiveness, this extension included efforts to enhance children’s empa-
thy and self-efficacy, support victimized peers, and combat the false impression that
“bullying is OK” (Kärnä et al., 2011). In the 78 schools implementing the programs,
there was a 46 percent reduction in victimization and a 61 percent reduction in bul-
lying from pretest to 1 year later. Bystander behavior was altered too: Children in
these schools were more likely to feel that they could defend a victim against a bully
assault compared with children in the 39 control schools. Despite the great success
of these programs in Scandinavia, the programs may not work as well in the United
States (Evans et al., 2014). Specifically, they may be quite effective in schools in
Scandinavia in part because the students are very similar to one another, which may
lead to the same intervention working similarly for most of the students. In contrast,
the interventions may be less effective in the United States in which students differ
much more from one another including in SES and race/ethnicity.
Another program developed in the United States to combat children’s aggressive
and antisocial behavior was The Fast Track Project (Conduct Problems Prevention
Courtesy Jaguar Educational/www.jaguared.com

This poster is part of a

schoolwide campaign to
reduce bullying.
512  Chapter 12 Aggression

Research Group, 2004, 2011). During the elementary school years (grades 1–5)
children from poor families were given lessons to help them with social problem
solving, emotional understanding, and communication and to teach them how to
regulate their emotions. Children with the most serious problems (10 percent of
the sample) also received academic tutoring, extra social skills training, and a par-
ent intervention designed to improve parenting skills.
In the middle and early high school years (grades 6–10), families participated
in four types of program. Parent group meetings focused on issues such as positive
involvement and monitoring. Parent and youth group meetings focused on adoles-
cent developmental issues such as romantic relationships and sex education; alco-
hol, tobacco and drugs; and vocational goal setting. Youth group meetings focused
on issues such as coping with peer pressure, vocational opportunities, budgeting
and life skills, job interview skills, and summer employment opportunities. Individu-
alized intervention plans for the youth focused on regular assessments of risk and
protective factors.
Researchers found that by the end of the first year in the program, children
in Fast Track were less aggressive, had improved academically, and had developed
better social-emotional skills than children in a control group. They got along bet-
ter and were better liked by their peers. Their parents’ skills and involvement in
school activities had improved as well. By the end of third grade, 37 percent of the
children in Fast Track still had no conduct problems compared with 27 percent of
the control group. Positive effects persisted through fifth grade (Foster et al., 2006).
The Fast Track preventive intervention’s positive impact on antisocial behavior in
adolescence is mediated by its impact on social-cognitive processes. Specifically, the
intervention’s impact on antisocial behavior was mediated by its impact on three
social-cognitive processes: reducing hostile-attribution biases, increasing competent
response generation to social problems, and devaluing aggression (Dodge et al.,
2013). Despite some positive effects of the Fast Track program, these findings also
speak to the difficulty of moving aggressive youth away from aggressive behaviors.
Although a follow-up when the youth were in 12th grade revealed that the inter-
vention reduced some problems for youth who were identified as being especially
at risk in first grade, the program was not effective for all problems or all youth
(­Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group, 2011; see Figure 12.7).
In a study comparing the effects of including single or multiple factors in the
mulipronged program, researchers confirmed that only a combination of factors
(classroom-based peer intervention and family intervention aimed at enhancing
parenting skills and parent–child communication) was effective in reducing chil-
dren’s aggression (Metropolitan Area Child Study Research Group, 2002). The
length of the program also mattered. In one study, children were assigned to a

0.5

0.4
Externalizing

0.3 Control
FIGURE 12.7 Cumulative rates of externalizing diagnosis Intervention
0.2
as a function of intervention (Fast Track) among the
highest risk group. 0.1
Source: Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group (2011).
The effects of the Fast Track Preventive Intervention on the 0
development of conduct disorder across childhood. Child Grade 3 Grade 6 or Grade 9 or Grade 12 or
­Development, 82, 331–345. earlier earlier earlier
 Control of Aggression  513

program of parent training, teacher training, and cognitive problem solving that
lasted from first grade through sixth grade or from fifth grade through sixth grade
(Hawkins et al., 1999). By age 18, adolescents in the 6-year program were signifi-
cantly less likely to exhibit delinquency and violence than children who had been in
the 2-year program or no program at all. The addition of “booster shots” to reinstate
the original treatment after a program ends is also helpful in maintaining lower
levels of aggression (Dishion, 2014; Kress & Elias, 2006). Clearly, mounting a mul-
tifaceted assault is important for reducing children’s antisocial behavior. Although
such efforts are expensive, they may be cost effective (Foster et al., 2006). Accord-
ing to Dodge (2008), a chronic violent offender costs society about $2 million, so a
prevention program that costs $1,000 per child would be cost effective if only one
out of 200 children was diverted from a life of violence.

Cultural Context: Preventing Youth Violence

Young people in ethnic and racial minority communities in the United States are
at greater risk for high rates of aggression and violence than majority youth, and it
has been suggested that prevention and intervention efforts should be tailored to
the unique needs of these communities (Guerra & Smith, 2006; Kenyon & H ­ anson,
2012). Cynthia Hudley and April Taylor (2006) outlined a model to serve as a guide
for culturally sensitive programs for minority youth. First, programs should be cul-
turally effective: Service providers’ knowledge, attitudes, and skills should equip
them to function successfully within the community. Second, programs should be
culturally responsive: Curricular materials and methods should reflect participants’
cultural strengths and support their success both within their own culture and in
the mainstream; strategies for preventing violence should be presented in ways that
support cultural values and practices. Third, programs should be culturally engaged:
Participants should be taught to understand and embrace their cultural niche. This
includes learning about their culture, taking pride in their heritage, and developing
a positive sense of themselves.
Here are some examples of culturally sensitive programs that were designed to
reflect these principles. One program for fifth- and sixth-grade children in Hawai’i
combines a focus on traditional Hawai’ian values, such as respect for the land
(aina) and care for the ocean (malama), with culture-free elements, such as conflict
management and problem-solving techniques. This program has been effective in
increasing the children’s pride in being Hawai’ian, and the program organizers
hope that by increasing children’s ethnic pride, they will reduce their violence as
well (Takeshita & Takeshita, 2002; Mark et al., 2006).
The Tribal Youth Program was established to empower Native American commu-
nities to resolve social problems using spiritual and cultural aspects of their native
traditions (Hurst & Laird, 2006). Interventions in the Tribal Youth Program include
youth tribal courts that are consistent with cultural traditions for dealing with trou-
bled youth, such as increased community service and immersion in tribal history
and traditions, home detention systems that reduce the need to separate youth
from their family members, and culturally based assessments such as talking circles,
sand tray paintings, and adventure programs. These programs have been found to
be effective in reducing youths’ antisocial behavior (McKinney, 2003).
Perhaps the most convincing evidence that cultural tailoring can increase a pro-
gram’s effectiveness comes from a test of two social skills training curricula in which
one group of African American youth received only the basic curriculum, including
training in cooperation, solving problems, and regulating emotions, and the other
group received that curriculum plus a component focused on African American
514  Chapter 12 Aggression

history (e.g., Martin Luther King’s “I have a dream” speech) and African American
values (e.g., the importance of extended family) (Banks et al., 1996). Only the mem-
bers of the group who participated in the culturally enhanced program decreased
their anger and increased their self-control.
Clearly, adapting violence-prevention programs to fit the cultural backgrounds
of their participants is important. The cultural appropriateness of the intervention
and the relevance of the program for participants’ everyday lives increase the effec-
tiveness of these efforts (Kenyon & Hanson, 2012).

earning from Living Leaders: Bonnie J. R. Leadbeater

French and English and is being translated into

Courtesy of Bonnie Leadbeater

Portuguese for use in Brazil. She is a fellow of the
Canadian Academy of Health Sciences and
recipient of the Canadian Institutes for Health
Research Partnership Award. She is highly commit-
ted to efforts to translate theory and research into
training, policy, and programs—all actions that
can improve the lives of children, youth, and their
families. Regarding the future of our field, she offers
that one of her most influential mentors, Ed Zigler,
Bonnie Leadbeater is a Professor of Psychology said, “Enough is known for action!” and adds that
at the University of Victoria in Canada. She the main challenge for our field is to translate
received degrees in Nursing and Educational research to action. And for undergraduates,
Psychology from the university of Ottawa and “Future scholars can change the world. Go for it!”
worked as a nurse before returning to graduate
school in Psychology. She earned her PhD from Further Reading
Columbia University, New York, and then taught Leadbeater, B. R, Thompson, K., & Sukhawathanakula., P.
at Yale university for nearly a decade before (2014). It gets better or does it? Peer victimization and
internalizing problems in the transition to young adult-
moving back to Canada. She has made hood. Development and Psychopathology, 26, 675–688.
internationally recognized contributions to
research on adolescent parenting, emerging Terrie E. Moffitt
adulthood, adolescent depression, resilience in
high-risk youth, and the prevention of peer
victimization in elementary school children. Her
book “Growing up fast: Transitions to early adult-
hood for inner city adolescent mothers” received
Best Book Award from The Society for Research
Courtesy of Terrie E. Moffitt

on Adolescence. She is the director of the

Victoria Healthy Youth Survey—a 15-year longitu-
dinal study assessing health during transitions to
young adulthood. She is also an author and
evaluator of the WITS and WITS LEADS elemen-
tary school programs for the prevention of peer
victimization (http://www.witsprogram.ca). This
program has been widely adopted in over 300 Terrie Moffitt is a citizen of the United Kingdom
schools across Canada, the Yukon, and the and the United States and holds positions in both
Northwest Territories and is available in both countries: She is Professor and Chair in Social
 Control of Aggression  515

Behaviour and Development at King’s College ­ ndergraduate students is a very positive one:
u
London and Nannerl O. Keohane University “The life of a behavioural scientist is a wonderful
­Professor and of Psychology and Neuroscience life, full of questions that are important to every-
and of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences at one, always stimulating, never boring.”
Duke University. When she was in college, she
wanted to major in English literature, but she Further Reading
chose psychology because her best grades were Wertz, J., Agnew-Blais, J., Caspi, A., Danese, A., Fisher, H. L.,
in her psych courses. She went on to graduate Goldman-Mellor, S. Moffit, T. E., & Arseneault, L. (2018).
From childhood conduct problems to poor functioning
school in psychology and received her Ph.D. in at 18 years: Examining explanations in a longitudinal
clinical psychology from the University of Southern cohort study. Journal of the American Academy of
California. In graduate school, she learned about Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 57, 54–60.
the power of the longitudinal research design,
and that design led her to an interest in tracking Kenneth A. Dodge
social development (or more accurately, anti-
social development) over time. In 1987, she met

Courtesy of Kenneth A. Dodge,

Sanford School of Public Policy

Avshalom Caspi at a conference, and in 1990,

photo from Duke University,

they became partners in research and in life.
Two questions have been at the center of their
research: What happens to children who have
behavior problems when they grow up? How do
nature and nurture work together to influence
children’s behavioral outcomes? Moffitt and
Caspi followed a sample of children in New
Zealand from birth to adulthood and are follow-
ing another sample in England. By observing Ken Dodge is Pritzker Professor of Early Learning
children across time, they have detected differ- Policy Studies and of Psychology and Neurosci-
ences in patterns of antisocial behavior related ence at Duke University. He received his Ph.D. in
to gender and to the age at which the children clinical psychology from Duke University in 1978
first exhibit antisocial behavior. Early starters are and went on to teach at the University of Indiana
more likely than late starters to become serious and at Vanderbilt before coming “home.” He is
offenders in adulthood. In 2007, Moffitt received best known for his development of the social
the Stockholm Prize in Criminology, and in 2008, information-processing model of social behavior.
the International Society for the Study of According to this model, children in social situa-
Behavioural Development presented her its tions go through a series of thoughts, interpreta-
Distinguished Scientific Contribution Award. She tions, and evaluations before they decide how
was awarded the Klaus J. Jacobs Research Prize to behave. The model has been widely used to
for Productive Youth Development by the Jacobs explain why some children behave more aggres-
Foundation in 2010. She is a Fellow of the sively than others. It brings together ideas from
Academy of Medical Sciences, the American cognitive science and developmental psychol-
Society of Criminology, the British Academy, and ogy and was an important corrective to earlier
Academia Europaea. accounts of aggression that simply focused on
Moffitt believes that the most pressing need in children’s behavior.
this area of research is to prevent psychiatric Dodge has now broadened his original
disorders in adulthood by intervening when model to include biological factors as well as
children first display problem behavior. In the cognitive and social ones. He and his col-
future, she predicts, more psychologists will use leagues have also developed an intervention
neuroimaging and molecular genetics to study program aimed at preventing antisocial behav-
social development because they are the ior in young children. The Fast Track program
newest tools in the field. Her message for has proved valuable for reducing children’s
516  Chapter 12 Aggression

aggression. Dodge’s research reflects his dual know that the impact of virtually every factor in
commitment to scientific theory and the appli- development ‘depends’ on culture, neighbor-
cation of scientific theory to problems in society. hood, peer, and family contexts. Therefore, we
He is a Fellow of the Academy of Experimental are in danger of losing general principles of
Criminology and a Fellow of the American development. A major challenge is to identify
Association for the Advancement of Science. these general principles while still acknowledg-
Dodge also is president-elect of the Society for ing the qualifying role of context.” For students,
Research in Child Development and a recipient he advises, “Find your passion, and relentlessly
of the Distinguished Scientific Achievement pursue it. External rewards can sustain one only
Award from the American Psychological so long; life’s most fulfilling and important
Association. He received the J. P. Scott Award for accomplishments are made out of intrinsic love
Lifetime Contribution to Aggression Research for the journey. Find work-life balance today
from the International Society for Research on because if you have a plan to defer, you will
Aggression and the Science to Practice Award never find it.”
from the Society for Prevention Research. His
long-term goal is to use basic research as a
Further Reading
guide for policies that will reduce violence.
Dodge, K. A. (2017). Developmental mechanisms in gene-
Dodge observes that “The field of social devel- by-intervention (GxI) effects in the Fast Track trial
opment has taken a leap forward by incorporat- (pp. 235-250). In P. H. Tolan & B. L. Leventhal (Eds.), Gene-­
ing the role of environmental context in Environment Transactions in Developmental Psychopa-
thology, Springer: Cham, Switzerland.
moderating children’s development. We now

Chapter Summary
Definitions of Aggression
• An act is aggressive if the aggressor intends it to harm the victim, the victim per-
ceives it to be harmful, and it is considered aggressive according to the norms
of the community.
• Types of aggression include proactive (or instrumental) aggression, which
occurs in the service of a goal such as acquiring an object, and reactive
(or hostile aggression), which occurs in response to a threat, attack, or
frustration.
Developmental Changes in Aggression
• Types of aggression change in frequency with development. Proactive aggres-
sion is most common in infancy and early childhood. In middle childhood,
reactive aggression becomes more common than proactive aggression. Chil-
dren also become more verbal and less physical in their aggression. Relational
aggression becomes more common and sophisticated. In adolescence, serious
violent offenses, such as assault, robbery, and rape, increase.
• Individual differences in aggression are quite stable from childhood to adult-
hood. A small number of children are physically aggressive at a young age
(early starters) and remain highly aggressive; the majority of children show a
steady decline in aggression after their early years. People who are late starters
begin to act aggressively during adolescence and are less likely to show long-
term patterns of aggression in adulthood.
 Key Terms  517

Gender Differences in Aggression

• Boys are more physically aggressive than girls. Girls are more likely to use ver-
bal strategies to solve their conflicts. Both boys and girls use relational aggres-
sion, but girls use more relational aggression than physical aggression, whereas
the reverse is true for boys.
Causes of Aggression
• Aggressive children are likely to have aggressive relatives, irritable and impul-
sive temperaments, lower levels of serotonin, higher levels of testosterone, and
prenatal complications.
• Parenting behavior including erratic and severe physical punishment and
overly strict control contribute to elevated levels of child aggression.
• Association with deviant peers can increase the possibility that a child will
engage in aggressive activities. Poverty and high-crime neighborhoods can
also promote aggressive behavior. Individualistic cultures have higher rates of
aggression than collectivist societies.
• Violent TV and video games are associated with increases in aggressive behavior.
• Children who have or experience more of these adverse factors are at greatest
risk for aggressiveness.
Bullies and Victims
• Bullying is a major issue in schools in many countries. It can be direct (verbal
or physical) or indirect. Victims are either passive (do not react aggressively to
being bullied) or provocative (respond aggressively to being bullied). Some
children are both bullies and victims.
• Being either a chronic bully or a chronic victim has psychological conse-
quences, such as increased anxiety, depression, and social withdrawal.
• Having a best friend, especially a physically strong one, can reduce victimization.
• Cyberfighting and cyberbullying can lead to negative psychological outcomes,
including suicide.
Control of Aggression
• Catharsis or “letting off steam” is an ineffective strategy for controlling
aggression.
• Aggression can be reduced by teaching children how to read other peoples’
behavior more accurately and encouraging them to be more sensitive to the
views and feelings of others.
• Multifaceted intervention programs in which children, parents, teachers, and
schools participate are effective approaches to reducing aggression.

Key Terms
bullying early starters proactive aggression verbal aggression
catharsis hostile attribution bias reactive aggression victimization
cyberbullying indirect aggression relational aggression
deviancy training late starters serotonin
direct aggression physical aggression social aggression
518  Chapter 12 Aggression

At th e M ov i e s

A number of movies have highlighted relational aggression. Asperger’s syndrome is a target for school bullies. He
In Mean Girls (2004), home-schooled Cady enters a public spends his time playing an online game in an attempt to
high school and immediately crosses paths with Queen Bee, block out reality, but as the bullies’ relentless attacks push
Regina, the leader of the school’s most fashionable clique, him over the edge, his online dream girl appears to him
The Plastics. When Cady falls for Regina’s ex-boyfriend, the and helps him devise a plan to make the bullies pay. A more
Queen Bee is stung and schemes to destroy Cady’s social shocking portrayal of youth violence appears in the movie
future. The “girl-world” war that ensues has the whole Green Street Hooligans (2005), a gritty film about English
school running for cover. Mean Girls was based on a non- gangs of hooligans that encourage their local football teams
fiction book, Queen Bees and Wannabes. Odd Girl Out (2005) by throwing violent brawls with their rivals. When a Harvard
also focuses on girls’ relational aggression, this time in mid- student moves to London, he finds himself in the middle
dle school. It portrays the brutality of the mean girls’ jeal- of one of these gangs. At first, he is afraid and reluctant
ousy, lies, rumors, name-calling, manipulation, and social to fight, but he becomes desensitized to the violence and
exclusion; the girls in the film even create a hate website on joins in. This movie illuminates an environment in which
which they put embarrassing pictures of their victim. In the violence is a major aspect of life as we see in high-risk neigh-
end, the victim stands up to the bullies. The implication is borhoods where gangs provide power and companion-
that this act will eliminate the mean girls’ harassment. Happy ship. The award-winning film Bowling for Columbine (2002)
endings are likely more common in films than in real life. explores the nature and causes of violence in the United
Cyberbully (2011)—a TV movie broadcast on ABC Family—is States, focusing on the massacre at Columbine High School.
similar to Odd Girl Out; it too depicts a girl who is bullied The film shows how culture in the United States often con-
at school and online. All of these films (and other dramas, dones violence through its media messages, online games,
such as the television show Gossip Girl) underscore the harm and easy access to guns. Bully (2011) is a no-holds-barred
and pain that relational aggression can cause and serve as a documentary film about bullying in U.S. schools, which inti-
reminder of the need to educate teens and tweens about the mately portrays the daily lives of five bullying victims over the
dangers of just being “mean.” In Cyberbully, the victim gets course of a school year. It addresses the concepts of cutting,
pegged as a “slut” and “whore” and almost commits suicide, physical abuse, and suicide, in a way that presents the con-
and in the end a law is passed to help fight against bullying. sequences as well as the behaviors themselves and encour-
Sometimes relational aggression isn’t enough and mean ages kids to stand up to bullies, not stand by, and reinforces
girls take out their feelings in physical aggression. Such is the fact that everyone can make a difference when it comes
the case in Girl Fight (2011), a Lifetime movie inspired by to this essential issue. The film’s director was a victim of
a harrowing true event in which a stellar high school stu- bullying as a child and decided to make a documentary so
dent in Florida posted negative comments on Facebook that the hidden lives of bullied children would be brought
about some popular girls at school who had rejected her, into the open. The recent film Wonder (2017) is based on
and when the girls discovered the comments they beat her R.J. Palacio’s best-selling children’s book about the school
up and uploaded a video of the beating online. experiences of a 10-year-old boy with a facial disfigurement
Physical aggression and bullying by boys is also a and how his classmates come to accept his difference and
popular topic for movies. In Ben X (2007), a boy with embrace him as a valued classmate.
 CH AP TE R 13

Policy
Improving Children’s Lives

AP Photo/Rogelio Solis/Wide World Photos

Joanne, age 16, is the single mother of a
6-month-old baby; she lives with her mother, who
is also unmarried and living on food stamps.
Across town, Jolene and Juan work to support
their four children, but their jobs pay minimum
wage and they often don’t have enough to pay
their bills. They are especially worried about what
will happen if one of their children gets sick
because their jobs do not provide health insur-
ance. Tim and Trish, parents of a third family in a
more affluent neighborhood, have a 7-month-
old, and it is time for Trish to go back to work.
Trying to find child care that is safe and afford-
able is proving to be a real challenge. Finally,
In the United States, one of the richest countries in in a fourth family, Sam worries that his temper is
the world, many families and children are struggling getting out of control. He finds himself spanking
to make ends meet. To survive and perhaps improve his children harder and harder. As these exam-
their lives, these families need help. Government ples illustrate, not everyone in the United States
policies and programs are intended to do just that— lives the American dream—happy, prosperous,
to improve the lives of families and children by and safe. In this chapter, we discuss four major
preventing or reducing their problems. Although problems affecting American children and their
private organizations such as businesses and chari- families and some policies to alleviate them.
table agencies also provide programs, our focus in
this chapter is primarily on policies implemented by
state and federal governments. Social policy refers to
a set of planned actions to solve a social problem or attain a social goal; government-
based social policy is often referred to as public policy.
Social policies have a number of purposes (Chapin, 2017; Dodge & Haskins,
2015; Jenson & Fraser, 2015). First, they provide information. In 1912, the U.S.
government established the Children’s Bureau to provide statistical information
about children. Today, government offices and private organizations, such as the
New America Foundation and Child Trends, provide yearly updates on the status
and needs of children and families. Second, policies provide funding to achieve

519
520  Chapter 13 Policy

goals such as child protection and family support. A third purpose of policy is to
provide services to prevent or reduce problems; these include programs such as
Head Start for preschoolers. A fourth purpose of policy is to provide an infra-
structure to support efforts on behalf of children; the House Select Committee on
Children and Families and the Senate Children’s Caucus address children’s policy
issues in the U.S. Congress. In this chapter, we examine some important social
problems that children and families face in the United States and discuss some
social policies that are designed to reduce these problems and prevent harm-
ful effects on children’s social and emotional well-being. When relevant, we also
describe contrasting policies that have been implemented in other countries to
address the same problems.

What Determines Public Policy

for Children?
What problems should social policies for children address? Although this is a sim-
ple question, policy decisions always represent trade-offs and compromises based
on society’s needs, budget limitations, and political agendas. To appreciate the
dynamic nature of the policymaking process, consider how child policy priorities
have changed in the last 100 years. In the late 1800s, the main concern for U.S.
policymakers was working conditions for children; in the middle of the 20th cen-
tury, preventing moral and sexual transgressions by children (particularly girls) was
a major issue (Schlossman & Cairns, 1993). Now policy concerns include poverty,
health insurance, child care, teenage parenthood, and child abuse. Clearly, policy
concerns reflect the needs and political priorities that are salient during different
historical eras.
A second question is how much money should be allocated for child-related poli-
cies. Social policies are effective only to the extent to which funds are available to
support them. In recent years, the U.S. government has spent nearly half of its
discretionary budget on military forces; a very small fraction of that has gone to
programs for children, in part because many U.S. policymakers assume that families
are responsible for the health and well-being of their children. Among developed
countries, the United States has the highest rate of poverty but spends the least to
reduce it.
A third question is who decides how the money should be used. In the United
States, the federal government, the states, and local counties or communities
share policymaking authority. Two common forms of federal funding for child
and family policies are block grants and matching grants. A block grant is a fixed
amount of money provided by the federal government to a state to promote
a broadly defined area such as maternal employment or school improvement;
with a matching grant, the federal government and the state share the costs of the
program.
A fourth question is what the research base is for the policy. Over the past few
decades, governments in the United States and other Western countries have
become concerned that policies be based on scientific evidence and have used this
evidence as a factor in the mix of ideology, interests, and institutional constraints
that underlie policies (Dodge & Haskins, 2015; Huston, 2008, 2011). The No Child
Left Behind law of 2002, for example, included the phrase “scientifically based
research” more than 100 times (National Research Council, 2007).
 Types of Public Policy  521

David McNew/Getty Images, Inc.

These children and their single mother live in El Centro,

California, where the poverty rate was over 20 percent in
2018, one of the highest in the United States. This family
can be helped by public policies offering the mother
economic assistance, job training, parenting-skills train-
ing, food stamps, health care, and subsidized housing and
by policies giving the children high-quality child care,
preschool education, and health benefits.

Types of Public Policy

Public policies for children come in many sizes and shapes. They differ in whether
they focus on preventing or reducing problems, whether they focus on children or
parents, and whether they provide economic aid, social services, or psychological
support (Dodge & Haskins, 2015).
Primary prevention policies are designed to alter environmental conditions and
prevent problems before they develop; examples include regulations to reduce the
amount of lead in the environment and providing safe schools for all children.
Secondary prevention policies focus on children who are already at risk of develop-
ing problems. Head Start is an example of a secondary prevention effort; others are
listed in Table 13.1. These policies all target low-income families and children, but
they differ in the types of support they provide.
The goal of one type of policy is economic improvement for families. Programs
implementing this type of policy—for example, Temporary Assistance for Needy
Families (TANF)—are based on the assumption that economic security will
reduce stress and provide better home environments for children. A second type
of policy is service oriented. Programs based on this type of policy help families
meet their basic needs by providing food stamps, health care, child care, and
housing. A third type of policy, parent-directed intervention, supports parents psy-
chologically and improves their child-rearing skills with the hope that this will
enhance children’s development. A fourth type of policy focuses on intervention
with parents and children: Children are helped through preschool education, child
care, and health benefits; parents are assisted through education, job training,
and parenting-skills training. Finally, there are policies that target children directly
by improving the quality of schools in impoverished areas or funding supplemen-
tary after-school programs.
Policies that focus on ameliorating or fixing problems after they have developed
or because they resisted prevention efforts include programs to reduce gang vio-
lence by teaching aggressive children how to solve social problems and programs to
encourage pregnant teens to stay in school by providing on-site child care for their
babies.
522  Chapter 13 Policy

TABLE 13.1

Examples of Policies and Programs for Children

Type of Policy Target Goal Programs Strategies
Economic Low-income To decrease family’s Temporary Assistance Temporary cash aid
support for families dependence on for Needy Families Work requirement
poor families public aid (TANF) Child care assistance
Marriage support
Recovery of child support
payments
Requirement that single
mothers < 18 years old
must live with adult
Services for Low-income To help families meet Supplemental Nutrition Electronic cash or food
poor families families basic needs by Assistance Program stamps to buy selected
providing food, (SNAP) (food stamps healthy food
health care, child program) Free meals at school for
care, and housing National School Lunch eligible children
Program Nutrition education
Special Supplemental Food supplements
Food Program for Health and social service
Women, Infants, and referrals
Children (WIC)
Intervention Low-income To reduce risks Promoting Safe and Home visiting to teach about
with poor parents associated with Stable Families developmental milestones,
parents poor parenting Program parenting practices, early
learning activities
Family preservation services,
such as crisis intervention,
management of home
finances, obtaining social
services
Family support services such
as respite care, early
developmental screening,
tutoring, health education
Interventions Low-income To provide direct Head Start Preschool education
for poor parents services and support Early Head Start Health care
parents and and to low-income parents ­Comprehensive Developmental screening
children children and children through Child Development Parent education
preschool/child care Program Job training Parenting
for children and skills
­services for parents
Programs for Children in To assist poor children Title I Improving Funding for schools in poor
poor children low-income directly through the Academic communities
neighbor- services provided in ­Achievement of the Provision of after-school
hoods schools, child care, Disadvantaged programs
and community
settings to improve
their academic
success and reduce
social deviance

Source: Adapted from Gershoff et al., 2005.

 Children in Poverty: A Social Policy Challenge  523

Children in Poverty: A Social Policy

Challenge
In the United States, 21 percent of children live in families with incomes below the
poverty line (Yang & Koball, 2017). Many policymakers have focused attention on
the adverse life situations of these low-income families.

Economic Hardship and Social Disadvantage

Poverty is not only a lack of monetary resources; it comes with social disadvantages
as well. Powerlessness is one disadvantage. The poor have less influence over soci-
ety than other families and are less likely to be treated well by social organizations.
Their lack of power, information, and education restricts their options. They have
reduced choices of occupations and housing, have increased vulnerability to job
loss and unemployment, and may be subject to impersonal and sometimes unfair
bureaucratic decisions in the legal system. They often find themselves in a cycle of
disadvantage as economic hardship leads to social, educational, and employment
failures, which spiral downward so that they lose even the resources they had. In
view of their limited power and lack of resources, it is not surprising that many poor
people experience psychological distress; feel helpless, insecure, and controlled by
external forces; and are unable to support and nurture their children (McLoyd
et al., 2015).

Effects of Poverty on Children

How do poverty and its associated social disadvantages affect children? Poor chil-
dren are at risk from the time they are born. Compared with children from affluent
families, they are twice as likely to have low birth weight, twice as likely to spend
time in the hospital, and almost twice as likely to die during childhood (Duncan &
Brooks-Gunn, 2000; Huston, 2011). By the end of the first year, poor children are
lagging cognitively and the effect is even greater by 24 months (Halle et al., 2009).
Being poor is also bad for children’s emotional health: Poor children are one-third
more likely to suffer from emotional or behavioral problems, seven times more
likely to suffer from child abuse or neglect, more than twice as likely to encounter
violent crime, and almost four times as likely to drop out of school (Children’s
Defense Fund, 2004). Being poor in early childhood is especially detrimental
(Duncan et al., 2010). Children whose parents made $10,000 or more during their
first 5 years were nearly three times as likely to finish high school as children with-
out this family income; increased income later in childhood or adolescence was less
significant (Duncan et al., 1998).
Poverty affects children through many routes. First, there is the quality of the
home environment (Bradley et al., 2015): Children in poor families have fewer
books, toys, educational games, and computers than children in affluent families.
Second, poverty is linked to parents’ physical and emotional problems, which affects
their parenting and impairs their children’s emotional and social development
(Yoshikawa et al., 2012). Third, poverty is linked to brain development of children
who grow up in families below the federal poverty line. Children in poverty had
gray matter volumes 8 to 10 percent below children in no-poverty homes, which,
in turn, was related to poorer cognitive achievement (Hair et al., 2015). Fourth,
524  Chapter 13 Policy

poor families usually live in neighborhoods with high rates of crime and unemploy-
ment, little supervision of children, and limited resources; these neighborhoods
can adversely affect children’s development (Leventhal et al., 2015). Fifth, family
disruptions, such as moving to a different location or breaking up the family unit,
which are more common in poor families, can leave children without the support of
friends and familiar teachers, alter their sense of security, and culminate in adjust-
ment problems in adolescence (Adams & Dubay, 2014).

Programs to Reverse Effects of Poverty

A number of policies have been implemented to combat the effects of poverty on
children’s development. Some focus on children directly and others increase paren-
tal income or job skills as a way of lifting families out of poverty.

Head start Beginning in the 1960s, researchers and policymakers implemented a

variety of programs to promote the development of poor children. One of the larg-
est and best-known preventive programs was Head Start, which was intended to give
3- and 4-year-old children a daily preschool experience. Originally, it included social
services, medical care, and health education for parents. However, funding cuts
eliminated many of the parents’ services. Today Head Start Performance Standards
require comprehensive services for children (education, health and nutrition, men-
tal health, and social services) and parents’ involvement. Head Start is the flagship
educational program for young children in the United States. The number of chil-
dren it serves has increased from about 720,000 in 1995 to 1.2 million today—but it
still reaches fewer than half of all eligible children.
A new phase of Head Start began in 1995 when it was recognized that providing
support for children before age 3 might be even better. This new program—Early
Head Start—was designed to serve infants and toddlers from poor families. It pro-
vides a wide range of services including child care, parenting education, and high-
quality comprehensive child development services delivered via home visits. Early
Head Start programs vary according to community and family needs, but all programs
provide some combination of these elements. The
effectiveness of Early Head Start was evaluated in a
study of 3,000 families who were randomly assigned
to Early Head Start or a control group. After about
20 months in the program, children in Early Head
Start performed better than control children (Love
et al., 2005). They had advanced language devel-
opment, displayed more emotional engagement
with their parents, and were less aggressive. Two
years after the end of the program, positive effects
remained in the areas of children’s social-emotional
behavior, parents’ behavior, and parents’ well-
Kali9/E+/Getty Images

being, and 7 years after the program ended, when

the children were in fifth grade, they still exhibited
a trend toward better social-emotional functioning
A preschool teacher (Vogel et al., 2010). Favorable outcomes were most
reads to a Head Start likely for African American children, children who
class in Washington, DC. had been in home-based Head Start programs, and
 Children in Poverty: A Social Policy Challenge  525

children who attended elementary schools with fewer poor children. These find-
ings underscore not only the importance of early investment but also the need to
continue positive educational experiences into the school years.
Evaluations of the Head Start program itself also identified some positive
results. In the national Head Start Impact Study, a randomized evaluation of a
representative sample of children in 383 Head Start centers, significant effects
were evident (Administration for Children and Families, 2010). At the end of
their first year in Head Start, 3-year-old children did better in language and math
tests and had fewer behavior problems (such as hyperactivity), and had closer
and more positive relationships with their parents. Parents are affected too. Head
Start parents are more emotionally supportive, cognitively stimulating, read more
to their children, and reduce their use of spanking (Ansari et al., 2016; Love
et al., 2005). Even their own educational attainment improves as well (Sabol &
­Chase-Lansdale, 2014).

I am so lucky to have my child in Head Start. It’s affordable and I know that Megan is
not only safe but really learning things too. Every day when she comes home, she sur-
prises me with how smart she is. It’s such a delight to watch her grow and learn.

There are long-term effects too. Head Start participants are about 8.5 percentage
points more likely to graduate from high school, 6 percentage points more likely to
have attempted at least 1 year of college, 7 percentage points less likely to be idle,
and 7 percentage points less likely to be in poor health (Deming, 2009). In fact the
gains were about 80 percent of the magnitude of the effects of experimental pro-
grams such as the Perry Preschool Program in Michigan that cost more than Head
Start, started earlier, lasted longer, and were more comprehensive (McLaughlin
et al., 2007; Ramey et al., 1998; Schweinhart et al., 2005). Moreover, positive social-
emotional outcomes in young adulthood have been found as well among Head start
children such as elevated self-esteem and better self-control as well as more positive
parenting practices in rearing their own children (Schanzenbach & Bauer, 2016).
The gains were most marked for minority children and those with mothers with low
educational levels. Finally, there are differences across sites and effects vary with
how well the program is implemented.

Welfare reform policies In 1996, the U.S. Congress passed the Personal
Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) as the cul-
mination of several decades of efforts to reduce single-parent families’ long-term
reliance on welfare. As part of PRWORA, the government implemented the Tem-
porary Assistance for Needy Families program (TANF), a policy that provided
assistance for single parents through block grants to states. Unlike welfare, this
policy introduced time limits on cash assistance and imposed work requirements
on recipients. It required recipients to be searching or preparing for a job and
then engaging in full-time work within 2 years of receiving their first aid check
and limited aid to a maximum of 5 years. Proponents of welfare reform argued
that requiring single mothers to leave welfare for work would provide the most
reliable pathway out of poverty and that work requirements would promote
healthier child development by enhancing mothers’ self-esteem and introducing
productive daily routines into family life. Opponents argued that children’s well-
being would worsen as mothers became overwhelmed by the work requirements
526  Chapter 13 Policy

and time-limited aid and that the new requirements would deepen the poverty
of some families, forcing young children into unacceptable child care environ-
ments and decreasing parents’ abilities to monitor their older children (Chase-
Lansdale et al., 2003).
So who was right? What were the effects of TANF? Researchers found that par-
ents benefited from going to work and earning money. Mothers who moved into
stable employment and increased their incomes experienced improved psycho-
logical well-being and reported less domestic violence (Cheng, 2007; Coley et al.,
2007; Gennetian & Miller, 2002). However, in comparison to the pre-TANF wel-
fare programs that it replaced, mothers in TANF had slightly shorter life spans
(Muennig et al., 2015). But how did the children fare? In one of the most com-
prehensive evaluations of this issue, researchers assessed the effects of welfare
reform on children’s well-being in five states (Connecticut, Florida, Indiana, Iowa,
and Minnesota), focusing on children between the ages of 5 and 12 years whose
families had been randomly assigned to a TANF program or not (Administration
for Children and Families, 2004). Their main finding was that although the new
welfare policy increased adults’ employment and earnings, it did not result in
either widespread harm or widespread benefit to children. Overall, effects on chil-
dren were relatively few in number and small in size. Children did, however, seem
to benefit from increases in family income. Pamela Morris and her colleagues
synthesized the results of a dozen TANF experiments (Morris, 2002; Morris et al.,
2005). They found that welfare policies that increased parents’ employment but
did not affect family income had few effects on children’s social behavior or psy-
chological problems. Welfare policies that increased both parents’ employment
and family income did benefit the children. The effects were small but notable.
Findings on adolescents in two studies suggested that the programs might be less
beneficial for this age group; increased adolescent problem behavior (drinking,
smoking, minor delinquency) were observed when parents moved from welfare
to work, presumably because they were not able to provide as much supervision
and monitoring. However, over time TANF has served fewer families and brought
fewer children out of poverty. In 1996, for every 100 families with children liv-
ing in poverty, TANF provided cash aid to 68 families. By 2014, it provided cash
assistance to only 23 such families for every 100 in poverty (Cohan, 2016; Trisi &
Pevetti, 2012). Moreover, the amount of cash provided is inadequate to keep fami-
lies out of poverty. As Edin and Schaefer (2015) argue in their book, “$2 a Day:
Living on Almost Nothing in America,” one unintended consequence of the 1996
reforms was a dramatic rise—130 percent—in the number of households with
children living on cash incomes of no more than $2 a day per person. In sum, this
policy is less expensive for the government but fails to help as many needy families
out of poverty.

Input and outcome: Getting what you pay for Do effective policies usu-
ally cost more than ineffective ones? There is some suggestion that this is true for
policies targeting poverty. TANF programs that provided income supplements to
families had a more positive impact on children than less-costly programs that just
mandated that parents get jobs. Intensive and expensive early childhood interven-
tion programs had a larger impact on children’s development than programs that
were less intensive and less expensive. Sharon Ramey and Craig Ramey (1992) iden-
tified a number of qualities that characterize effective programs for poor families.
Programs had high success rates if they began early in life and continued over a
 Children in Poverty: A Social Policy Challenge  527

long period of time, involved parents as well as children, focused on improving both
parent–child relationships and families’ natural support systems, and involved com-
munity resources such as those providing education, job training, and employment
services. Programs that had these qualities were relatively expensive. The Carolina
Abecedarian Project (see description in Real-World Application section), for exam-
ple, cost $40,000 per child per year. Head Start currently costs $7,600 per child
per year (Administration for Children and Families, 2012). Although some analysts
have concluded that the benefits of Head Start exceed its costs, they also note that
increased Head Start funding is related to enhanced effects (Ludwig & Phillips,
2007). Policy decisions are always constrained by budgets, and the reality is that
the amount of money governments can invest in children’s development is limited.
Nevertheless, detrimental effects of poverty can be reduced more if we invest more
in effective and expensive programs.

eal-World Application: Early Intervention with Children

in Poverty
One of the most successful (and the time they were 4 years old, the children in
expensive) interventions for poor the program scored 13 points higher than the
children is the Carolina control group on an IQ test (Ramey et al., 1998).
Abecedarian Project (Campbell The program group did better than the control
et al., 2001; McLaughlin et al., 2007; Ramey et al., group in elementary school too, and, at age 21,
2014). This project entailed a carefully controlled adults who had been in the program as infants
scientific study of the benefits of early childhood and preschoolers were twice as likely to still be
education for poor African American children. in an educational program as those in the
Four cohorts of infants born between 1972 and control group (40 percent versus 20 percent).
1977 were randomly assigned to either the They were more likely to be employed
educational program (57 children) or a control (65 percent versus 50 percent), and they
group (54 children). Children in the program reported fewer symptoms of depression (26
group received full-time, high-quality education percent versus 37 percent met the criteria for
in a child care setting from infancy through age depression). At age 30, Abecedarian graduates
5 years. The factors responsible for the high were more likely than control adults to have a
quality of education included small classes, bachelor’s degree (23 percent versus 6 percent)
well-educated teachers, low staff turnover, and a and to be working full time (75 percent versus
strong curriculum consisting of individualized 53 percent) (Campbell et al., 2012). They had
activities or “games” that focused on children’s waited longer before having children (22 years
social, emotional, and cognitive development. versus 20 years). At age 35, Abecedarian
Children in the program attended the center for graduates were also healthier than control
5 days a week all year long. Their mothers also adults; they had lower rates of prehypertension
received intensive parent education. Children in and significantly lower risk of experiencing
the control group experienced a variety of child coronary heart disease (CHD) or CHD death
care settings during their infant and pre- (Campbell et al., 2014).
school years. When researchers investigated the effect of
By the time the children were 1 year old, their the program on the children’s mothers, they
abilities had already begun to diverge, and by found that those whose children had been in the
528  Chapter 13 Policy

program were more likely than control mothers to (projected to be $143,000 more for those in the
have graduated from high school and to have program), their mothers’ lifetime earnings (pro-
received postsecondary training; they were more jected to be $133,000 more for those in the
likely to be self-supporting and less likely to have program), savings to school districts because
borne subsequent children (Campbell et al., participants were less likely to require special or
1986; Ramey et al., 1983). remedial education, and health benefits because
Analysts who performed a cost–benefit participants were less likely to smoke. Early
analysis of the Carolina Abecedarian Project intervention is apparently a worthwhile investment
found that it generated roughly $4 in benefits for but successfully introducing such expensive and
every $1 invested (Masse & Barnett, 2002). These staff-intensive programs on a wide scale is difficult
benefits included participants’ lifetime earnings to achieve (Dodge & Haskins, 2015).

Child Care: A Problem Lacking

a Unified Policy
Another policy issue for state and federal governments is child care for young
children. In the mid-1970s, about one-quarter of U.S. children younger than
6 years were cared for by someone other than their mother for some portion
of each week; by 2012, about 60 percent were in some type of nonparental care
(Musu-Gillette, 2017). The primary reason for this dramatic increase was the rise
in maternal employment. For single and divorced mothers, work and child care
are not a choice; they are an economic necessity. In a tight economy, however,
even two-parent families often need more than one paycheck to cover the bills.
Today, the overall labor force participation rate of mothers with preschoolers
is about 65 percent and for mothers of school-age children the rate is 75 per-
cent (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2016). Women also work because they find their
jobs to be a source of social and emotional satisfaction. Another factor that has
increased the use of child care is geographic mobility. A century ago, young par-
ents were likely to live near extended family who could look after the children,
and nearly half of them had a mother, mother-in-law, sister, or older daughter to
help with child care. Today only one-fifth of U.S. parents can count on extended
family to provide child care. A final reason for the increase in child care is that
views about what children need for their social and cognitive development have
changed. Regardless of whether mothers work, most parents believe that chil-
dren benefit from spending time in a setting where they can learn their colors
and interact with their peers.

Choosing Child Care: What’s a Parent to Do?

In choosing child care, parents balance three things: cost, convenience, and qual-
ity. Quality may be most important, but it’s the most difficult to define and to find.
Parents want child care that is safe and secure with a warm caregiver and oppor-
tunities for the child to learn. Features that experts use to define quality, such as
a small group of children, a low child-to-adult ratio, and a high level of caregiver
training, are lower on parents’ priority lists. In spite of their concern about quality,
moreover, most parents do little comparison shopping. Instead they rely on the
 Child Care: A Problem Lacking a Unified Policy   529

recommendations of friends, relatives, and neighbors. A brief visit or a phone call is

usually the extent of their background work. As Jason’s mom said:

“It was really hard to find a good place to leave my kids, especially one that I could
afford. Although I tried to find out about my options, in the end I took my cousin’s
advice and enrolled Jason in the same center that she was using for her son. I was just
too busy to do a huge search for the best place.”

In one of the richest countries in the world and one with careful regulations for the
quality of everything from carpet fibers to airline operations, it would be comforting
to think that good-quality child care was guaranteed. Nothing could be further from
reality, and over the past 30 years, quality has deteriorated, not improved (Burchinal
et al., 2015; Clarke-Stewart & Allhusen, 2005).

Types of child care Parents can choose from three types of child care: in their
own home, in a family child care home, or in a center. A nanny who comes to the
family’s home offers personalized care for the child and perhaps some housekeep-
ing, but this is usually the most expensive type of care. No licensing requirements
apply to nannies and often they are untrained. A family child care home is a setting
in which an adult, most often a mother, cares for a small group of children, usually
of different ages, in her own home. Often these homes are in the parents’ neigh-
borhood and therefore are convenient and relatively inexpensive. Although many
are licensed by the state, many more are unregulated and operate under the radar.
They typically do not offer organized educational activities.
Center care stands in sharp contrast to these two types of care. Most centers offer
educational opportunities, peer contacts, and a variety of materials and equipment.
Center care workers are usually trained and often are better educated than home
care providers, and the centers are licensed and regulated. Finding a slot at a highly
desirable child care center can be a challenge. Many parents sign up at a center
as soon as they get a positive pregnancy test. They also need to start saving. Child
care is the second largest family expense after housing. In 2013, the average cost of
center care was nearly $11,700 (Pinto, 2016)—higher than tuition at many public
universities. Child care expenses take up 7 percent of the budget for families with
incomes above the poverty line and 20 percent for poor families. Although poor
families on TANF qualify for federal support to help offset child care costs, only 15
to 20 percent actually receive this help. Due in large part to the high cost of child
care, lower-income families are more likely to rely on unpaid arrangements with
grandparents, other family members or friends, and neighbors than are higher-
income families.

Effects of Child Care on Children

Quality of child care matters We know that the quality of child care makes a dif-
ference for the children. Children in higher-quality care are more sociable, consid-
erate, compliant, controlled, and prosocial; they are better adjusted, less angry and
defiant, and have higher self-esteem than children in poorer-quality care; they also
have more positive relationships with the caregivers in their child care arrangement
(Burchinal et al., 2015; Clarke-Stewart & Allhusen, 2005). The NICHD Study of
Early Child Care and Youth Development found that children in higher-quality care
exhibited more positive interactions with other children and were reported by their
530  Chapter 13 Policy

caregivers to have fewer behavior problems and to be more socially skilled than
children who experienced lower-quality care (NICHD Early Child Care Research
Network, 2005). Even children’s physiology is related to the quality of their child care.
Several studies have found that children who received more attention, warmth, and
stimulation from their caregivers—an index of high-quality care—were less likely
to have increased cortisol levels over the course of the day, which is a physiological
reaction to stress (Groeneveld et al., 2012; Gunnar et al., 2010). Child care quality
has been documented to have a modest long-term effect on children’s socioemo-
tional development and academic achievement measured in first grade (Peisner-
Feinberg et al., 2001), middle childhood (Votruba-Drzal et al., 2010), at age 15
(Vandell et al., 2010), and at the end of high school (Vandell et al., 2016). More
experience in center-type care was linked to higher class rank. Higher-quality child
care also predicted higher academic grades and admission to more selective col-
leges (Vandell et al., 2016). Effects of quality are larger for children who had dif-
ficult temperaments in infancy (Pluess & Belsky, 2009).

What is quality care? Many components make up high-quality care (Table 13.2).
One is the physical environment. When each child’s physical space is very limited,
children in the setting are more aggressive with their peers and more destructive
with their toys; they spend more time doing nothing and less time interacting
(Connolly & Smith, 1978). Children are also less cooperative and constructive when
there are not enough toys and materials to go around (Brown, 1996).
A second component of quality is the number of children in the setting. Those
settings that have too many children, especially too many for each caregiver to look
after, can have detrimental effects on the children. Studies have shown quite consist-
ently that overall quality of care suffers when child-to-adult ratios are high; caregiv-
ers in these settings are less sensitive, responsive, and positive, and children are less
socially competent and less likely to have secure attachment relationships with their
caregivers (Burchinal et al., 2015; Clarke-Stewart & Allhusen, 2005).
A third aspect of quality care relates to the activities for the children. An ideal
program gives children some structured activities as well as opportunities for free

TABLE 13.2

Components of Good Child Care: What to Look For

Component Explanation
Plenty of materials A center with only a few exciting toys that every child wants to play with has more fighting.
Ample staff There should be at least one caregiver for every three or four infants. Some programs claim to
have that ratio, but it turns out that the afternoon groups are combined and there are more
children per adult.
Balance between Preschoolers in highly structured programs experience higher stress levels.
structure and
free time
Great caregivers Having a degree in child development or early childhood education is associated with better
care, but equally important is whether the caregivers are caring and responsive.
Low staff turnover Replacing a third of the staff every year causes the atmosphere to be more chaotic and children
to feel less secure and connected. High turnover may also be symptomatic of other poor
­conditions, such as low staff salaries.
 Child Care: A Problem Lacking a Unified Policy   531

play and free choice. Children in highly structured classes are less happy, less com-
pliant, and more stressed, and they have lower opinions of their own competence
(Stipek et al., 1998). High-quality programs also offer children a balanced menu
of academic and social lessons; programs that focus solely on academic work are
unlikely to promote social development (Sylva et al., 2003).
The fourth component of child care quality is the caregivers’ qualifications.
Those who have higher levels of education and more training in child develop-
ment are more likely to provide high-quality care, and the children in their care
are more involved, cooperative, and competent in their play; engage in more
complex play with peers; and are more likely to develop secure attachment rela-
tionships with their caregivers (Burchinal et al., 2015; Clarke-Stewart & Allhusen,
2005).
Finally, care quality relates to the stability of the staff. The National Staffing Study
found that centers with the lowest rates of staff turnover had the highest overall
quality (Whitebook et al., 2014, 2016). Caregivers who stay in the child care setting
longer have more opportunity to get to know the children, read their signals more
accurately, and respond to them more appropriately. As they spend more time in
a child care setting, caregivers become more engaged with the children, are more
affectionate and responsive, and form closer relationships (Whitebook et al.,
2014, 2016).

Time in child care Another aspect of care that makes a difference is how much
time children spend there. Children who spend more time in care—more hours,
more months, and more years—are louder, more assertive, more aggressive, and
more disobedient than children who spend less time there (McCartney et al., 2010).
One reason for the elevated likelihood of externalizing behaviors is that extended
periods in child care can cause stress. When researchers have measured toddlers’
salivary cortisol as an index of feeling stressed they have found that cortisol lev-
els rise across the day for children in child care but tend to decrease for children
at home (Groeneveld et al., 2012; Gunnar et al., 2010). Children who are more
socially fearful are especially likely to experience high and increasing cortisol levels
across the day while in child care. For girls, the increase in cortisol is associated with
anxious, vigilant behavior; for boys it is associated with angry, aggressive behavior.
The externalizing behaviors displayed by children who spend a great deal of time in
child care do not rise to the level at which clinicians are concerned, but they can be
a nuisance for teachers when the children are in school (NICHD Early Child Care
Research Network, 2005). Peers might not mind, though. Children who spent the
most time in child care were more likely than children who spent less time in care
to be categorized as popular-aggressive in elementary school (Rodkin & Roisman,
2010). All of this said, developmental scientists continue to probe whether the cor-
relation between extensive early child care experience and subsequent behavior
problems reflect a truly causal effect, as evidence for this link is somewhat inconsist-
ent in studies that use more rigorous methods for adjusting for potential confounds
(Dearing & Zachrisson, 2017).

How Can Policy Help?

Child care in the United States lacks unified government policy. At times in our
history, the government has been poised to develop a comprehensive plan, but
this has not happened, and the United States may never experience the level of
federal involvement found in many other countries. The governments in many
532  Chapter 13 Policy

European countries and Japan, for example, make a substantial contribution to the
cost of child care (see Figure 13.1; Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
Development [OECD], 2016). In the United States, parents pay for child care costs
themselves unless they are poor and receive a welfare supplement or are eligible to
participate in a government-subsidized program.
Policies could help U.S. parents in their quest for high-quality care in a number
of ways. The first way is by increasing the availability of care. Finding high-quality
child care is difficult for parents because it’s simply not widely available. One way
to increase availability would be to expand the public school system. Expansions
might include extended school days in which before- and after-school care is pro-
vided in a safe, educational environment. Another expansion would be to extend
the public education system downward to include 4-year-olds. Many states have
implemented or are exploring the possibility of universal preschool for 4-year-olds,
which is already common in countries throughout Europe. In France and Italy, for
example, about 95 percent of all 3- to 5-year-olds are enrolled in state-sponsored
preschools.
Even if quality care is available, though, parents may not find it. The second way
governments could help parents find high-quality care is by increasing their knowl-
edge about care. Many parents are first-time users with little experience and an
urgent need. They may assume that they have few choices and restrict their search.
Even if they do search, they are not particularly astute or conscientious observers.
In one study, researchers found that parents consistently rated the quality of their
children’s classes higher than trained observers did (Cryer & Burchinal, 1997). Gov-
ernment policy could increase parents’ knowledge by providing written materials,
YouTube videos, and public-service announcements on TV focused on components
of quality care. Government support has already been used to create child care
resource and referral services, which are a useful starting point when parents are
searching for care.

US$
8000

6000

4000

2000

0
d

Sw k
en

Ki nd

ce

Be an

Au um

lia

itz aly

ze her d
Re ds

G blic

d ny
es

H ea

ov Ze ry
Re nd

M ic
o

Po a

Po l
nd
ga
a
ar

ad
ic
an

bl
ew ga
do

ra
w

at
ni rma
an

r
ed

ch lan
a

N erla

ak ala

la
Sw It

ex

rtu
nm

Ko
i

pu

pu
lg

an
nl

Ja
or

st

St
te Ice

N un
ng

Fr
Fi

C
e
De

te
et
d

U
ni

Sl
U

FIGURE 13.1 Public expenditure on child care per child in 2013 per country converted to U.S. dollars.
Source: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2016), OECD Family database, www.oecd.org/els/social/family/database.
 Child Care: A Problem Lacking a Unified Policy   533

A third way policy could help parents find quality care is by providing more
money to pay for care. Affordability is a major issue for most parents. Because
parents with high incomes can afford high-quality care and parents with very low
incomes are eligible for government-subsidized care, middle-income families are
the ones likely to receive the poorest quality of care (Burchinal et al., 2015; Torquati
et al., 2011). Public investment in child care in the United States has been esti-
mated to be only about $2,000 per child compared with up to $11,000 in European
countries, where a combination of subsidies, tax benefits, and employer contribu-
tions cover the bulk of child care costs (see Figure 13.1). Here, states with more
generous child care subsidy policies have child care centers offering higher-quality
care (Rigby et al., 2007), and low-income parents who receive federal child care
subsidies are able to purchase higher-quality care than nonrecipients ( Johnson,
Ryan, et al., 2012).
A fourth policy to improve child care quality would be to supplement caregiv-
ers’ wages. We know that it’s better if caregivers stay in a setting for a longer period
and provide a stable, predictable child care environment, yet turnover rates in
child care are among the highest of any profession, hovering around 30 percent
per year (U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2016), a rate similar to that of workers
in fast-food restaurants. By comparison, only 17 percent of public school teachers
leave their jobs each year. Paying caregivers more would likely encourage them
to stay longer. In 2016, the median salary of child care workers in the United
States was $21,170 per year, far less than that for kindergarten teachers ($52,000)
(Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2016). Wages were the primary determinant of staff
turnover in the National Staffing Study (Whitebook et al., 2014, 2016). An effort
to improve child care quality for military families is instructive. The U.S. armed
services oversee a child care system that serves more than 200,000 children every
day at more than 300 locations worldwide. In 1989, Congress enacted the Military
Child Care Act in response to reports of extremely poor child care conditions.
This act made pay for child care workers comparable to that for other jobs on mili-
tary bases that required similar levels of training, education, and responsibility. As
a result, staff turnover dropped from 48 percent to 24 percent (Campbell et al.,
2000). The military’s commitment to quality child care and better wages could be
a model for the rest of the country.
Fifth, policies could be implemented to regulate quality. In 2013, the National
Association of Child Care Resource and Referral Agencies examined state child
care regulations in the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and the Department
of Defense (Child Care Aware® of America, 2014). No state earned an “A” and
the Department of Defense got the top score, a B. The remaining top 10 states
earned a “C.” Twenty-one states earned a “D,” and the remaining states earned a
failing grade. Staff were being hired without background checks. Inspections were
infrequent. State licensing offices had unmanageable caseloads. Child-to-staff ratios
were not in line with suggested standards. States can solve some of these problems
without huge infusions of money. For example, checking employee rolls against sex
offender registries requires only a modest budget increase. Other factors such as
child-to-staff ratios cannot be addressed unless centers increase their tuition (which
many families are already struggling to afford) or find other sources of funding to
pay for more staff members. Changes in state and federal laws would be required to
set minimum levels of quality and to impose penalties when centers do not comply.
When states have stringent regulations, child care quality is higher (Rigby et al.,
2007; Whitebook et al., 2016).
Finally, it might be possible for policy to limit the number of hours children
spend in care, but it is unlikely that parents would find this policy acceptable.
534  Chapter 13 Policy

esearch Up Close: The Florida Child Care Quality

Improvement Study
In the 1990s, Florida provided a improved, teachers became more sensitive and
natural laboratory to study two responsive and relied less on negative discipline,
indexes of child care quality: and children engaged in more complex play
child-to-adult ratios and caregiv- with other children, gained more in cognitive
ers’ education (Howes et al., 1995, 1996). In 1992, development, and were more securely attached
state legislators mandated a change in child-to- to their teachers. When the proportion of staff
teacher ratios from 6:1 to 4:1 for infants and from with specialized training increased (from
8:1 to 6:1 for toddlers. In 1995, they imposed an 26 percent to 53 percent), teachers were more
additional requirement: For every 20 children in a responsively involved with the children, and
child care facility, there should be at least one teachers with the most advanced training had
staff person with a child development associate the highest scores on classroom quality and
credential or equivalent education or sensitivity with the children; children spent more
experience. time engaged in learning activities and complex
Researchers seized the opportunity to con- play and were more securely attached to
duct a study of the effects of these changes in their teachers.
child care regulations. They randomly selected Although this study was not a controlled
150 licensed centers in four Florida counties that experiment—it did not have a randomly
were representative of child care within the state. assigned control group in which child care
Within these centers, they focused on 450 regulations did not change—it did have an
classrooms and examined them before and after advantage over correlational studies because it
the legislation. During the three years of data demonstrated that changes in child care
gathering, questionnaires were collected and legislation preceded changes in child care
interviews and observations were conducted. quality and that changes in child care quality
Center directors were asked about their percep- preceded changes in children’s behavior. The
tions of the effects of the mandated changes. study also revealed some of the problems of
Teachers were asked about their educational policy research. Although it was mandated that
backgrounds. Observations were made in an centers increase caregivers’ training and
infant class, a toddler class, and a preschool decrease the number of children per caregiver,
class in each center to assess child-to-adult not all centers complied. The proportion of
ratios, caregivers’ interactions with the children, trained staff still did not reach the level required
and overall quality of care. Detailed assessments by the state, and center directors did not think
of two randomly chosen children in each class that the new ratios improved quality—just that
were made on a sample of 900 children. they were more expensive. Many directors did
Teachers also completed ratings of these not even expect that the new regulations would
children’s behavior problems. be enforced. Enacting policy change and
Researchers found that when child-to-staff conducting policy research is clearly very
ratios were reduced, overall program quality challenging.

Teenage Pregnancy: Children Having

Children
From the 1990s to 2015, about 30 percent of high school students reported being
sexually active. Among African American students, however, the proportion who
reported they were sexually active decreased from 59 percent in 1991 to 33 percent
 Teenage Pregnancy: Children Having Children   535

in 2015 (Child Trends, 2017). Nearly one-fifth of American teenage girls become
pregnant (Perper & Manlove, 2009), and of all the industrialized nations in the
world, the United States has the highest teen birth rate. Nevertheless, average teen
birth rates in the United States are declining and are lower today than they have
been in the seven decades since they were first recorded: 31 births per 1,000 girls
aged 15 to 19. Although the rates for African American and Latino teens are higher
than for white female teens, the rate for Asian American/Pacific Islanders teenagers
is lower than for white adolescents (Guttmacher Institute, 2016; Mollborn, 2017).
Despite the trend of decline in adolescent births in the developing world, there
remain region-specific inequities in the rates of decline. Adolescent birth rates are
highest in sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America and the Caribbean (Blum, 2015).
What is contributing to the decline in teen birth rates? Less sex and use of more
effective contraception and more information about pregnancy prevention are the
main factors (Patten & Livingstone, 2016).

Factors Leading to Teen Pregnancy

A variety of factors predict teenage pregnancy. First, teens who are sexually active
are different from teens who are virgins: They are less conventional and conserva-
tive in their values, have more unsupervised time after school (Cohen et al., 2002),
less likely to be enrolled in school or have poor attitudes toward school (Kirby &
Lepore, 2007), are more likely to have a sexually active best friend (Jaccard et al.,
2005), and are more likely to have spent their childhood without their father (Ellis
et al., 2003). Second, teens who take sexual risks such as having multiple partners
and not using condoms differ from teens who practice safe sex: They have poorer
self-regulatory skills in childhood (Raffaelli & Crockett, 2003) and their parents
are more likely to be economically disadvantaged, not active in a religion, and not
warm and responsive toward their children (Manlove et al., 2008; Penman-Aguilar
et al., 2013). Third, teens who actually become pregnant differ from those who do
not: They are more likely to live with a single parent, have problem behaviors and
low confidence in themselves and their educational futures, use contraception less,
and intend to have children early (Chandra et al., 2008; Martinez & Abma, 2015)
or live in foster care (Boonstra, 2011). In addition, their mothers are more likely to
have dropped out of school and been teen mothers themselves (Abma et al., 2004).
Finally, teenage mothers come from more disadvantaged parts of the population in
terms of social class, race/ethnicity, and geographical location, although teen preg-
nancy is not restricted to only the poor and disadvantaged (Mallborn, 2017). These
underlying causes of teen pregnancy—including adolescents’ values, goals, social-
emotional abilities, and family characteristics and conditions—are complicated and
difficult to combat.
An additional factor contributing to teen pregnancy is television (Calvert, 2015).
In a national study of about 2,000 teens, those who frequently watched TV programs
containing sexual content were twice as likely to be involved in a pregnancy over
the following 3 years as peers who watched few such shows (Chandra et al., 2008).
Television programs seldom highlight the risks of sex, so exposure to sex on TV may
create the illusion that there is little risk to engaging in sex without using contracep-
tives. It might also accelerate the initiation of sexual intercourse by showing young
people doing it; teens who watch more TV programs with sexual content initiate
sex earlier and are more likely to get pregnant (Brown, 2011; Chandra et al., 2008;
Collins et al., 2011).
Finally, teenage pregnancy may be related to biological factors. Early pregnancy
is predicted by early puberty (De Genna et al., 2011). In addition, early pregnancy
536  Chapter 13 Policy

et You Thought That . . .: More Teens Are Having Sex

Than Ever Before
You probably have some miscon- Answer
ceptions about teenage sexuality 1. False. The percentage of teens who have sex
in the United States. See if you can has declined (from 59 percent to 33 percent).
pass this true–false quiz. 2. False. Only 13 percent of girls and
18 percent of boys had sex before age 15.
1. More teens are having sex today than 15 3. True. More males than females have sex by
years ago. True or false? age 19 (49 percent versus 44 percent).
2. More than a third of teenagers have sex by 4. True. Most sexually experienced teen girls
age 15 years. True or false? (73 percent) are in a steady relationship the
3. Boys are more likely to have sex than girls. first time they have sex.
True or false? 5. False. Almost two thirds of sexually experi-
4. Most teen girls have sex in a steady relation- enced teens aged 15–19 have more than
ship. True or false? one sexual partners but only a small percent-
5. Most teens have only one sexual partner. age (12 percent) have 4 or more partners.
True or false? 6. False. Only 11 percent of females who had
6. Most girls are forced into their first sexual sex as teenagers report that their first sexual
experience. True or false? experience was coerced.
7. Most teens who have sex regret doing so. 7. True. Sixty percent of sexually experienced
True or false? teenagers wish that they had waited longer.
8. Most teens have sex while using alcohol or 8. False. Only 21 percent of teens who had sex
drugs. True or false? reported using drugs or drinking alcohol.
9. Few teens use condoms the first time they 9. False. Of teenagers who have sex, 68 percent
have sex. True or false? of girls and 80 percent of boys say they used
a condom during their first sexual experience.

Original Source: Holocombe et al., 2009 and Updated

Sources: Child Trends Databank, 2017; Kost & Maddfow-
Zimet,, 2016; Martinez et al., 2011

may be precipitated by reduced life expectancy (Hubbeling, 2011). Teenage moth-

erhood may be the outcome of an adaptive response of an evolved reproductive
strategy to conditions of risk and uncertainty; when one’s personal future is uncer-
tain, having children at an earlier age may promote lineage survival (Johns et al.,
2011) and be a form of achievement in a world of limited options (Gregson, 2009;
Mallborn, 2017). This is an example of the application of the life history theory we
introduced in Chapter 1, “Theories.”

Outcomes of Teen Pregnancies

The factors that increase the likelihood of a teen pregnancy also increase the likelihood
of problems after the baby is born. In this section, we discuss the problems that the
mother, the baby, the grandparents, the mother’s siblings, and the baby’s father face.

Problems for teenage mothers More than half of the girls who become preg-
nant decide to keep their babies and become single mothers (Easterbrooks et al.,
 Teenage Pregnancy: Children Having Children   537

2019). If they have already left school, they are unlikely to return; if they have not
yet dropped out of school, they are likely to do so and are unlikely to catch up
educationally after the baby is born. Without education, these young mothers are
limited in the types of jobs they can secure and their earning power is low. They
can rarely afford child care, and, unless relatives or others can care for the child,
they might have to give up their jobs and go on welfare. They find themselves in a
cycle of low educational attainment, few skills, economic dependence, and poverty.
Although almost a quarter of teenage mothers are married and another third have a
fairly stable relationship with the father of their baby, more than half face personal,
economic, and social problems that make supporting and caring for their children
very difficult.

Problems for children of teenage mothers Babies of teenage mothers also

have problems. In fact, it has been suggested that the impact of the conditions
under which teenage mothers and their children live is worse for the children than
for their mothers. This may be because the children have always lived under these
conditions, whereas some of the mothers grew up in better circumstances. The chil-
dren of teenage mothers are less likely than babies of older mothers to survive their
first year (Phipps et al., 2002). They receive less positive and stimulating care from
their parents and are more likely to be abused (Easterbrooks et al., 2019). They are
more likely to develop behavior problems and to do poorly in school (Centers for
Disease Control, 2017; Moffitt, 2002). They display higher levels of aggression and
have less ability to control impulsive behavior. By adolescence, they have higher
rates of school failure and delinquency. They also become sexually active at younger
ages and are more likely to become pregnant before age 20 (Kiernan & Smith,
2003). Part of the reason for these poor outcomes is that teen moms are not always
competent parents; they have personal problems and lack resources (Easterbrooks
et al., 2019; Leadbeater, 2014). They are likely to be less warm and nurturing than
older mothers and have lower educational aspirations for their children. The chil-
dren do better if they have strong attachments to their fathers and if their mothers
are prepared for maternal responsibilities and know about children and parenting
before the baby is born (Whitman et al., 2001).

Problems for other family members Even the younger sisters of teenage mothers
can be affected by the arrival of a nephew or niece. Often they must take time away
from schoolwork to help care for the baby, and they are at increased risk for drug
and alcohol use and for becoming pregnant themselves (East & Jacobsen, 2001).
Grandmothers can provide support and guidance and help teen moms become bet-
ter parents, but they may have to reduce their own activities to do so, and confronta-
tions and conflicts with the teen mom are common (Bravo et al., 2016; Oberlander
et al., 2007). Teen mothers do better if their mothers are supportive (Easterbrooks
et al., 2019).

Problems for teenage fathers Adolescent boys are more likely to become teen-
age fathers if they are poor and prone to behavior problems (Moore & Florsheim,
2001). Most of these teen dads are unprepared for fatherhood socially, emotionally,
and financially. As one 17-year-old said (Robinson, 1988, p. 39):

“I sure was surprised about my baby. I’d never been around babies much before, and
for the longest time I just knew something was wrong with her. She didn’t make much
noise unless she was crying, and she slept all the time. I’m telling you, it was a real drag!”
538  Chapter 13 Policy

Although society tends to fault teenage fathers for their failure to support their
babies and their babies’ mothers, some do see their children regularly and pro-
vide help with caregiving (Coley & Chase-Lansdale, 1998). Two-thirds of European
American fathers and nearly as many Latino American fathers marry the mothers
of their children; while only one-quarter of African American fathers do (Sullivan,
1993). However, even when they do marry, young fathers are two to three times
more likely than older fathers to separate or divorce (Easterbrooks et al., 2019).
One national study reported that nearly half of teenage dads visited their child
at least once a week; only 13 percent never visited (Lerman & Ooms, 1993). But as
children grew up, contact was likely to decline: 57 percent of the adolescent fathers
visited once a week when the child was 2 years or younger, 40 percent when the
child was 2 to 4 years, 27 percent when the child was 5 to 7 years, and 22 percent
when the child was older. Nearly one-third of the children in the oldest group never
saw their fathers at all. These declines continue across childhood and adolescence
(Furstenberg & Harris, 1993).
Unmarried teen fathers contribute little financial support for several reasons
(Kiselica, 2008). First, most teenage boys lack the earning power to help much;
second, the mother’s parents may try to exclude the young father, assuming that
his support is unlikely anyway; third, some teen fathers simply don’t want the
­responsibility.

Happy endings Happily, many teenage parents develop good lives for themselves
and their children. Researchers in two studies have followed African American teen
mothers into adulthood (Furstenberg et al., 1987; Horowitz et al., 1991). Not all
were destined to a life of poverty and welfare. In their early 30s, one-third had com-
pleted high school and nearly one-third had completed some post-high school edu-
cation. About three-quarters were working; only one-quarter were on welfare. They
were most likely to be doing well if they had attended a special school for pregnant
teens, they had high aspirations at the time the baby was born, and their parents
were well educated. Others (Leadbeater, 2014) found that many Hispanic American
as well as African American teen mothers were doing well in their mid-20s. Teen-
age childbearing need not lead to negative life outcomes for the mothers or their
children. Just think of former President Barack Obama, whose mother was 18 when
he was born.

nto Adulthood: When Teen Mothers Grow Up

The stories of three women in the Clearly, there is no single pathway for teen
Baltimore Study of Teenage mothers into or through adulthood.
Motherhood illustrate how teen Doris fit the stereotype of what happens to a
mothers can have entirely teenage mother. She was unmarried and
different life trajectories dropped out of school when she became
(Furstenberg et al., 1987). These stories represent pregnant at age 16. She went on welfare and
three different patterns of adaptation to early continued to receive public assistance for the
childbearing: failing to achieve domestic or next 17 years, even when she was—briefly—­
economic security (Doris), struggling to maintain married. Doris had three children by three differ-
economic independence (Iris), and achieving ent men, none of whom she married. She was
marital success and economic stability (Helena). employed periodically but never for more than a
 Teenage Pregnancy: Children Having Children   539

few years, and the work never gave her enough soon as she could afford it, she moved out, and
income to get off welfare. During her late 20s, she in her 30s, she was living with her two children as
had a lengthy relationship with the father of her a single parent. For 5 years, she had been
third child. But he left the household, and in her employed as a business administrator for the
30s, Doris was living alone with her three children Baltimore School District. Iris managed to get by
and her grandchild, the 2-year-old son of Doris’s with assistance from her family and supportive
second child. services from the government; her best financial
Iris also became pregnant at 16, but she years were when she was married and working.
finished high school and then married the baby’s When Helena became pregnant, her parents
father the year after the child was born. The insisted that she delay her marriage to Nelson,
marriage lasted about 10 years, during which the father of her child, until she had completed
time they had a second child. Except for the her schooling and had a secure job. She and
period right after the children were born, Iris Nelson were married around the time she turned
always worked. After her marriage broke up, she 20 and have been married for nearly 14 years.
went on public assistance for 2 years. She began During most of this period, both Helena and
a new relationship with another man, but it did Nelson have been steadily employed. They live in
not last. When it dissolved, Iris moved in with her a comfortable garden apartment on the outskirts
mother rather than going back on welfare. As of Baltimore with their two children.

Reducing Teen Pregnancy

As we have pointed out, the United States has a higher rate of teenage pregnancies
than other Western nations. Some of this disparity is attributable to demographic
differences, but a large part is the result of different policies to reduce teen preg-
nancy. This is evident because the rates of sexual activity in the other countries are
as high as those in the United States, and teenagers’ use of abortion is equally low.

Support from the media One policy that could reduce teen pregnancy involves
the media. Restricting sexual content on TV and peppering the airwaves with
public service announcements about safe sex could be helpful. In a survey of
U.S. youth, 72 percent reported that they gained at least some of their knowledge
about sex from the media (Kaiser Family Foundation, 2003). Broadcasters could
be encouraged to include more realistic depictions of sex and its unintended neg-
ative consequences for teens. However, even these portrayals might not reduce
teen pregnancy. Researchers have found that youth who lack sexual experience
are more likely to say they will participate in an unsafe sexual behavior portrayed
on TV (such as a one-night stand) regardless of the positive or negative outcomes
portrayed (Nabi & Clark, 2008). The National Campaign to Prevent Teenage
Pregnancy (www.teenpregnancy.org), initiated in 1996, incorporates pregnancy-
prevention messages directly into youth-oriented entertainment media by sharing
its messages and research with media professionals such as TV writers and movie
producers (Donahue et al., 2008; Sawhill, 2002). In a recent evaluation of this
strategy, researchers examined the effects of a widely viewed MTV show 16 and
Pregnant on teen childbearing (Kearney & Levine, 2015). This reality TV show fol-
lows the lives of pregnant teenagers during the final months of their pregnancy
and early months of motherhood. The introduction of this MTV show led to a
4.3 percent reduction in teen births in the 18 months following its initial airing,
which accounts for 24 percent of the overall decline in teen births in the United
540  Chapter 13 Policy

States during that period. Part of the success was due to the fact that this show led
to increased interest in contraceptive use and abortion, as captured by Internet
search and tweeting behavior. Clearly the media is not just part of the problem but
can be part of the solution as well.

Sex education in schools The most important policy to reduce teen pregnancy
is sex education in the schools. In the United States, however, this is the subject
of contentious debate. Many educators argue that comprehensive sex education
effectively reduces the number of teenage pregnancies; their opponents argue that
comprehensive sex education encourages sexual activity. PRWORA increased fund-
ing for one particular form of sex education; it made about $88 million available
annually for programs complying with the definition of “abstinence education”
(Table 13.3).

AP Photo/Rogelio Solis/Wide World Photos

Hundreds of balloons were released from the steps of
the capitol in Jackson, Mississippi, May 3, 2006, during
the Mississippi Department of Human Services annual
abstinence rally, where teenagers were warned about the
dangers of premarital sex.

TABLE 13.3

Definition of Abstinence Education

Abstinence education should . . .

1. Have as its exclusive purpose teaching the social, psychological, and health gains to be realized by abstaining from
sexual activity.
2. Teach abstinence from sexual activity outside marriage as the expected standard for all school-age children.
3. Teach that abstinence from sexual activity is the only certain way to avoid out-of-wedlock pregnancy, sexually transmit-
ted diseases, and other associated health problems.
4. Teach that a mutually faithful, monogamous relationship in the context of marriage is the expected standard of
sexual activity.
5. Teach that sexual activity outside the context of marriage is likely to have harmful psychological and physical effects.
6. Teach that bearing children out of wedlock is likely to have harmful consequences for the child, the child’s parents,
and society.
7. Teach young people how to reject sexual advances and how alcohol and drug use increases vulnerability to
sexual advances.
8. Teach the importance of attaining self-sufficiency before engaging in sexual activity.
Source: Title V, Section 510 (b)(2)(A–H) of the Social Security Act (P.L. 104-193).
 Teenage Pregnancy: Children Having Children   541

How effective is abstinence education for reducing teen pregnancy? One team of
researchers found that only a small portion (14 percent) of the decline in teen preg-
nancy rates since these programs began could be attributed to teens waiting longer
to start having sex (Santelli et al., 2007). They concluded that abstinence promo-
tion by itself is insufficient to help adolescents prevent unintended pregnancies.
Another team of researchers conducted an experimental study in which more than
2,000 youth were randomly assigned to abstinence education programs or a control
group and administered a follow-up survey 4 to 6 years later (Trenholm et al., 2007).
Youth in the program group were no more likely than control group youth to have
abstained from sex (about half of both groups reported remaining sexually absti-
nent), and the two groups had initiated sex at the same average age (14.9 years).
Among those who reported having had sex, youth in both groups had similar num-
bers of sexual partners. The abstinence programs did not increase the likelihood
of using a condom (23 percent of both groups reported always using a condom),
which is not surprising because these curricula do not provide accurate information
about the effectiveness of condoms (Kirby, 2008; Lin & Santelli, 2008). Numerous
state evaluations of federally funded sex education programs have yielded similar
results. A review of 11 state-based evaluations found that abstinence-only programs
showed little evidence of sustained long-term impact on attitudes and intentions
(Hauser, 2004). Worse, they showed some negative effects on youth’s willingness to
use contraception to prevent sexually transmitted diseases.
Virginity pledges (public promises to remain a virgin until marriage) and purity
rings are common components of abstinence-only programs. Does this increase
their effectiveness? Under certain very limited conditions, pledging may help ado-
lescents delay sexual intercourse. A study of participants in the National Longitudi-
nal Study of Adolescent Health found that the onset of sexual activity was delayed 18
months among pledgers—but only in schools where pledgers were the minority, so
their pledging was “special” (Bearman & Brückner, 2001). Moreover, pledgers were
one-third less likely than nonpledgers to use contraception when they did become
sexually active. In a subsequent study of this sample that matched pledgers and non-
pledgers on factors such as economic status and attitudes toward sex and religion,
researchers found that pledgers and nonpledgers did not differ as to premarital sex
or sexually transmitted diseases 5 years after their pledge (Rosenbaum, 2009). Most
surprising, 82 percent of the pledgers denied that they had ever pledged. Here is
one student’s take on the issue (Lowen, 2009):

“My mother did this “purity ring” and “purity promise” crap with me and my sister, and
we were both sexually active before we left high school. Thankfully, my father was more
open about sex and made sure his daughters could get birth control so that he didn’t
wind up a grandfather too early. My mother now recognizes that all she did was drive
us from talking to her about sex by making it something we weren’t supposed to do.”

More effective in preventing teen pregnancy than abstinence programs and prom-
ise rings are sex education programs that give teens accurate and complete informa-
tion about safe sex and the use of contraception and focus on parent–adolescent
relationships (Fish et al., 2014). Comprehensive sex education programs, which
emphasize both abstinence and the use of protection for those who do have sex,
have a relatively positive effect. Using data from the National Survey of Family
Growth, researchers found that 86 percent of the decline in teen pregnancy rates
between 1995 and 2002 was the result of improved contraceptive use (Santelli et al.,
2007). Sexually active teens were more likely to use contraceptives, more likely to
542  Chapter 13 Policy

use multiple methods of contraception (e.g., the pill with condoms), and more likely
to use effective methods of contraception in 2002 than they were in 1995. However,
a recent set of evaluations of the effectiveness of programs for reducing teen sexual
activity and improving sexual practices underscores the challenge of meeting this goal
(Manlove et al., 2015). Overall, 40 of the 118 rigorous evaluations were found to work
on at least one reproductive health outcome, and another16 evaluations had mixed
findings. Several program features improved success. Most focused on comprehen-
sive sex education but also included parent–youth relationship components which
focused on improving parent–youth relationships, particularly communication about
sexual behavior and romantic relationships. Other programs that incorporated fami-
lies into the program through a variety of methods—including a parent meeting or
training, homework for youth to complete with their families, and providing parents
services or referrals to services in the community—increased effectiveness. Culturally
tailored programs aimed at ethnic minority adolescents increased their effectiveness
with Latino and African American youth. However, success is not easily achieved and
no silver bullet for reducing teen sexual practices has been found.
In other countries, sex education is an accepted component of national policy.
In the United Kingdom, the policy includes sex education and contraceptive and
advice services for young people and encouragement of their parents to talk to
them about sex and relationships. In the Netherlands, sex education includes a
curriculum focused on values, attitudes, and communication skills, as well as bio-
logical aspects of reproduction. The Dutch media encourage open dialogue, and
the health care system guarantees confidentiality and nonjudgmental providers.
In Sweden, teenagers are given access to free contraceptives, including emergency
contraceptives, and abortion as a backup. To reduce teen pregnancy in the United
States, public policy programs could give teenagers accurate information about con-
traception and sexual behavior, make contraceptive services and supplies available
and accessible, and promote the value of responsible behavior including contracep-
tive use and pregnancy planning.

Support for Teenage Mothers

In addition to providing programs to reduce teen pregnancy, public policies could
reduce problems associated with teen pregnancy by providing support for teen par-
ents. One type of support is education and employment assistance. Research suggests
that if a teenage mother acquires more education and becomes economically inde-
pendent, she and her child have fewer problems than others without these resources
(Kalil & Ziol-Guest, 2005; Moore & Brooks-Gunn, 2002). Another type of support is
to instill in teen mothers the belief that they can have a successful future (Leadbeater,
2014; Moncloa et al., 2003). A third type of support is marriage assistance. Once a
teen has become a parent, marriage is one of the best routes out of poverty. Marriage
also gives the children a relationship with their father or stepfather, and this has posi-
tive social consequences. But marriage is a difficult path when the couple starts off
with a baby in tow; the majority of marriages entered into by teenage mothers end
in divorce (Clarke-Stewart & Brentano, 2006). Young people have limited abilities to
judge what makes a good life partner and limited maturity to deal with the stresses of
marriage and child rearing. As Angie, a teen mom, lamented,

“It was really tough going and much harder than I thought it was going to be. Being a
kid and having a kid is not the best combination. I wish that I had waited before taking
on the motherhood job. Maybe I would have been better prepared for the realities of
caring for a child.”
 Child Abuse within the Family  543

Policies that offer teenagers guidance and assistance in developing and maintaining
stable marriages could reduce the problems inherent in teen pregnancy.

Child Abuse within the Family

Tragic as it is, children in this country are starved, beaten, burned, cut, chained,
isolated, and left to lie in their own excrement. They are sexually molested. They
are even murdered. In 2015, approximately 1,670 children in the United States died
as the result of abuse or neglect; 700,000 more were maltreated but survived (U.S.
Administration for Children & Families, 2015). Of these children, about 525,000
were neglected, 100,000 were physically abused, 50,000 were sexually abused, and
40,000 were psychologically or emotionally abused. Young children are particularly
vulnerable to abuse and neglect. About half of abuse victims are younger than 7
years; about one-quarter are younger than 3. Almost half of the children who die
from maltreatment are younger than 1 year; more than three-quarters are younger
than 4 (see Figure 13.2). Because many instances of child abuse are not reported
or are discovered only after the abuse has continued for a long time, these figures
underestimate the prevalence of abuse. The majority of victims are abused by family
members; nearly 80 percent of abusers are parents. Abuse is a worldwide problem
(Stoltenborgh et al., 2015).

Child Abuse: A Family Affair

What can possibly lead to this inhumane treatment of children? Many students read-
ing this book probably think that no one they know would ever abuse a child or
that only someone who is really mentally ill would inflict grievous physical harm on
defenseless children. However, child abusers are found in all social classes, religions,
and ethnic groups, in mansions and mobile homes, and there is little evidence that
severe mental illness characterizes abusive parents.
Physical abuse is defined as physical injury or maltreatment by a responsible per-
son so that the child’s health or welfare is harmed or threatened. It includes beating,

6.4% 3 years old

12.4% 2 years old

4–7 years old
11.9%
15.0% 1 year old

0–3 years old

8–11 years old 78%
4.8%

12–17 years old 44.2% <1 year old

5.4%

FIGURE 13.2 Death as a result of maltreatment at different ages. Children are far more likely to die as the
result of abuse or neglect when they are very young.
Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (2008).
544  Chapter 13 Policy

nautilus_shell_studios/iStockphoto
Child abuse is a
problem that requires
stringent preventive and
ameliorative policies.

biting, burning, hitting, kicking, punching, scalding, shaking, shoving, slapping,

and not letting the child eat, drink, or use the bathroom. The adult need not have
intended to hurt the child for an act to constitute physical abuse. Shocking as it may
seem, mothers are often the ones who physically abuse their children because they
generally spend more time with them (Cicchetti & Toth, 2015). Physical abuse is
most likely to occur to young children in large families.
Sexual abuse is defined as contact or interaction between a child and an adult
when the child is being used for sexual stimulation of the adult or another person.
It can include actual physical contact, such as fondling or rape, but it also includes
making a child watch sexual acts or pornography, using a child in any aspect of the
production of pornography, or making a child look at an adult’s genitals. Sexual
abuse occurs at ages from infancy through adolescence; the median age is 9 years.
Based on a worldwide meta-analysis, girls are more than twice as likely to be vic-
tims of sexual abuse than boys (Stoltenborgh et al., 2011). About one-quarter of
child sexual abuse victims are abused by a parent (U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services, 2008).
Here is how one anonymous teen victim of sexual abuse told her story in a poem:

I hear the floor creak

Closer and closer toward my bedroom door
I try to stay quiet hiding under the covers
Though I know he will find me

Child neglect is the failure of a parent or other caregiver to provide for a child’s
basic needs. The neglect may be physical (failure to provide necessary food or shel-
ter, or lack of appropriate supervision), medical (failure to provide necessary medi-
cal or mental health treatment), educational (failure to educate the child or attend
to special education needs), or emotional (inattention to the child’s emotional
needs, failure to provide psychological care, or permitting the child to use alcohol
or other drugs). Girls and boys are equally victims of neglect and it often co-occurs
with other types of abuse (Stoltenborgh et al., 2013).
Two factors most commonly associated with abusive behavior by parents are a
distressed, often sexually unsatisfying couple relationship and a history of abuse in
the family (Azar, 2002). This does not mean that parents are destined to repeat their
parents’ mistakes. Only about one-third of parents who were abused when they were
young abuse their own children (Cicchetti & Toth, 2015). Mothers who break this
 Child Abuse within the Family  545

intergenerational cycle are more likely to have a close marital relationship and to
have received therapy (Egeland et al., 1988). Abusive parents are often socially iso-
lated (Belsky, 1993). They have fewer friends, relatives, or neighbors to whom they
can turn in times of stress. Their isolation can contribute to the fact that they often
do not seem to recognize the seriousness of their behavior, and they may blame the
child rather than themselves for the abuse. In addition, abusive parents are likely
to have unrealistic expectations for their child’s behavior (Azar, 2002; Feerick et al.,
2006).
Children’s characteristics also play a role in the likelihood of abuse. Children
with birth defects, physical and intellectual disabilities, irritable and negative tem-
peraments, or exasperating behavior problems are more likely to be abused. The
combination of a difficult infant and a “helpless” mother who does not believe she
has the power to influence her infant’s development is a recipe for abuse (Bugental &
Happaney, 2004). Physical abuse is usually preceded by an escalating cycle of verbal
and physical aggression (Straus & Donnelly, 1994). Abusive mothers give threat-
ening commands, strong criticism, and physical punishment (Cicchetti & Toth,
2015). In addition, their behavior is often unpredictable; they respond the same
way whether the child has just succeeded in a task or thrown a tantrum (Mash et al.,
1983). The mother’s physical reactions reflect this failure to discriminate between
desirable and undesirable behaviors. Abusive mothers experience both a smiling
baby and a crying baby as physiologically arousing and emotionally aversive (Frodi
& Lamb, 1980). This distorted reaction to the child’s behavior increases the stress
and confusion in an already disturbed parent–child relationship.

The Ecology of Child Abuse

Although abuse occurs in all types of families, there is a cluster of environmen-
tal factors that make it more likely. Physical abuse and neglect are more likely to
occur in a family that lives in poverty (Cicchetti & Toth, 2015). Several reasons have
been suggested for this association; among them are the stressors associated with
being poor, the violence that often pervades poor neighborhoods, and the limited
access poor people have to social services. Parents’ unemployment is another eco-
logical feature related to abuse. Occurrences of abuse rise after parents, especially
fathers, lose their jobs (Steinberg et al., 1981). Stress, frustration, and increased
contact between parents and children all contribute to this link between job loss
and child abuse. Third, child abuse rates differ across neighborhoods, even after
levels of poverty are statistically controlled. Neighborhoods that offer more social
resources—friends, neighbors, relatives, community centers—are protective; they
provide advice, guidance, and physical and financial assistance that help parents
avoid abusive behavior. Neighborhoods that are less friendly and more run down,
dangerous, and transient exacerbate the family’s plight and increase levels of abuse
(Leventhal et al., 2015; Parke, Lio, et al., 2012).
Families are also embedded in cultural and societal contexts that contribute to
abuse. Changes over the past several decades that may have increased the stress
on parents and contributed to an increase in child abuse include a heightened
divorce rate, increased geographic mobility, increased demand for child care, and
decreased medical coverage. In addition, the media have promoted widespread
indifference to violence or even acceptance of it as a solution to social problems,
which also may have contributed to child abuse (Straus, 2001). Some social scien-
tists suggest that the high incidence of child abuse in the United States is related to
tolerance of physical punishment (Donnelly & Straus, 2005; Gershoff, 2002). Child
546  Chapter 13 Policy

abuse is relatively uncommon in some other cultures, such as China, where adults
rarely punish children physically. Our cultural approval of violence may combine
with parents’ lack of social, economic, and emotional resources and lead to child
abuse.
No single factor causes child abuse. Abuse is more common when families have
to deal with a pileup of stressful conditions—poverty, single parenthood, substand-
ard housing, limited educational opportunities, poor health, a difficult child—in a
culture that tolerates aggression and condones physical punishment. Abuse is less
common when only one risk factor is present or stress is buffered by protective fac-
tors, such as a supportive marital relationship, a supportive social network, acces-
sible community resources, and strong personal qualities (Azar, 2002; Cicchetti &
Toth, 2015).

Consequences of Abuse
The consequences of abuse can be devastating. Abused and neglected children
often experience adverse outcomes throughout their lives (Child Welfare Informa-
tion Gateway, 2006; Cicchetti & Toth, 2006). In childhood, sexually abused chil-
dren, particularly girls, often display bed-wetting problems. Sexually abused boys
are more likely than nonabused boys to have somatic complaints, such as stomach-
aches. Both boys and girls who are sexually abused display inappropriate sexual
behavior directed toward themselves and others and engage in play and fantasy with
sexual content. They are more likely than nonabused children to be anxious and
withdrawn (Trickett & Putnam, 1998).
Physically abused children are more likely than nonabused children to be
depressed and anxious, suffer from eating disorders, exhibit self-injurious behavior,
and experience suicidal thoughts and attempts. They are more likely to suffer from
a serious psychological disturbance such as post-traumatic stress disorder. They have
lower self-esteem and are more likely to experience fears and nightmares (Cicchetti
& Toth, 2015). They are also more likely to have difficulty regulating their emotions
(Cicchetti & Toth, 2006; Kim & Cicchetti, 2015) and have shown deviations in emo-
tion expression, recognition, communications, and understanding (Cicchetti & Ng,
2014; Luke & Banerjee, 2013). Part of this problem may be physiological. Infants
who receive frequent spankings have higher cortisol responses to stress (Bugental
et al., 2003). Even in infancy, abused children are especially at risk for developing
insecure disorganized attachments (see Cyr et al., 2010, for a meta-analysis) and
are more noncompliant with, resistant to, and avoidant of their mothers. As they
advance through school, they are less prosocial and empathic, more aggressive and
likely to be rejected and victimized by their classmates (Bolger & Patterson, 2001;
Cullerton-Sen et al., 2008; Howe & Parke, 2001). Just as we saw earlier (in Chapter 9,
“Peers”) this heightened aggression may be due to the fact that physically abused
children are biased toward attributing hostile intentions to their peers’ actions
(Teisl & Cicchetti, 2008). These behavior problems may continue into adulthood
(Arnow et al., 2011). The age of onset of maltreatment may be an important factor
in differentiating the effects of maltreatment on later outcomes. Individuals who
were maltreated earlier in life (i.e., before the age of 6 years) showed higher levels
of internalizing problems such as depression as adults, whereas those who were
older at the time of maltreatment went on to develop more externalizing outcomes
such as violent or criminal behaviors in adulthood (Kaplow & Widom, 2007). As
an indication that children are often resilient in the face of adversity, the majority of
abused children do not become delinquents or violent offenders (Cicchetti, 2013),
 Child Abuse within the Family  547

Long-term effects of abuse are most likely if children remain in low-income environ-
ments with multiple stresses and few supports (Cicchetti & Toth, 2006, 2015).

Policies to Prevent Abuse

The economic cost of locating, evaluating, treating, and providing alternative care
for victims of child abuse and neglect in the United States was a staggering $80 bil-
lion in 2012 (Gelles & Perlman, 2012). In contrast, only $742 million was used to
strengthen families and prevent abuse (Kids Are Waiting, 2008).

ultural Context: Child Abuse and Children’s Rights

Historically, children have had i­llustrate, however, child sex trafficking and rifle
few legal rights. Not until the toting are still common.
mid-20th century was children’s One obstacle to reducing child maltreatment
right to protection from abuse is that cultures differ in what they consider abuse
recognized. In 1989, the United and how they interpret children’s rights. Many
Nations passed a bold declaration on the Western countries (although not the United
rights of children, the Convention on the Rights States or Canada) classify corporal
of the Child (CRC). With the support of 190 ­punishment—including hitting, slapping,
countries, this document is the most widely ­pinching, shaking, and hitting with a belt,
ratified human rights treaty in history. It sets paddle, ruler, or stick—as physical abuse. Other
forth a broad range of provisions including countries accept corporal punishment of
children’s right to a positive family environment, children. In Sri Lanka, caning a child is still a
basic health and welfare, education, leisure, permitted form of punishment in government
and cultural activities. Since the CRC was schools (de Silva, 2007). According to a survey of
adopted, the world has seen dramatic gains 24 countries, 16 percent of caregivers reported
for children. However, violence against children that someone in the home had used severe
continues. A few examples of continuing child physical violence on a child in the past month,
maltreatment include trafficking of children to with some countries (Belarus, Kazakhstan, and
work on plantations in West Africa, child soldiers Ukraine) reporting low rates (1 percent) while in
fighting in Sudan and Sierra Leone, Chinese others (Mongolia ,Yemen) the rates reach 40
girls sold off as young brides, sexual exploita- percent (Lansford & Deater-Deckard, 2012).
tion of children in Sri Lanka and Thailand, and What is considered neglect also varies from
child labor in India (Betencourt et al., 2010; de country to country. In India, because of extreme
Silva, 2007; Segal, 2001). Human trafficking is poverty, many girls are seen as a financial
the third most profitable criminal activity, burden to their families and are forced to marry
surpassed only by trafficking drugs and weap- in exchange for money. In some cases, the girls
ons. To address these concerns, the United are sold to brothels instead (Segal, 2001). A
Nations added two protocols to the CRC in distinct type of neglect occurs in Japan. For
2000: the Sex Trafficking Protocol directed at the years, unwanted children were placed in coin-
sale of children, child prostitution, and child operated lockers, and in many cases they died
pornography, and the Child Soldiers Protocol because they were not found in time. This
designed to ensure the right of children not to became a serious social problem in the mid-
be enlisted as soldiers in armed combat. As 1970s. Approximately 7 percent of infanticides in
newspaper and TV reports dramatically Japan during this period were of coin-operated
548  Chapter 13 Policy

locker babies (Kouno & Johnson, 1995). Since observed (Voices of Youth Newsletter, October
that time, this type of neglect has dropped 2007, p. 2):
dramatically thanks to an increase in locker
inspections and educational programs on “Most children in virtually every nook and
contraception. cranny of the world have very little or no
Although abuse is found in all countries, each idea of their rights. Even their teachers are
country’s government determines how it is ignorant of the fact that these rights exist.
defined, treated, and prevented. If governments How can you protect or defend what you
could agree on a single definition of abuse this know little or nothing about?”
would be a step forward in the effort to protect
children’s rights. It would also be a step forward if Although we have made progress in recogniz-
children around the world were made aware of ing children’s right to live free from abuse,
their rights. As a 16-year-old Nigerian boy problems remain around the world.

Programs that prevent abuse As Table 13.4 shows, a variety of strategies are
available to reduce child maltreatment. One approach aimed at preventing child
abuse is to educate parents and increase their understanding of children’s behav-
ior and development. In one such program, parents who were at risk of becoming
abusive because they were single, were uneducated, were immigrants, or had a his-
tory of abuse were assigned to one of three groups (Bugental, 2013; Bugental et al.,
2002). In the program group, the parents were taught a number of basic skills, such
as how to set family goals, obtain high-quality health care, and manage money, as
well as how to reframe and solve child-related problems. In the comparison group,
parents were taught only the basic skills. In the control group, they were just given
information about community services. The results were clear: Mothers in the pro-
gram group were less harsh and physically abusive with their infants than mothers
in the other two groups. Thus, teaching parents how to think more clearly about
infant problems and how to solve them is one effective way to reduce child abuse.

TABLE 13.4

Preventing Child Abuse and Neglect

Strategy Approach
Strengthen economic supports to families • Strengthening household financial security
• Family-friendly work policies
Change social norms to support parents • Public engagement and education campaigns
and positive parenting • Legislative approaches to reduce corporal punishment
Provide quality care and education early • Preschool enrichment with family engagement
in life • Improved quality of child care through licensing and accreditation
Enhance parenting skills to promote • Early childhood home visitation
healthy child development • Parenting skill and family relationship approaches
Intervene to lessen harms and prevent • Enhanced primary care
future risk • Behavioral parent training programs
• Treatment to lessen harms of abuse and neglect exposure
• Treatment to prevent problem behavior and later involvement in violence

Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2016). Child Abuse and Neglect: Prevention Strategies. Atlanta, Ga: Centers for Disease C
­ ontrol
and Prevention.
 Child Abuse within the Family  549

A second approach prevents abuse by increasing parents’ child-rearing skills.

In one such program, the Nurse–Family Partnership, nurses visit mothers at home
from the time they are pregnant until the children are 2 years old. The nurses help
the mothers improve their prenatal health before the baby is born and then they
help them provide more sensitive, responsive, engaged, and competent care to the
child. They also try to enhance the family environment by involving other fam-
ily members, especially fathers, in the home visits, by linking families with needed
health and human services, and by improving parents’ economic self-sufficiency,
helping them complete their education, find work, and plan future pregnancies.
In a controlled experiment to evaluate this program, researchers found that par-
ents who had been in the program had 48 percent fewer substantiated reports of
child abuse and neglect than parents in the control group (Olds et al., 1997). Later
work with African American and Hispanic American low-income families reported
similar reductions in abuse as well as consistent improvements in children’s school
readiness, language development, and early academic achievement (Olds, 2012).
At age 19 years, girls in nurse-visited group were less likely to have been arrested.
Nurse-visited girls born to unmarried and low-income mothers had fewer children,
and less Medicaid use than their comparison group counterparts (Ekenrode et al.,
2010). Today, this program operates in 42 states, has served over 260,000 families
(http://www.nursefamilypartnership.org), and has been implemented internation-
ally (e.g., Netherlands) as well.
In SafeCare, another program focused on parenting skills, home visitors conduct
in-depth, structured skill assessments of at-risk and maltreating parents and then
teach them parent–infant interaction skills. Families in this program were less likely
than comparison families to be reported for child maltreatment or to have their
children removed from the home (Edwards & Lutzker, 2008). Not all parenting
programs are successful in preventing child maltreatment, but this approach can be
effective when well-trained professional home visitors make repeated visits and pro-
vide parents with instruction based on sound psychological theory (Astuto & Allen,
2009; MacMillan et al., 2009; Olds, 2012).
Sometimes even a simple intervention can reduce abuse. When researchers dis-
covered that child abuse was particularly likely to occur after kids’ report cards were
sent home, school personnel in Baltimore began to enclose messages to parents
with each report card (Mandell, 2000). The messages, printed on colorful cards,
suggested positive parenting techniques and provided crisis intervention phone
numbers. Public service announcements on TV also aired the week the report cards
were sent home. One year later, the Maryland State Attorney’s Office reported that
incidents of known child abuse as a result of a bad report card had decreased from
90 to 2.
Courtesy of Nurse–Family
Partnership

In the Nurse–Family Partnership, nurses visit mothers and help them provide sensitive care to their
infants. Child abuse is reduced as a result.
550  Chapter 13 Policy

This intervention in Baltimore involved providing parents with parenting instruc-

tion as well as taking a third approach to abuse prevention: connecting families with
a support network. By giving parents phone numbers they could call in a crisis if
they needed help or advice, the intervention reduced the families’ isolation and
increased their access to social support. This has been an effective strategy for pre-
venting abuse in other programs, too (Azar, 2002).
A particularly helpful form of support is the crisis nursery, which provides tempo-
rary emergency care at any time, day or night, for children who are at risk of being
abused or neglected. Most crisis nurseries offer free child care for a maximum of
30 days a year. They may also include support services such as family counseling
and parenting classes. In an evaluation of five crisis nurseries in Illinois, research-
ers found that 90 percent of the parents who had used them said that their stress
levels decreased as a result, 96 percent said that their parenting skills improved, and
98 percent reported a reduced risk of child maltreatment (Cole et al., 2005). The
Childhelp National Child Abuse Hotline, which can be reached 24/7 at its toll-free
number, 1-800-4-A-CHILD, also offers crisis intervention, information, and referrals
to thousands of emergency, social service, and support resources.
A fourth strategy for reducing child abuse is to communicate with the public
at large. This was also part of the Baltimore report card intervention through its
televised public service announcements. Media campaigns to prevent child sexual
abuse have been explored with some success; at least they increase people’s knowl-
edge about abuse (Poole et al., 2014; Self-Brown et al., 2008) and provide an avenue
for children to report maltreatment. They might also be used to try to reduce society’s
tendency to tolerate violence and physical punishment of children (Donnelly &
Straus, 2005).
Finally, programs that address children directly are the fifth approach to prevent-
ing child abuse, particularly sexual abuse. Evaluations of these child-empowerment pro-
grams indicate that children as young as 3 years can be taught some self-­protection
skills, especially if parents are involved and the children are taught to identify and
resist inappropriate touching and are reassured that the abuse is not their fault
(Finkelhor, 2007; Kenny et al., 2008). Programs such as The Kids’ Club program
which focuses on building coping and social skills as well as safety strategies was
effective in reducing children’s adjustment problems—less aggression, anxiety, and
depression (Graham-Bermann et al., 2015). There was a decrease in substantiated
cases of child maltreatment in the United States between 1990 and 2013. Spe-
cifically, substantiated cases of sexual abuse have declined by 64 percent, physical
abuse declined by 55 percent, and neglect declined by 13 percent (Giardino, 2016).
There is some suggestion that a national decline in substantiated sexual abuse cases
(49 percent between 1993 and 2004) can be attributed to proliferation of these
programs. However, although some programs have been associated with children’s
disclosure of abuse and lower rates of victimization, there have been no true experi-
mental studies, and the effectiveness of child-empowerment programs is not con-
clusively established.
Reviews of all these different approaches to preventing child abuse suggest that
the most effective programs do the following: target physical abuse and neglect
rather than sexual abuse (because sexual abuse is more difficult to prove and to
prevent), begin when a child is born and last several years; target multiple risk fac-
tors in the family, provide services that are responsive to individual family needs and
sensitive to the family’s culture, give control to the local community, and employ
staff who are well trained and competent (Poole et al., 2014; Portwood, 2006).
A significant limitation of most programs is that they do not alleviate family poverty,
 Child Abuse within the Family  551

which is a major risk factor for child maltreatment. To prevent abuse, families also
need to be supported by social policies that promote access to income, employ-
ment, education, and housing.

Federal and state policies Social policy for child abuse prevention in the United
States has focused on protecting children from abusive parents. It does this, first,
by requiring that people report suspected child abuse to authorities and, second,

nsights from Extremes: Suggestive Interrogations

and Legal Policy
On August 12, 1983, a woman agreed with the interviewers, they were praised.
called police to report that her When they disagreed, the interviewers expressed
2-year-old son had been sexually disbelief or disapproval. Often the interviewers
abused by Raymond Buckey at introduced new suggestive information about
the McMartin Preschool in Manhattan Beach, abuse—“Did Miss Peggy take her clothes off?” “I
California. Police detectives interviewed the boy bet she looked funny didn’t she?” They also
and other parents to determine whether their invited children to pretend or speculate about
children, too, had been abused, and based on supposed abusive events—“Do you think Mr. Ray
the parents’ concerns, the Los Angeles District might have done some of that yucky touching?
Attorney’s office asked Children’s Institute Where do you think he would have
International (CII), an agency for treating abused touched her?”
and neglected children, to investigate. Between Before the McMartin case, children’s testimony
November 1983 and March 1984, CII examiners about abuse was accepted without question as
interviewed nearly 400 children who had being truthful. Almost everyone believed that
attended McMartin Preschool. They identified 369 children could not lie or be coached to make
of these children as having been abused. erroneous statements about sexual abuse. The
Allegedly, these children had been forced to McMartin case opened the door to skepticism
participate in satanic rituals and sex games. and caution. It inspired researchers to conduct
Buckey and six other staff members were indicted studies of children’s susceptibility to coercive
by a grand jury on 115 counts of child interviews. These studies revealed that children
sexual abuse. who are interviewed suggestively can produce
After the longest and most costly criminal false narratives, allegations, and accusations,
case in U.S. history, however, charges against the even about behaviors that could be misinter-
teachers were dropped, and Buckey was set free. preted as abuse (Ceci & Bruck, 1995; Clarke-
The jury had concluded that the interviews, Stewart et al., 2004; Thompson et al., 1997). These
which they watched on videotape, were so erroneous narratives are often coherent and
suggestive and coercive that it was not possible detailed and cannot be detected as false by
to determine what had actually happened to professionals. Children are particularly suggest-
the children. Analyses conducted since then ible about sexual abuse if they are young, their
indicate that the interviewers sought to have memories have faded with time, they are asked
children admit abuse rather than finding out suggestive questions, and the interviewer pres-
whether any abuse had occurred (Coleman sures them (Lamb et al., 2015).
et al., 1999; Schreiber et al., 2006). Children were As a consequence of the McMartin case and
prodded and charmed, cajoled and tricked, until the research it inspired, legal policy and practice
they finally gave the interviewers what they have changed substantially. Now many police
wanted, some “yucky secrets.” When children officers and child protection workers are taught
552  Chapter 13 Policy

to interview children about possible abuse using that someone may have done something to
simple and direct childlike words, explaining you that wasn’t right. Tell me everything about
words the child does not understand, using the that, everything you can remember.”). The goals
child’s own words for sexual terms, and avoiding of the interview are to maximize the amount of
suggestive questions. They are trained to follow information provided by the child and to mini-
guidelines developed by professional organiza- mize contamination of the information. In an
tions (Lamb et al., 2015), which suggest that they effort to find and prosecute child abusers, using
begin by building rapport (“Tell me what school techniques such as these is critical to uncover
you go to.”), practice free recall (“Tell me about “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the
your last birthday party.”), provide information truth.” In Canada and many other countries, this
about the ground rules for the interview (“It’s OK type of interview has become the standard in
to say ‘I don’t know.’”), ask open-ended questions investigations of child sexual abuse. Requiring
about the specific incident (“Tell me why you interviewer training as legal policy would also
came to talk to me.” “What happened next?”), advance investigations of child abuse in the
and then ask more focused questions (“I heard United States.

by removing children from an abusive situation (U.S. Department of Health and

Human Services, 2008). Child abuse and neglect have been considered serious
enough problems to warrant federal intervention and regulation since 1974. That was
the year Congress passed the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA),
the first federal policy that mandated reporting of abuse. CAPTA established mini-
mum standards that defined child maltreatment and required that maltreated chil-
dren be identified and reported to authorities. Individual states could decide how
to implement reporting requirements and how to provide services to maltreated
children and their families, but they must comply with the child abuse and neglect
guidelines mandated under CAPTA in order to receive federal funds. All states now
have systems to respond to reports of suspected child abuse and neglect and trained
professionals to make evaluations and determine whether intervention and services
are needed. School personnel, medical and mental health professionals, and police
and fire investigators are all mandated reporters of abuse. However, the funding for
CAPTA is inadequate to fulfill its mission. In 2016, CAPTA state grants provided less
than $26 million a year for all 50 states with some states receiving less than $100,000
annually to cover child protection, reporting, investigations, prevention services,
training, workforce recruitment, and data collection (Harfield & Marlowe, 2017).
In the United States, we spend less per child each year (32 cents) than we spend on
an average cup of coffee ($2.10) (Prevent Child Abuse America, 2017).
As a result of CAPTA and the state legislation that followed, U.S. policies moved
in the direction of removing children from abusive family environments and plac-
ing them in foster care. These policies were based on the belief that parents have a
fundamental right, protected by the Constitution, to raise their children as they see
fit but the state has the power and authority to take action to protect children from
significant harm. At first, children tended to be kept in foster care until their parents
were rehabilitated, which often led to many years in care. Therefore, in 1997, Presi-
dent Bill Clinton signed the Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA), which favored
speedy termination of parental rights and expedited adoption after 15 months in
foster care. ASFA was criticized, however, because of research showing that chil-
dren can maintain multiple attachments including those to their abusive parents.
When ASFA was reauthorized in 2002, it was amended to reaffirm the importance of
making reasonable efforts to preserve and reunify families. The Keeping Children
 Child Abuse within the Family  553

and Families Safe Act of 2003 required states to engage in efforts to attempt fam-
ily reunification unless the parents were guilty of torture, abandonment, or sexual
abuse or had killed another child. Over half of children who are placed in foster
care are reunited with their families (Children’s Bureau, 2017). Research suggests
that foster care placement leads to benefits for abused children compared with chil-
dren who remain at home or are reunified with their parents, especially if the foster
parents are supported and trained to assist their foster children (MacMillan et al.,
2009; Schwartz et al., 2012).
Today, family and juvenile courts have the authority to decide what happens to
children after a petition alleging abuse or neglect has been filed, usually by Child
Protective Services (CPS). The court is responsible for making the final determi-
nation about whether children should be removed from their homes, where they
should be placed, and whether parental rights should be terminated. In most juris-
dictions, child maltreatment is criminally punishable when a parent has committed
an act against a child such as assault, abandonment, emotional, physical, or sexual
abuse, indecent exposure, or child endangerment.
Although the intended purpose of federal and state child abuse policies is benev-
olent, they are not without problems. Child protection systems have been the sub-
ject of numerous investigations every time a child in the system dies from abuse. In
many countries in Western Europe and North America, these agencies are under-
funded and overburdened, often give their workers inadequate training and poor
supervision, and fail to focus on children’s safety and family’s needs for therapeutic
services (Bentley et al., 2016; Gilbert et al., 2011). In addition, most child abuse
reports are not investigated. To remedy these problems, as with all the other social
policies we have discussed in this chapter, requires increased expenditure of govern-
ment funds. Progress at preventing child abuse is slow and expensive.

earning from Living Leaders: Jack P. Shonkoff

and Director of the university-wide Center on
Courtesy of Jack P. Shonkoff, photo from
Harvard Graduate School of Education.

the Developing Child at Harvard University. His

goal is to drive science-based innovation to
achieve breakthrough outcomes in learning,
behavior, and health for young children facing
adversity. After he received his MD from
New York University, Shonkoff started his career
as a pediatrician expecting to take care of
kids and families, but he soon realized that the
answers to children’s health and developmental
needs went far beyond the doctor’s office. He
became interested in broader policy issues and
Jack Shonkoff is a pediatrician who is the Julius moved from pediatrics into the world of social
B. Richmond FAMRI Professor of Child Health and policy. Since then, his career has been devoted
Development at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of to understanding how research and policy
Public Health and the Harvard Graduate School mutually influence each other, especially how
of Education; Professor of Pediatrics at Harvard credible, trusted, and well-translated research
Medical School and Boston Children’s Hospital; can guide the development of effective
554  Chapter 13 Policy

interventions for young children. He wants to use study of societal conditions that harm families
science to help policy makers understand how with an emphasis on families’ strengths and abili-
adverse experiences in early childhood disrupt ties to adapt to adversity.
children’s brain architecture and how effective She has studied the effects of economic
interventions can shift the odds toward more hardship, welfare reform, marriage, divorce,
favorable outcomes. He also wants developmen- adolescent parenthood, immigration, and
tal science to inform policy discussions about maternal employment on children and youth. To
child welfare, poverty reduction programs, hous- help these children, she has proposed policies
ing, family leaves, and environmental protection, that bring together ideas from psychology,
as well as about education and health care. psychobiology, demography, sociology, and
Dr. Shonkoff has received many professional economics. Her books—Escape from Poverty:
honors including elected membership in the What Makes a Difference for Children? and For
National Academy of Medicine, the C. Ander- Better and for Worse: Welfare Reform and the
son Aldrich Award in Child Development from Well-Being of Children and Families—illustrate her
the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the interdisciplinary approach to social problems.
award for Distinguished Contributions to Public She has also worked to promote synergy among
Policy for Children from the Society for Research scholars from diverse disciplines by launching an
in Child Development. His advice for the field innovative research center called Cells to Society
“Think about current, state-of-the-art programs (C2S): Center on Social Disparities and Health at
for young children facing adversity as a starting Northwestern’s Institute for Policy Research. The
point, not a destination.” He urges undergradu- center’s mission is to bring together researchers
ates to “Build a strong knowledge base and from life sciences, biomedical sciences, and
prepare to change it.” social sciences to study the origins, conse-
quences, and policy solutions for contemporary
Further Reading health inequalities. Chase-Lansdale learned
Shonkoff J. P. (2017). Rethinking the definition of evidence- about social policy as a Congressional Science
based interventions to promote early childhood devel- Fellow in Child Development.
opment. Pediatrics. 140(6): e20173136.
She is a Fellow of the American Psychological
Association and the Association of Psychological
Lindsay Chase-Lansdale Science and a recipient of the Society for
Research on Adolescence Social Policy Award.
She was a cofounder of the Social Policy Report,
Courtesy of Lindsay Chase-Lansdale, photo

a publication of the Society for Research in Child

Development that provides reviews of current
policy issues for practitioners and researchers
and A Resource Guide to Careers in Child and
Family Policy, a valuable tool for students who
wish to pursue jobs in the social policy arena.
credit: Kim McElroy

She is convinced that students cannot learn

about policy from courses alone; they need to
work in policy settings, which will challenge and
expand their notions of research, decision
making, and political influence.

Lindsay Chase-Lansdale is Professor of Human

Further Reading
Development and Social Policy in the School of
Chase-Lansdale, P. L., & Brooks-Gunn J. (2014). Helping
Education and Social Policy at Northwestern Uni- parents, helping children: Two-generation mechanisms.
versity. Her intellectual perspective combines the The Future of Children, 24, 13–39.
 Child Abuse within the Family  555

Kathleen McCartney Three of her four siblings work in the field, she is
married to a teacher, and her stepson is a
teacher, too. In her view, “Education is the single
most important ingredient for a just society.” She
argues that we know that there are individual

Courtesy of Kathleen McCartney

differences among children, but we are only just
starting to realize that children are affected
differently by the environment, both with respect
to positive and negative influences. The search
for differential susceptibility will be a focus on
developmental science going forward. Her
advice for undergraduates, “Get involved in
research and do an independent study with a
faculty member you admire. You will be helping
Kathleen McCartney is President of Smith College them through your work, and they will help you
in Northampton, Massachusetts. Previously, she through the apprenticeship. And it’s fun!”
was a Professor in Early Childhood Development
and Dean of Education at Harvard University Further Reading
and a principal investigator in the NICHD Study Hardway, C. L. & McCartney, K. (2016). Child Care at the
nexus of research, practice, and policy: In K. Durkin &
of Early Child Care and Youth Development. This H. R. Schaffer (Eds.), Blackwell Handbook of Devel-
study of over 1350 children from birth through opmental Psychology in Practice: Opportunities and
age 15 years is one of the most comprehensive Obstacles In Giving Developmental Psychology Away.
Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
studies of the short-term and long-term effects of
early child care. The findings have been pub-
lished in numerous articles and are summarized Kristin Anderson Moore
in a 2005 book, Child Care and Child Develop-
ment. McCartney received her BA from Tufts

Courtesy of Kristin Anderson Moore

University and her PhD from Yale.
She served as director of the Child Study and
Development Center, a laboratory school for
children from birth through kindergarten, when
she was on the faculty of the University of
New Hampshire. Today she is one of the country’s
experts on child care. According to McCartney,
tests of child care policy provide convincing
evidence about whether or not, and how, child
care assistance can affect patterns of child care
use. McCartney is coeditor of the Handbook of Most of the people profiled as Living Leaders are
Early Child Development and Best Practices in professors; Kristin Moore is Senior Scholar and
Quantitative Methods for Developmentalists. Past President at Child Trends, an independent
She is a Fellow of the American Psychological research and policy center focused on improv-
Association, the Association of Psychological ing outcomes for children. Child Trends’ mission
Science, and the American Educational is to improve outcomes for children by provid-
Research Association, and she was the recipient ing research, data, and evaluation findings to
of the award for Distinguished Contributions to the people and institutions whose decisions
Education in Child Development from the Society and actions affect children. The center identifies
for Research in Child Development in 2009. emerging issues, evaluates important programs
Education is a common thread in her family. and policies, and provides evidence-based
556  Chapter 13 Policy

guidance for policy and practice. Child Trends the more laudable.” In 2013, she was selected
covers a range of topics, including child welfare, as a Fellow by the National Council on Family
early childhood, positive youth development, Relations, and she was selected to receive the
education, and teen pregnancy. Child Trends 2018 Distinguished Career Award for the Practice
also tracks indicators of the well-being of children of Sociology. Moore’s career is a reminder that
and youth over time to provide a clear picture of scholars outside of academia make important
how children and families in the United States are contributions to the well-being of children.
doing. Audiences include policy makers, program Moore shares, “I think that communicating
providers, foundations, and the media. Moore findings from research to policy makers, program
was Executive Director and then President of providers, funders, and other non-researchers
Child Trends from 1992 to 2006, when she chose represents a huge challenge. Whether in writing
to return to full-time research. While she is a senior or speech, we need to share complex ideas in
member of the Youth Development research clear, brief, non-partisan, and straightforward
area at Child Trends, she works across areas and language.”
recently completed studies of trauma systems Further, Moore suggests that “undergradu-
therapy, integrated student support educational ates need to build their skills in research and
models, key soft skills, lead exposure, and meas- evaluation and also in communication. In the
ures of positive outcomes. She was a founding coming decades, the U.S. will increasingly draw
member of the Task Force on Effective Programs on data and evidence to guide public policy
and Research at the National Campaign to Pre- and program improvement and communicat-
vent Teen Pregnancy and served on the Advisory ing the findings and implications of research
Council of the National Institute for Child Health will require a broader array of soft and hard
and Human Development. In 2009, she received skills than researchers needed in previous
the William Foote Whyte Award from the Socio- decades.”
logical Practice and Public Sociology Section of
the American Sociological Association “for her Further Reading
career-long efforts in using sociological research Manlove, J., Fish, H., & Moore, K. A. (2015). Programs to
to develop policy, evaluate programs, and further improve adolescent sexual and reproductive health
in the US: A review of the evidence. Adolescent Health,
understanding of society. The fact that the benefi- Medicine and Therapeutics, 6, 47–79.
ciaries of all these efforts are children makes it all

Chapter Summary
Definitions, Aims, and Types of Social Policy
• Social policy refers to a set of planned actions whose goal is solving a social prob-
lem or attaining a social goal; government-based social policy is referred to as
public policy.
• Social policies are designed to provide information, funding for programs and
services, services to prevent or solve problems, and an infrastructure to support
efforts on behalf of children.
• Policy decisions represent compromises based on societal needs, budgetary
limitations, and political agendas. Policymakers increasingly use scientific
information as one basis for policies.
• Programs may be focused on prevention or intervention. Primary prevention
policies alter social and environmental conditions to reduce the likelihood
that social problems will develop. Secondary prevention policies provide ser-
vices for at-risk groups. Policy-based interventions involve treating children
and families who have already been identified as having problems.
 Chapter Summary  557

Poverty
• In the United States, 21 percent of children live in poverty.
• Poor parents generally have limited power, feel helpless and insecure, have
little choice of occupation or housing, and are vulnerable to job loss and
­unemployment.
• Poverty makes child rearing difficult and leads to adverse outcomes for
children.
• Poverty affects children through poor-quality home environments, high rates
of parents’ physical and emotional problems and conflicts, neighborhoods
characterized by social disorganization and limited resources, and increased
family disruptions.
• Among the best-known programs for poor children is Head Start, which has
reported modest gains in children’s academic and social performance.
• Welfare reform involving supplemental income is linked to improved school
engagement and social behavior; younger children benefit more than older
children.
Child Care
• About 60 percent of children in the United States are cared for by someone
other than their parents, partly because of maternal employment and geo-
graphic mobility.
• In choosing child care, parents balance cost, convenience, and quality. How-
ever, most do little comparison shopping.
• Major care forms are care in the child’s own home, care in a family child care
home, and care in a center. Centers are most likely to emphasize educational
opportunities, peer contacts, and materials and equipment, and they are likely
to be licensed and regulated.
• Children in high-quality care are more sociable, considerate, compliant, con-
trolled, and prosocial; they are better adjusted, less angry and defiant, have
higher self-esteem, and have better relationships with their child care caregiv-
ers than children in poor-quality care.
• Child care in the United States lacks unified government policy. Parents pay
for child care costs themselves unless they are poor and receive a welfare sup-
plement or are eligible for a government-subsidized program.
• Possible policies to improve child care include increasing parents’ knowledge
about its effects, providing parents with more money to pay for it, supplement-
ing wages of child care workers as a way to reduce turnover, and regulating
quality standards.
Teenage Pregnancy
• Nearly one-fifth of teenage girls in the United States become pregnant—the
highest rate of teen pregnancy in industrialized nations.
• Teens who become pregnant are more likely than those who do not to have
low self-confidence and limited educational aspirations, to belong to an eth-
nic minority, to have unsupervised time, to live without their father, to view
sexually oriented TV, to engage in sexual activity, and to come from a family
in which parents are poor, uneducated, nonreligious, and unresponsive to the
teen. However, some overcome early adversity and do well.
• More than half of pregnant teens decide to keep their babies and become
single mothers. Teen mothers are likely to quit school, go on public assistance,
and live in poverty.
558  Chapter 13 Policy

• Children of teen mothers are likely to have behavior problems and low self-
control. Lack of economic resources, less competent parenting, and higher
rates of abuse and neglect contribute to these poor child outcomes.
• Adolescent boys are more likely to become fathers if they are poor and prone
to behavior problems. Lack of responsibility, poor earning power, and family
interference all contribute to a decline in father–child contact over time.
• Policies to reduce rates of teen pregnancy involve comprehensive sex educa-
tion; abstinence-only programs are not effective.
• Education and employment assistance and marriage support for teenage moth-
ers could reduce the negative outcomes for them and their children.
Child Abuse
• About 700,000 cases of child abuse or neglect were substantiated in the United
States. Young children are particularly likely to be victims.
• Mothers are often the ones who physically abuse their children, partly because
they spend more time with them than other family members do.
• Sexual abuse occurs at ages from infancy through adolescence. Girls are twice
as likely to be victims than boys.
• Ecological factors such as poverty, parents’ unemployment, divorce, mobility,
and cultural values that tolerate aggression and physical punishment all con-
tribute to child abuse.
• Children’s characteristics such as birth defects, physical and intellectual disa-
bilities, irritable and negative temperaments, and exasperating behavior prob-
lems also increase the likelihood of abuse.
• Abuse occurs in all social classes, religions, racial groups, and ethnic groups,
and there is little evidence that severe mental illness characterizes abusive par-
ents. However, abuse is most likely to occur in the presence of multiple risk
factors.
• Abusive parents themselves may have been abused, are socially isolated, and
have unrealistic beliefs about young children’s abilities.
• Child abuse is preceded by escalating verbal and physical aggression that is
often unpredictable and not contingent on the child’s actual behavior.
• Consequences of child abuse include insecure attachment in infants, problems
with emotional regulation and aggressive behavior in toddlers, poor relations
with peers and adults and low self-esteem as children get older, and delin-
quency in adolescence.
• Programs to educate parents and enhance their parenting skills are effective in
reducing child abuse.
• Policies in the United States and Canada have focused on protecting children
from abusive parents by requiring that people report suspected child abuse to
authorities and that authorities remove children from abusive situations and
place them in foster care.

Key Terms
center care Personal Responsibility primary prevention sexual abuse
child neglect and Work Opportunity policies social policy
family child care Reconciliation Act of public policy Temporary Assistance
home 1996 (PRWORA) secondary prevention for Needy Families
Head Start physical abuse policies (TANF)
 Key Terms  559

At t h e M ov i es

Many movies touch on the problems we have discussed in with a story of a fictional “pregnancy pact” set against the
this chapter. backdrop of actual news reports about teen pregnancy from
Movies about poverty. Protection (2000), a film about a June 2008. Keeper (2015) is the story of two teenagers that
family falling apart, was written and directed by a man with are about to have a baby. After deciding that they will keep
a background in child protection. This docudrama looks at the baby, they have to deal with their parents and also with
both sides of the child protection issue and presents a harsh, their everyday life.
realistic look at social services. Movies about child abuse. Mommie Dearest (1981)
The Pursuit of Happyness (2006) is a film portraying shows how Joan Crawford, one of the great classic Hollywood
the struggles of Chris Gardner, played by Will Smith, after actresses, abused her adopted daughter Christina. At first,
becoming homeless due to a bad investment of his life Joan lavished her daughter with attention and luxuries, but
savings. The movie breaks the stereotypical idea that home- as Christina began to rebel against her mother’s stringent
less individuals suffer through poverty because they are just demands and standards, Joan became increasingly abusive.
plain lazy. Living on One Dollar (2103) follows the journey of This film illustrates how child abuse can occur even in very
four friends as they set out to live on just $1 a day for two wealthy families. Quite a different family is the backdrop
months in rural Guatemala. They battle hunger, parasites, for Indiscretion (2006). In her Hispanic family, 12-year-old
and extreme financial stress as they attempt to survive life on Sophia endures a bleak childhood with constant battering
the edge. An unimaginable reality for most young Americans, from her mother. In a cry for help, she ties a message to a
the challenges they face are real and plague over 1.1 billion balloon and releases it from her bedroom window, which
people around the world. sets off a series of events that unfold over the course of
Movies about child care. The Nanny Diaries (2007), the the movie. Mystic River (2003) takes the long view by show-
story of a young woman who becomes a nanny for a wealthy ing how childhood sexual abuse can persistently haunt its
family in the elite culture of Manhattan’s Upper East Side. It victims. It gives a nuanced portrayal of the ugly reality of
provides an interesting illustration of some of the problems child abuse. But at least it’s fiction. The French film My
of nanny care. The funniest movie about child care is Eddie Little Princess (2011) is based on a true story of sexual abuse,
Murphy’s Daddy Day Care (2003). Two fathers lose their jobs focused on prurient pictures the director’s mother started
and are forced to become stay-at-home dads. With no job taking of her when she was only 3 years old. Although the
possibilities on the horizon, they open their own day care director changed the movie so it features a more “mature”
facility. Although the movie is full of laughs, it actually pres- girl who is 10 years old and capable of saying no to her
ents some serious issues about the challenges of creating monster mother, it is still disturbing to watch this troubled
high-quality care. mother–daughter relationship. In real life, the director
Movies about teen pregnancy. One of the best known and her mother (age 80) are still fighting in court over
such movies is Juno (2007). A 16-year-old high school junior the sale of the naked photos. ReMoved (2013) explores the
discovers she’s pregnant after a one-time experience with a foster care system in which abused and neglected children
boy who’s just a friend. She is pragmatic about her situation are often placed and illustrates how the system sometimes
and decides to place her baby with an adoptive couple. Her fails them. The film follows an incredibly immersive story
parents are supportive, and in the end, things work out and through the mind and eyes of a young girl taken from her
Juno continues with her life. There has been some worry abusive household and put into foster care, followed by her
that teen pregnancy has been made cool by this movie—the heartbreaking journey through multiple prospective foster
so-called “Juno effect.” Other movies show less-positive and parents. In Precious (2009), obese, illiterate, 16-year-old
more typical outcomes of teen pregnancy. In Quinceañera Claireece “Precious” Jones lives in Harlem with her mother.
(2006), Magdalena is anxiously awaiting her 15th birthday She has been raped by her father, resulting in two preg-
when she’ll celebrate her quinceañera. Her world starts to nancies, and suffered long-term physical and mental abuse
crumble when she discovers she is pregnant. She is aban- from her dysfunctional mother. This is an Academy Award
doned by her family and deserted by the baby’s father. This winning portrayal of a heart-breaking abuse. Precious
film shows the flip side to Juno’s upbeat portrayal of teen finds a way out of her traumatic daily existence through
pregnancy. But Magdalena manages a happy ending. The her imagination and fantasy and with the support of a new
Pregnancy Pact (2010) explores the costs of teen pregnancy teacher and a social worker.
 CHAPTE
C H APT E R 14

Overarching Themes
Integrating Social Development

John Dominis/Time Life Pictures/Getty Images, Inc.

Throughout this book, we have reviewed the results of hundreds of studies

of children’s social behavior and development. We have described theories
that attempt to explain the detailed and complex information amassed by
researchers and have discussed how researchers collect and analyze that
information. As is true in any field of science, research-based knowledge is
constantly expanding and changing, and we realize that a good deal of
the information presented in this book will be reexamined and modified in
the future. We recognize that although our understanding of children’s social
development today is vast, much remains to be discovered. With this in mind,
in this final chapter, we identify some broad principles underlying the cur-
rent state of knowledge about social development and suggest some ideas
about how to increase knowledge in the future. Social development is a
vibrant and exciting area of study, and further research can contribute to the
healthy development of children and the betterment of society.

560
 What We Know: Some Take-Home Principles  561

What We Know: Some Take-Home Principles

Views of the Social Child
The child is socially competent from an early age Scientists once considered
infants to be helpless, passive creatures who, with limited abilities, were simply await-
ing the imprint of the adult world. Today we view infants as competent and active
beings who possess a wide range of social and emotional capabilities. When they are
born, infants can use their sensory, perceptual, and motor capacities to respond to
social signals and communicate their needs. In their first year of life, infants can
use social referencing to guide their behavior in uncertain situations and can produce
social signals to alert others to interesting events. By their second year, infants
can infer that other people have thoughts, feelings, and intentions. These social-
emotional skills provide a foundation for continued social development.

The child’s social behavior is organized Social behaviors such as crying, smil-
ing, and looking are not disorganized reflexes or random reactions; they are organ-
ized response patterns that enable even very young infants to interact and ultimately
build relationships with others. Based on experiences with their caregivers, infants
soon develop working models of their social world, which serve as organizing guides
that permit them to react to social partners in orderly and predictable ways. As they
grow, children use social information in increasingly organized and strategic ways to
evaluate social situations and decide on their next social moves.

The child’s social behavior becomes increasingly sophisticated As chil-

dren mature, social skills exhibited in rudimentary form at early ages become
increasingly sophisticated and occur in increasingly complex contexts. For exam-
ple, at first, children can use their turn-taking skills with an adult, who is a skilled
social partner; later they can take turns with a less socially skilled peer partner. At
first, children can communicate their desire for a particular toy when they are face
to face with their partner; later they can communicate even when they are not face
to face because they have acquired perspective-taking knowledge and can visualize
what their partner sees. At first, children engage in moral reasoning in the course of
their everyday social exchanges by invoking property ownership rules and pointing
out the consequences of another’s actions; later they can demonstrate this level of
moral reasoning about an abstract, hypothetical moral dilemma. As these examples
suggest, as children develop they demonstrate social competence in more mature
forms and under more challenging conditions. They learn when to use their social
skills and how to execute them in an ever-widening range of circumstances. Social
development is not only acquiring social skills but also being able to deploy these
skills in circumstances involving more abstract tasks and in the face of competing
demands.

The child is embedded in levels of social complexity The behavior of

the individual child is embedded in a set of social interactions, relationships,
and networks. At the simplest level, the child has dyadic interactions with another
person—a parent, a peer, a sibling, or a stranger. These interactions depend on the
characteristics of both people and reflect the sum and product of their behaviors.
Somewhat more complex are triadic interactions involving the child and two other
people, such as mother and father or two siblings. Even more complex interactions
involve more than three players. At the next general level of complexity, children
562  Chapter 14 Overarching Themes

develop longer-term relationships, which depend on the participants’ shared history

and expectations about future social interchanges. Dyadic relationships include
the child’s attachments to mother and father, friendships with peers, and mutual
antagonistic relationships with adversaries. Somewhat more complex are triadic
relationships among mother, father, and child or among three siblings or three
friends. Relationships represent a unique level of social organization and involve
characteristics such as commitment, mutual support, and trustworthiness, which
cannot be understood by simply observing interactions. The next level of complex-
ity is the social group—a network of social relationships with its own rules and iden-
tity. The groups in which children are embedded include cliques, clubs, and gangs.
At an even higher level of complexity are social networks of which children are not
necessarily members. These networks—such as the extended family, parents and
teachers, or parents and their religious institutions—influence children indirectly.
Finally, at the highest level of complexity, children are embedded in a society or cul-
ture with its traditions, values, beliefs, and social institutions.

Children’s interactions with other people are reciprocal and transac-

tional From infancy onward, children influence the behavior of other people
around them and are influenced by the reactions of these other people in return.
Infants play an active role in eliciting and modifying their parents’ behaviors by smil-
ing and crying. In turn, their parents’ reactions to these social signals modify the
pair’s behavioral patterns and exchanges. Infants who frequently display fussy and
irritable behavior can provoke either highly involved, attentive behavior while par-
ents try to calm them down or weary and withdrawn behavior as parents tune them
out. Infants with an easy and engaging style are likely to elicit involved and pleasant
reactions from their parents, leading to mutually satisfying patterns of interaction;
infants with an irritable and difficult style are more likely to elicit negative reactions
leading to less-satisfying patterns of interaction. When they are older, children talk
to their parents and evoke their help in solving social problems and, as a result of
their parents’ assistance, modify their social interactions with parents, siblings, and
peers. Over the course of development, the social behavior of children and adults
is constantly undergoing change as a result of this mutual influence process. The
resulting pattern of mutual modification over time is best described as transactional.

Organization and Explanation of Children’s

Social Behavior
Aspects of development are interdependent Shifts in other domains, includ-
ing motor skills, language abilities, cognitive functions, and emotional competencies,
play a role in social development. These diverse domains of development are insepa-
rable, interrelated, and interdependent. Infants’ motor abilities such as learning to
crawl or walk expand their social possibilities: No longer do they depend on crying
or vocalizing to elicit a caregiver’s attention; because they can instead initiate social
contact by moving closer at will. Children’s acquisition of language opens new possi-
bilities for expressing wants, wishes, and desires that previously could only be inferred
from looks, gestures, or cries. Children’s advances in cognitive understanding allow
them to appreciate other people’s intentions, wishes, and desires, which changes the
nature of social exchanges and eventually the quality of children’s relationships with
others. Understanding other people’s feelings also allows children to feel empathy
and express sympathy, and this, in turn, promotes prosocial behavior. In short, social
development is a package deal that is fueled by advances in other areas.
 What We Know: Some Take-Home Principles  563

Social behavior has multiple interacting causes Social behavior is influ-

enced by a number of interacting causes, including biological factors, such as
genetics, brain organization, and hormonal levels, and environmental factors,
such as parents’ behavior, peer relations, school experiences, and popular cul-
ture. All of these biological and environmental factors influence one another
as well as the child. Neighborhood conditions influence parenting practices.
School conditions provide opportunities for peer contact. Genetic factors affect
brain functioning. Environmental conditions influence how genes are expressed.
Only by recognizing the interdependent nature of different causal factors can
we fully understand how social development occurs. Systems theory approaches
that emphasize the interplay among biological and environmental systems are
increasingly recognized as ways to organize the multiple causes of social develop-
ment ­coherently.

All causes are important No single set of causes is more real than another. The
tendency to treat some causal factors as fundamental and therefore more important
is misleading. Some researchers act as if biological processes are more important,
more scientific, and more valid and view brain scans or hormonal assessments as
better than nonbiological assessments based on observations or reports of social
behavior. This is a mistake. To understand social development, we should recog-
nize that biological causes are not more important than school experiences; genes
are not more important than parents. All levels of explanation represent different
pieces of the puzzle and together enrich our understanding of social behavior and
development. It is our task to figure out how different causal factors work together
to facilitate or hinder children’s social development.

Social Agents and Contexts for Social Development

Social behavior is influenced by social agents in social systems In the fam-
ily system, children are affected by mothers, fathers, and siblings and the relation-
ships among parents and siblings. They are affected by the extended family network
of aunts, uncles, cousins, and grandparents and by the ties between the nuclear
family and the extended family. Larger social systems include schools, communities,
media, and society. In these systems, peers, teachers, neighbors, clergy, physicians,
actors, sports heroes, media characters, and politicians influence children. Our
task is to specify how social development is altered as a result of exposure to these
multiple social systems and how changes in one social system reverberate through
the other social systems. Understanding how the influences of systems change over
development is another task.

Social behavior varies across both situations and individuals Human

beings have the ability to adapt to the demands of different situations. For this
reason, children behave differently in different situations—in the home, the labo-
ratory, the school, the peer playgroup. This does not mean that situations alone
determine children’s behavior, however. Children’s individual characteristics also
matter. In an unfamiliar situation in which a stranger confronts a child, for exam-
ple, all children react with some apprehension, but their temperament constrains
their degree of upset and anxiety. Shy and inhibited children are likely to be afraid;
extroverted children may be fearless. Our goal is to determine how individual dif-
ferences among children modify the degree and form of their reactions to different
situations.
564  Chapter 14 Overarching Themes

Social development occurs in a cultural context No single description of

social development applies to all children in all cultures, social classes, and racial
and ethnic groups. In different regions and communities across the globe, children
have different experiences. They require different social skills to become produc-
tive and accepted members of their cultural group. If children live in a multicultural
society they may receive conflicting messages from different sources. Observing
the socialization of children across a variety of cultures and in different ethnic and
social class groups can be a source of insights about social development and a way
to increase tolerance of cultural and ethnic diversity.

Social development occurs in a historical context As social conditions shift

over time, children and families are confronted with experiences that differ from
those of their predecessors. Their experiences reflect new economic conditions,
lifestyle patterns, employment practices, and immigration demographics. Tech-
nological advances such as the invention of printing or the introduction of the
Internet, which change the ways people communicate, have substantial effects on
children’s social development. Describing the social development of children in
­different historical eras and determining whether the processes that account for
development are similar or different across historical periods is important. It is
essential to continue research so we can update our understanding of social devel-
opment as the social world changes over time.

Some aspects of social development are universal Although historical and

cultural influences are important, some aspects of social development are universal:
They occur in all cultures and historical epochs. Social development is affected by
universally shared achievements such as learning to walk and talk, which occur at
approximately the same time and order in all cultures. Children’s basic emotional
expressions are universal as well, even though the rules that govern when emotions
are displayed are culturally sensitive. The biological preparedness of infants for social
interaction is evident in all cultures, but the ways that adult caregivers modify infants’
early social signals differ across cultures. Determining which aspects of social behav-
ior are universal and which are culturally determined is a continuing challenge.

Progress and Pathways of Social Development

Development may be gradual and continuous or rapid and dramatic
Against a background of gradual development, of “every day and every way getting
better and better,” children experience periods of sudden rapid change. Some are
biological changes such as growth spurts in infancy and adolescence, rapid advances
in prefrontal cortex development around age 5 or 6 years, and the onset of puberty
in adolescence. Others are normative or culturally programmed social changes
such as school transitions or beginning to vote, drive, or drink at specific ages. Some
changes are unexpected non-normative events, such as the death of a parent or
friend, a natural disaster, an unexpected illness, or the loss of a parent’s employ-
ment. Our task is to understand both rapid and gradual changes.

Early experience is important, but its effects are not irreversible For many
years, the accepted assumption about early experience was that it had long-lasting
and irreversible effects. Evidence has challenged this view, suggesting that even the
effects of early adverse experiences can be overcome. These early adverse experi-
ences include mothers’ smoking, drinking, or other drug use during pregnancy;
 What We Know: Some Take-Home Principles  565

nonstimulating rearing in infancy; living with parents who are depressed, abusive,
poor, or uneducated; and growing up in a group home or foster care. Examples
of resilience and recovery from these early experiences abound. Children reared
in orphanages or institutions can recover or at least improve if they move to stim-
ulating adoptive families. Children who are adopted after the first year are still
capable of forming attachments to their new caregivers. Although many children
who are abused early in life suffer long-term consequences, others develop into
well-functioning adults who do not repeat this pattern when they become parents
themselves, especially if they marry a supportive and nonabused partner. Continuity
of problems from childhood to later years is most likely to result from continued
adversity throughout childhood, not from early adverse experience alone. The ease
with which children can bounce back from early experiences varies with the timing
of the onset, length, and intensity of the adversity. The earlier the onset and the
longer and more severe the adverse conditions, the more difficult it is to overcome
negative effects.

There is no single pathway to normal or abnormal development It is a

well-established observation that people reach their goals by different routes. They
might follow the conventional path of getting an education and marrying a class-
mate, or they might achieve success by winning the lottery and getting fixed up by
the millionaire matchmaker. Children, too, take different routes through develop-
ment; no single pathway is always the “best” or the “worst.” Children can start life
with disadvantages because of a difficult temperament or a depressed caregiver;
they can overcome great risks because they are resilient or they can become derailed
by minor obstacles because they are not. There is clearly more than one pathway
through childhood and adulthood. We can learn from people who take the typical
path and from people who follow the road not taken. Tracking the development
of children with problems such as autism, for example, can teach us about cer-
tain aspects of social development, such as reading another person’s emotions and
developing insight into others’ perspectives and beliefs. Similarly, understanding
social development in normal children can give us insights into how children with
social problems cope and how we can help them.

Tracing both normative pathways and individual pathways is impor-

tant Throughout this book, we have described the age-related norms of social
development. These norms are useful guides for knowing what to expect of children
at certain ages and when specific social skills are likely to emerge. At the same time,
individual children have different trajectories of social development. For example,
some children start to act aggressively early in life, but others show this tendency for
the first time during their teen years. Some children are shy as infants and remain
shy for life, but others start out shy and move into the normal range of social asser-
tiveness. Norms are useful, but recognizing and tracking the variety of individual
developmental trajectories is important as well.

Development is a lifelong process Social development in infancy and child-

hood is important and interesting. But development does not stop at the end of
adolescence. Human beings of every age continue to respond to, learn from, and
change as a result of new experiences. These experiences include marriage and
divorce, occupational success and failure, becoming parents and grandparents,
and losing friends and independence. One of our goals in studying development
over the life span is to identify the types of childhood experiences that account for
successful or not-so-successful adult development. Another goal is to understand
566  Chapter 14 Overarching Themes

how adult development affects children. The age at which person becomes a par-
ent is one factor that illustrates this association. When a girl enters parenthood
during her teen years rather than as a woman in her 20s or 30s, the social, eco-
nomic, and even cognitive environment she provides for her infant will be radi-
cally different. Her identity and education and occupational roles are unsettled,
she is less likely to have achieved financial stability, and she might not know how
or be able to devote herself to stimulating her child. If we are to understand chil-
dren’s social development, we must consider the parents’ development as well.
Adult development and children's development continue to mutually influence
each other.

Glimpsing the Future: Methodological,

­Theoretical, and Policy Imperatives
Methodological Imperatives
Questions take priority over methods Without a sound and sensible question, even
great methodological creativity will not advance our understanding of social develop-
ment. Once a solid research question has been identified, the researcher chooses a
method that will answer it. Sometimes this means using a less-preferred method, but it
may be the only method available. For example, to address a central question of social
development, “What aspects of the early social environment are crucial for optimal
social adaptation?” researchers are unlikely to conduct experiments by setting up a
variety of child-rearing environments and randomly assigning infants to them. Instead,
they must pursue the question by taking advantage of natural experiments or carrying
out field studies. Although these methods have problems and limitations, pursuing a
meaningful question with a less-optimal method is better than investigating an unim-
portant question with a sounder method—unless you’re just doing it for course credit!
Though even then you will probably learn from your efforts.

No single method will suffice Many research methods are available to examine
the complex and multifaceted domain of social development. Naturalistic observa-
tions, clinical interviews, laboratory and field experiments, hormonal, genetic, and
neurological assessments, and questionnaires and standardized tests can all provide
valuable information about children’s social behavior. To provide a complete and
definitive answer to any research question, using a variety of methods to collect
data is important. Doing so will ensure that results are reliable and valid. When new
methods are devised, questions that have already been examined can be revisited.
For example, advances in assessing unconscious prejudice (with the Implicit Asso-
ciation Test, which we discussed in Chapter 6, “Self”) can be used to investigate the
question “What is the role of unconscious processes in social interactions?” New
statistical techniques for analyzing growth curves can be used to reexamine how par-
enting practices influence children’s social development over time. Using multiple
methods to look at facets of social development from different angles will provide
broader and deeper understanding.

No single reporter will suffice Different reporters provide different perspectives

on children’s social behavior, which means that children’s self-reports, parents’ rat-
ings of children, siblings’ observations, teachers’ assessments, peers’ evaluations,
 Glimpsing the Future: Methodological, ­Theoretical, and Policy Imperatives  567

and coaches’ comments are all valuable sources of information. Teachers know how
children function in class and on the playground. Peers know who is popular, who is
rejected, and who is a member of a clique. Children themselves are the best source
of information about their own attitudes, feelings, dreams, goals, and hopes for the
future. Parents know whether children do their chores or fight with their younger
siblings. Siblings may be a good source of information about whether children can
keep secrets. Groups of children or adults can provide a sense of whether a neigh-
borhood is safe, a school provides a positive climate for children, or a subculture
values honesty. To get an in-depth picture of social development, collecting infor-
mation from many reporters is necessary.

No single sample will suffice To capture the diversity of children’s social lives,
studying more than one sample is often necessary. Using a variety of samples will
capture the cultural, ethnic, and socioeconomic richness of children’s develop-
ment, both within the United States and throughout the world, and will tell us
whether findings are replicable and generalizable. Cross-cultural comparisons can
be used as natural experiments to test theories about influences on social develop-
ment. For example, carefully choosing samples from different regions around the
globe and examining the effects of different disciplinary practices on children’s
cooperative behavior in these different cultures can provide information about
whether influences are universal or culture specific. In recent years, the use of
nationally representative samples has increased confidence in the generalizability
of findings.

Theoretical Imperatives
No single theory will suffice At present, no single theory provides a full and
complete explanation of children’s social development—and perhaps none ever
will. Contemporary developmental psychologists believe that the complex nature
of social development requires explanations of smaller pieces of the developmental
puzzle rather than a theory that is all encompassing. These psychologists prefer
theories of specific phenomena—such as gender typing, attachment, aggression, or
moral development—rather the grand theories, such as those of Freud and Piaget,
which were proposed during the last century. One of the challenges for the future
is to integrate the phenomena of social development into a coherent overarching
theory illuminating how the “whole child” develops. Systems theories that recognize
the multiple levels of biological and environmental influence and their interplay
reflect attempts to achieve this goal, but providing a unified approach to social
development remains a continuing challenge.

No single discipline will suffice A number of scientific disciplines besides psy-

chology contribute in important ways to our understanding of children’s social
development. Anthropology provides a cross-cultural perspective on child socializa-
tion. Sociology offers a societal viewpoint on the systems and institutions in which
children are embedded. The field of pediatrics illuminates the role of physical
health in children’s social development. Clinical psychology and psychiatry offer
an understanding of children’s deviant and abnormal development. History views
children’s development through the lens of time. Neuroscience and molecular and
568  Chapter 14 Overarching Themes

behavior genetics provide information about the biological basis of social behavior.
Multidisciplinary approaches in which researchers from different disciplines come
together to focus on a specific aspect of social development are likely to be produc-
tive in the future. It takes a village of disciplines to understand the complexities of
social development.

Policy Imperatives
Research on social development can inform social policy Findings from
research about how children’s social development is influenced by their social expe-
riences can be used to improve social policies, such as those pertaining to parenting
education, child care, preschool programs, school transitions, teenage pregnancy,
adolescent risk taking, divorce, neighborhood poverty, immigration, and television
and other mass media content. Sharing knowledge of research findings helps policy
makers design scientifically based interventions and prevention programs aimed at
improving the social lives of children.

Social policy can inform research on social development The dialogue

between policymakers and researchers needs to go both ways. Social policy deci-
sions, including shifts in welfare rules, increases in child care opportunities,
changes in immigrant-deportation policies, neighborhood relocation initiatives,
and altered routes to parenthood via new reproductive technologies, are natural
experiments and provide rich opportunities for researchers to track the conse-
quences of policy changes on the lives of children and families and in the process
learn more about social development. These studies can also evaluate the effec-
tiveness of the policy changes and offer feedback to policy makers concerning the
value of their decisions for improving children’s social lives. In this way, citizens
can be more confident that government funds–your tax dollars—are being spent
wisely and effectively.

One-size-fits-all social policies are inadequate Because families and commu-

nities are diverse, there is a need to provide social policies and services tailored
to meet the needs of different cultural groups. Policy makers who recognize the
customs and traditions of these diverse groups are more likely to develop social
programs that are effective in achieving their goals of optimizing children’s social
development through the targeted application of program funding resources. Inex-
pensive changes that improve cultural appropriateness often can produce dramatic
changes in a policy’s effectiveness. For example, inviting Latino parents to teacher
conferences in small groups rather than individually has been observed to increase
parents’ attendance and participation, create stronger partnerships between fami-
lies and the school, and improve children’s school progress. Clear improvements
in policy have been achieved by recognizing the unique needs of particular ethnic
groups.

Social development is everyone’s responsibility Ensuring children’s suc-

cessful social development is everyone’s responsibility. Parents, teachers, coaches,
religious leaders, and, in fact, all citizens have a responsibility to encourage and
support social policies in the best interests of children. Being informed about chil-
dren’s development through books and media and using that knowledge to urge
policymakers to promote child-friendly policies is a task we can all share.
 Emerging Leaders in Social Development  569

Emerging Leaders in Social

Development
Throughout this book we have featured “Learning from Living Leaders” in
each chapter to acquaint you with some senior scholars in the field of social
development. But the field is also influenced by younger scholars. These are
the leaders of the future. In this section we introduce you to some of these
up-and-coming leaders. They are the researchers in social development who
were given early career awards by the Society for Research in Child Develop-
ment or the American Psychological Association (Division 7, Developmental
Psychology) since 2009. Take a look at their profiles and read what they have
to say that may be of interest to you or an inspiration for you.

Courtesy of Andres De Los Reyes

Andres De Los Reyes received his PhD from Yale University in 2008, and
currently serves as an Associate Professor and Director of Clinical Training at
the University of Maryland at College Park (UMCP). He is also the Editor-
in-Chief of the Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology (JCCAP) and
Program Chair of the JCCAP Future Directions Forum (https://jccapfuture-
directionsforum.weebly.com/), an annual meeting focused on providing
early career scientists with professional development training and an outlook
on emerging areas of research in child and adolescent mental health. At the
UMCP, he serves as Director of the Comprehensive Assessment and Interven-
tion Program (CAIP), a laboratory focused on improving our understanding
of the inconsistent outcomes that commonly arise from multi-informant men-
tal health assessments, with a focus on adolescent social anxiety and family
functioning. In 2013, he was recognized with an early career award from the
Society for Research in Child Development. A recent publication that Andy
contributed to is De Los Reyes, A., Augenstein, T. M., Wang, M., Thomas,
S. A., Drabick, D. A. G., Burgers, D., & Rabinowitz, J. (2015). The validity of the
multi-informant approach to assessing child and adolescent mental health. Psy-
chological Bulletin, 141, 858–900. Andy offers you this advice: “As in other career
pursuits, science is about balancing your interests with what you think the field
needs. I often tell my students that I am fortunate to be ‘interested enough’
in the content area of my research program. I keep on studying and learning
more about this content area because I think it’s where I am needed.”
Anna D. Johnson is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Psychology
at Georgetown University. A hybrid scholar with degrees in Developmental Psy-
chology and Public Policy, Anna’s research sits at the intersection of the two
disciplines by blending the theory and measures of developmental psychology
with advanced quantitative methods to ask exploratory and evaluative questions Courtesy of Anna D. Johnson
about how public policies impact vulnerable children’s early development.
Anna’s primary research focus is on the effects of publicly funded early care and
education experiences on low-income children’s development, with a second-
ary interest in identifying predictors and consequences of obstacles to healthy
development such as food insecurity on children’s kindergarten readiness. For
this work, she received an early career award from the Society for Research in
Child Development. Anna believes that what the field needs next is “a closer
look at what children who are not native English speakers—Dual Language
Learners (DLLs)—and children with special needs require, especially in their
nonparental child care and early education (preschool) settings. And, we
need a better understanding of what strengths—not just weaknesses—these
children possess in terms of self-regulation and executive functioning.” And her
advice to undergraduates: “take classes outside of your psychology or education
 570  Chapter 14 Overarching Themes

major! Especially methods classes. In order to bring more methodological rigor

to correlational questions of “is X correlated with Y,” we need ever-more sophis-
ticated statistical models, so students should take advantage of classes in other
fields such as epidemiology, economics, and sociology to understand best ways
to answer those questions.”
Brian D’Onofrio is Professor and Director of clinical training in the Depart-
ment of Psychological and Brain Sciences at Indiana University. He received
his PhD in clinical psychology from the University of Virginia in 2005. He
received the Society for Research in Child Development Award for Early Career
Contributions in 2011 for his pioneering methods for understanding gene–
environment interplay in marital processes and parenting, for providing new
insights into early risk factors for child and adolescent psychopathology, and
Courtesy of Brian D’Onofrio

for his innovative adaptation of longitudinal research methods for advancing

understanding of sensitive periods of development and explaining heteroge-
neity and reciprocal influences over time. He is also studying whether different
types of divorce mediation can help children after the separation of their parents.
One of his recent publications is D’Onofrio, B. M., Rickert, M. E., Frans, E.,
Kuja-Halkola, R., Almqvist, C., Sjölander, A., Larsson, H., & Lichtenstein, P.
(2014). Paternal age at childbearing and offspring psychiatric and academic
morbidity. JAMA Psychiatry, 71, 432–438. Brian stated “I have been quite for-
tunate to have numerous mentors, each with different research interests, but
they all shared the fundamental goal of pursuing truth by searching out dis-
confirming evidence for their hypotheses rather than solely seeking converg-
ing evidence. This has had a profound impact on my research and how I train
my students.”
Candice Odgers is Professor of Psychological Science in the school of social
ecology at UC Irvine. Prior to her move to California she was Associate Pro-
fessor of Public Policy, Psychology, and Neuroscience at Duke University. She
received her PhD from the University of Virginia in 2005 and completed post-
doctoral training at the Social, Genetic and Developmental Psychiatry Centre
Courtesy of Candice Odgers

in London, England. She earned early career awards from both the American
Psychological Association and the Society for Research in Child Development
for her seminal contribution to understanding the developmental course and
consequences of externalizing problems, for her innovative research examin-
ing social inequalities and health across development, and for her elegant use
of complex statistical procedures and methodologies to elucidate both genetic
and environmental mechanisms that confer increased risk not only in child-
hood but across the lifespan. A recent publication that Candace contributed
is George, M., Russell, M. R., Piontak, J., & Odgers, C. L. (2018). Concurrent
and subsequent associations between digital technology use and high-risk ado-
lescents’ mental health symptoms. Child Development, 89, 78–88. Candace offers
you this advice: “Early in my career I was told that the way to make a novel
contribution to science was to be brilliant or to import innovative approaches
from other disciplines into your own. When I realized brilliance might not be in
Courtesy of Catherine Bradshaw

the cards, I opted for the second approach and I learned an incredible amount
in the process. I strongly encourage other young scholars to peek outside of the
boundaries of psychology as well. The benefits to our science are substantial
and you may learn, as I did, that economists are not that scary after all.”
Catherine Bradshaw is a Professor and Associate Dean for Research and
Faculty Development at the Curry School of Education at the University of
Virginia. Before this, she was an Associate Professor in the School of Public
Health at Johns Hopkins University. She maintains her affiliation with the
 Emerging Leaders in Social Development  571

Johns Hopkins Center for the Prevention of Youth Violence, where she is
the Deputy Director, and the Johns Hopkins Center for Prevention and Early
Intervention, where she is the Co-Director. She received her PhD in devel-
opmental psychology from Cornell University in 2004. Her primary research
interests focus on the development of aggressive behavior and bullying. She
examines the effects of exposure to violence, peer victimization, and environ-
mental stress on children, and she designs, implements, and evaluates school-
based programs to prevent bullying and school violence. In 2009, she received
both an early career award from the Society of Research in Child Develop-
ment and a Presidential Early Career Award for Scientists and Engineers from
President Obama for her application of public health perspectives to school-
based prevention and educational research. One of her recent publications is
Parker, E. M., Lindstrom Johnson, S., Debnam K. J., Milam, A., & Bradshaw,
C. P. (2017). Teen dating violence victimization among high school students:
A multilevel analysis of school level risk factors. Journal of School Health, 87,
696–704. Catherine says, “I was once told I wasn’t a ‘real developmentalist’
because my interests were too applied and interdisciplinary. However, this
career path has enabled me to conduct research that has real-world signifi-
cance and reaches a broader audience. I am proud to be a nontraditional devel-
opmentalist and I encourage others also to forge a path into applied fields.”
Cecilia Cheung is an Assistant Professor of Psychology at the University of
California, Riverside. She received her PhD from the University of Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign, after completing her undergraduate and Masters’ degrees
at the Chinese University of Hong Kong. In 2017, Dr. Cheung received an early
career award from the Society for Research in Child Development. She has
been recognized for her contribution to understanding the role of culture and
parents in children’s academic and psychological adjustment. A representative
publication to which Cecilia contributed is Cheung, C. S., Pomerantz, E. M.,
Wang, M., & Qu, Y. (2016). Controlling and autonomy-supportive parenting in

Courtesy of Cecilia Cheung

the United States and China: Beyond children’s reports. Child Development, 87,
1992–2007. Her recent research focuses on the confluence of culture, schools,
and home environments on children’s creativity development. In Cecilia’s
view, the development of cross-culturally relevant and valid measures is a chal-
lenge in her area of research. Cecilia offers this advice: “It is not always neces-
sary to go after topics that are ‘hot’. Instead, pursue topics that truly intrigue
you. Be ready to question established approaches and be bold to innovate,
integrate, and improvise.”
David Yeager is an Associate Professor in the Department of Psychology at
the University of Texas at Austin. After earning his Bachelors and his masters
in English Education at the University of Notre Dame, Yeager spend 2 years
as a middle school teacher, including teaching Language Arts. Yeager then
pursued graduate work at Stanford University, earning a doctorate in devel-
Courtesy of David Yeager

opmental and psychological science. Yeager’s work focuses on understanding

the processes shaping adolescent development, especially how social cogni-
tive factors may affect developmental and educational outcomes for youth.
Much of this work focuses on randomized experiments in school settings
because he believes, as Bronfenbrenner and Lewin did, that a good way to
understand the system of forces affecting behavior and development is to try
to change it. He hopes that such interventions will be useful for addressing
important problems facing society. Yeager’s research has been supported by
the William T. Grant Foundation, the Spencer Foundation, and the National
Institute of Child Health and Human Development. Yeager received awards
 572  Chapter 14 Overarching Themes

for his dissertation research from the American Psychological Association, the
American Education Research Association, and the Society for Research in
Child Development. Yeager also received a Rising Star Award in 2015 from
the Association for Psychological Science and an early career award from the
American Psychological Association in 2018.
Jelena Obradović is an Associate Professor in Developmental and Psycho-
Courtesy of Jelena Obradović

logical Sciences program in the Graduate School of Education at Stanford

University. She received her PhD from the Institute of Child Development at
the University of Minnesota and completed postdoctoral training at the Uni-
versity of British Columbia. Her research examines how the interplay of chil-
dren’s physiological arousal, self-regulatory skills, and the quality of caregiving
environments contributes to children’s adaptation over time. She received an
Early Career Research Contribution Award from the Society for Research in
Child Development for her “studies on the processes that influence the quality
of adaptation, among children threatened by adversity and disadvantage; and
for her work interrogating multilevel dynamics in development, particularly
with respect to the biological embedding of experience and interplay of indi-
vidual differences with context.” Jelena is also a recipient of a William T. Grant
Foundation Scholar Award and Jacobs Foundation Advanced Research Fellow-
ship. Jelena thinks the two biggest challenges of developmental science are
scaling up evidence-based programs aimed to improve children’s lives across
the globe, and developing high-quality assessments that can be used to evalu-
ate the impact of these programs across different contexts. Jelena’s advice to
young scholars is to seek collaborations and learn from their peers; working
together is more fun and leads to better science and lifelong friendships.
Luke W. Hyde is an Assistant Professor of Psychology at the University of
Michigan. Before joining the faculty at Michigan, he received his PhD from
the University of Pittsburgh in the joint program in Clinical and Developmen-
tal Psychology. During this time, he also received a certificate in Cognitive
Neuroscience from the Centers for Neural Basis of Cognition, a joint pro-
Courtesy of Luke W. Hyde

gram between the University of Pittsburgh and Carnegie Mellon University. He

completed his clinical internship at Western Psychiatric Institute and Clinics.
His work focuses on understanding the development of antisocial behavior
(e.g., aggression, rule breaking) from early childhood to adolescence. This
research has helped to uncover early markers of children who will persist in
this troubling behavior, has helped to illuminate the origins of psychopathy,
and has highlighted how the interaction of genes and experiences (e.g., harsh
parenting) shape the developing brain, leading to increased risk for psychopa-
thology. Hyde’s work has been funded by the National Institutes of Health, the
Avielle Foundation, and the Brain and Behavior Foundation. Hyde has several
awards for his research contributions, including the Boyd McCandless Award
from Division 7 of the American Psychological Association (Developmental)
for distinguished contributions by a young scientist and a “Rising Star” award
from the Association for Psychological Science. In terms of challenges that the
field faces, Hyde notes that “Science is moving towards larger teams and inves-
tigators with interdisciplinary experience. But it is really hard to collaborate
across disciplines because people speak different ‘languages’ and it is hard to
get good, deep, cross-disciplinary training within the time you have for a PhD”
and to undergraduates he urges “Get experience in a research lab as soon as
you can and don’t be afraid to have a (second) major that is far from psychol-
ogy—my career has benefitted as much from the conceptual skills I gained as
a religion major as it did from the psychology major.”
 Emerging Leaders in Social Development  573

Noel Card received his PhD in clinical psychology from St. John’s Univer-
sity in 2004 and is currently Professor in the Department of Human Devel-
opment and Family Studies at the University of Connecticut. Previously he
was an Associate Professor in Family Studies and Human Development at the
University of Arizona. His work is noted for its programmatic and interrelated
lines of research on aggression, victimization, and antipathetic relationships;
for developing and applying advanced best-practice quantitative methods to
developmental science; and for contributing critical meta-analytic reviews
of the forms and functions of aggression in childhood and adolescence. In

Courtesy of Noel Card

2009, Dr. Card received an early career award from the Society for Research
in Child Development. His goal is to advance understanding of child and
adolescent social development, primarily about peer relations and aggressive
behavior. A recent article Noel wrote is Casper, D. M., & Card, N. A. (2017).
Overt and relational victimization: A meta-analytic review of their overlap
and associations with maladjustment. Child Development, 88, 466–483. Noel’s
strongest suggestion to students is to “Pursue an area of study or career that
you feel passionate about. To achieve much success in most areas, one has to
devote thousands of hours over many years, so you might as well pick a focus
that you find interesting and important!”
Tobias Grossmann directs the Early Social Development Group at the
Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences in Leipzig,
Germany. He received his PhD in developmental social neuroscience with a
specific focus on infancy from the University of Leipzig in 2006. His research
interests are face, voice, and emotion processing, the role of the prefrontal

Courtesy of Tobias Grossmann

cortex in the early development of social cognition, and individual differ-
ences in social perception. He was given his early career award from the
Society for Research in Child Development, for applying innovative methods
in neuroscience to address how infants develop social, cognitive, and emo-
tional skills. One of his recent publications is Grossmann, T., Oberecker, R.,
Koch, S. P., & Friederici, A. D. (2010). The developmental origins of voice
processing in the human brain. Neuron, 65, 852–858. He says that something
that has inspired and motivated his research is captured nicely by a quote
from Peter Hobson’s book, The Cradle of Thought, where he makes the point
that “We need to realise that the most powerful influence on development is
what happens between people.”
Victoria Talwar is a Professor in the Department of Educational and Coun-
selling Psychology at McGill University. She received her PhD from Queen’s
University in Canada. When she was given her early career award from the
Society for Research in Child Development, she was recognized for systematic
advancement of knowledge concerning young children’s deceptive abilities
and broad application of this knowledge to developmental and legal con-
texts; for contributions to the understanding of lying in children, including
Courtesy of Victoria Talwar

not only very early deceptive capabilities but also important cultural and con-
textual influences on these capabilities; for research on deception in chil-
dren and perceptions of truth-telling in child witnesses that had a significant
impact on evaluating children in legal contexts; and for novel integration of
theory and application in a programmatic line of research concerning the
development of deception. She is also interested in the influence of cross-
cultural factors and attitudes to lying behavior. An article she has written is
Talwar, V., & Crossman., A. M. (2012). Children’s lies and their detection:
Implications for child witness testimony. Developmental Review, 32, 337–359.
Her advice to students facing the big question of “what to do when you grow
574  Chapter 14 Overarching Themes

up” is to “Do something you find interesting and challenging. This way you will
never be bored and you will be motivated to keep working even when there are dif-
ficulties or unexpected results. And most of the time it will be fun! There is noth-
ing like going to work and looking forward to playing.”

At the Wedding
Before you close this book, look back at the wedding photo that opened this chap-
ter. It illustrates many of the social development themes and principles we have
discussed. The wide range of ages represented by the wedding participants illus-
trates the theme that social development is a lifelong process. The presence of the
extended family gathered for the wedding provides a clear example of the theme
that children are embedded in a social network of relationships. Imagine the num-
ber of individuals in this photo who have had a socializing influence on each child.
The theme that children’s development is affected by nurture is reflected in the
photo by clear evidence that parents and elders have taught the children to be
quiet and attentive when being photographed. The effect of nature is implicit in
the family resemblances among grandparents, parents, and children in the photo.
Visible variations between adults in the photo illustrate the theme that different
individuals follow diverse pathways from infancy to adulthood. Yet the very event
of a wedding suggests that some aspects of development—such as forming loving
relationships culminating in marriage—are universal. The photo reminds us of
the themes that social behavior is affected by culture and by historical era. This
wedding ceremony is colored by Chinese customs, but the white dress and bou-
quet illustrate the influence of modern Western customs as well. The photo also
provides a reminder of the theme that social behaviors vary across situations. While
sitting for the wedding photo, the children are quiet, but when they are released
by the photographer they will undoubtedly become more celebratory at the wed-
ding reception. It was probably harder for some children than others to sit still for
this portrait, reflecting the theme that there are biological differences in individu-
als’ social behavior. Children who are by nature quiet and shy would have an eas-
ier time than children who are temperamentally outgoing or hyperactive. Highly
active children would be better suited for the post-wedding party, where there is
less structure and more opportunity for boisterous fun. Thus, even a single snap-
shot can illustrate some of the myriad themes that characterize social development
across time, place, and culture.
 GLO SSA RY

accommodation Modifying an existing schema to fit a new experience.

active gene–environment association People’s genes encourage them to seek out experiences compat-
ible with their inherited tendencies.
age cohorts People who were born in the same time period and share historical experiences.
aggressive-rejected children Youngsters who are not accepted by their peers because of their low level
of self-control and high level of aggression.
allele An alternative form of a gene; typically, a gene has two alleles, one inherited from the offspring’s
mother and one from the father.
altruistic behavior Intrinsically motivated conduct intended to help others without expectation of
acknowledgment or reward.
androgynous Possessing both feminine and masculine psychological characteristics.
assimilation Applying an existing schema to a new experience.
associative play Interaction in which young children share toys, materials, and sometimes conversa-
tion, but are not engaged in a joint project.
attachment A strong emotional bond that forms between infant and caregiver in the second half of
the child’s first year.
attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) A disorder characterized by a persistent pattern of
inattention and hyperactivity or impulsivity.
attrition Loss of participants in a longitudinal study due to their unwillingness or unavailability to
participate in subsequent assessments.
attunement A pattern of mutual engagement between caregiver and infant by which the caregiver
maintains attention and responds warmly to the infant’s signals.
authoritarian parenting A child-rearing style that is harsh, unresponsive, and rigid and tends to use
power-assertive methods of control.
authoritative parenting A child-rearing style that is warm, responsive, and involved and sets reasonable
limits and expects appropriately mature behavior from children.
autism A disorder that begins in childhood, lasts a lifetime, and disrupts social and communication
skills.
average children Youngsters who have some friends but who are not as well liked as popular children.
babbling An infant’s production of strings of consonant–vowel combinations.
bullying Use of aggression against weaker individuals to gain status or power.
case study A form of research in which investigators study an individual person or group intensely.
catharsis Discharging aggressive impulses by engaging in actual or symbolic hostile acts.
center care A licensed and regulated type of child care facility operated by trained professional car-
egivers and providing educational opportunities, peer contacts, and materials and equipment.
cerebral cortex The covering layer of the cerebrum, which contains the cells that control specific func-
tions such as seeing, hearing, moving, and thinking.

575
576  Glossary

cerebral hemispheres The two halves of the brain’s cerebrum, left and right.
cerebrum The two connected hemispheres of the brain.
childhood depression A mood disorder often manifested in despondent mood and loss of interest in
familiar activities but possibly expressed as irritability and crankiness and difficulty concentrating or
focusing on tasks.
child neglect Failure of a responsible adult to provide for a child’s physical, medical, educational, or
emotional needs.
chronosystem The time-based dimension that can alter the operation of all other systems in Bronfren-
brenner’s ecological model, from microsystem to macrosystem.
classical conditioning A type of learning in which a new stimulus is repeatedly presented with a familiar
stimulus until an individual learns to respond to the new stimulus in the same way as to the familiar
stimulus.
clique A exclusive peer group formed on the basis of friendship.
cognitive behavior therapy A therapy technique useful for treating depression in adolescents that
teaches strategies for dealing with depressive moods and acquiring a more positive outlook.
cognitive developmental theory of gender typing Kohlberg’s theory that children use physical and
behavioral clues to differentiate gender roles and to gender type themselves very early in life.
cognitive social learning theory A theory that stresses the importance of observation and imitation in
the acquisition of new behaviors, with learning mediated by cognitive processes.
collective self A person’s concept of self within a group, such as a group based on race or gender.
conscience Internalized values and standards of moral behavior.
construct An idea or concept, especially a complex one such as aggression or love.
controversial children Youngsters who are liked by many peers but also disliked by many.
conventional level Kohlberg’s second phase of moral development in which moral judgment is
based on the motive to conform, either to get approval from others or to follow society’s rules and
conventions.
cooing A very young infant’s production of vowel-like sounds.
cooperative learning A teaching technique in which small groups of students work together.
cooperative play Interaction in which children share goals and work together to achieve them.
coparenting How parents work together as a team, which can be cooperative, hostile, or unbalanced.
corpus callosum The band of nerve fibers that connects the two hemispheres of the brain.
cortisol A hormone secreted by the adrenal glands in response to physical or psychological stress.
critical period A specific time in an organism’s development during which external factors are claimed
to have a unique and irreversible impact.
cross-sectional design A research design in which researchers compare groups of individuals of differ-
ent age levels at approximately the same point in time.
cross-sequential design A way of studying change over time that combines features of both cross-­
sectional and longitudinal designs.
crowd A collection of people whom others have stereotyped on the basis of their perceived shared
attitudes or activities—for example, populars or nerds.
cyberbullying Making threats or using embarrassment or humiliation directed at a victim with some
form of interactive digital medium such as the Internet.
delay of gratification Putting off until a later time possessing or doing something that gives one imme-
diate pleasure.
dependent variable The factor that researchers expect to change as a function of change in the inde-
pendent variable.
depression contagion The process of youths’ depressive symptoms increasing the likelihood of their
friends developing depressive symptoms.
 Glossary  577

desensitization Classical conditioning therapy used to overcome phobias and fears through exposure
to increasingly intense versions of the feared stimulus; the process by which people show diminished
emotional reaction to a repeated stimulus or event.
deviancy training Amplification of aggression that occurs when adolescents are with and learn from
aggressive peers.
diathesis-stress (or dual risk) model An interaction model that claims that vulnerability factors, such as
genetic risk, make some children more susceptible to negative experiences.
differential susceptibility model An interaction model that claims that genetic and other biologically
based factors make some children not only more susceptible to negative experiences but also more
responsive to positive experiences.
direct aggression Physical or verbal hostile behavior that directly targets another person.
direct observation A research technique in which researchers go into settings in the real world or
bring participants into the laboratory to observe behaviors of interest.
dizygotic Fraternal twins from two different eggs, fertilized by two different sperm, producing two
different zygotes.
domain specificity Processes of development are different for different types of behavior, for example,
moral judgments, manners, and peer relationships.
dominance hierarchy An ordering of individuals in a group from most to least dominant; a “pecking
order.”
drive-reduction theory A version of learning theory suggesting that the association of stimulus and
response in classical and operant conditioning results in learning only if it is accompanied by reduc-
tion of basic primary drives such as hunger and thirst.
Duchenne smile A smile reflecting genuine pleasure, shown in crinkles around the eyes as well as an
upturned mouth.
early starters Children who start to behave aggressively at a young age and often remain aggressive
through childhood and adolescence.
ecological theory A theory stressing the influences of environmental systems and relations between
systems on development.
ecological validity The degree to which a research study accurately represents events or processes that
occur in the real world.
effect size An estimate of the magnitude of the difference between groups or the strength of the
association between the variables, which is averaged across studies and weighted by the sample size of
those studies in a meta-analysis.
ego In Freud’s theory, the rational component of the personality, which tries to satisfy needs through
appropriate, socially acceptable behaviors.
egocentric Tending to view the world from one’s own perspective and having difficulty seeing things
from another’s viewpoint.
Electra complex According to Freud, girls blame their mother for their lack of a penis and focus their
sexual feelings on their father.
emotion regulation The managing, monitoring, evaluating, and modifying of emotional reactions to
reduce the intensity and duration of emotional arousal.
emotional display rule An implicit understanding in a culture of how and when an emotion should
be expressed.
emotional script A scheme that enables a child to identify the emotional reaction likely to accompany
a particular event.
empathic reasoning An advanced type of prosocial reasoning involving sympathetic responding, self-
reflective role taking, concern with the other’s humanness, and guilt or positive affect related to the
consequences of one’s actions.
empathy A shared emotional response that parallels another person’s feelings.
578  Glossary

epigenetics The study of heritable changes in gene expression that do not involve changes to the
underlying genetic sequence.
epistasis A gene by gene interaction.
equifinality The convergence of developmental paths in which children follow very different paths to
reach the same developmental end point.
ethnic identity Recognition of being a member of a particular race or ethnic group.
ethnography Use of intensive observations and interviews to gather data about the beliefs, practices,
and behaviors of individuals in a particular context or culture.
ethological theory A theory that behavior must be viewed in a particular context and as having adap-
tive or survival value.
event sampling Investigators record participants’ behavior only when an event of particular interest
occurs.
evocative gene–environment association People’s inherited tendencies elicit certain environmental
responses.
exosystem In Bronfenbrenner’s ecological theory, the collection of settings that impinge on a child’s
development but in which the child does not play a direct role (e.g., parental workplace).
experience sampling method (ESM) or ecological momentary assessment (EMA) A data collection
strategy by which participants are typically signaled at random times throughout the day and record
answers to researchers’ questions, such as: Where are you? Who are you with? What are you doing?
Originally called the beeper method.
experience-dependent processes Brain processes that are unique to the individual and responsive to
particular cultural, community, and family experiences.
experience-expectant processes Brain processes that are universal, experienced by all human beings
across evolution.
expressive characteristics Aspects of a person that involve nurturance and concern with feelings. They
are more typical of girls and women.
extended family A unit of people that includes relatives such as grandparents, aunts, uncles, nieces,
and nephews as well as members of the nuclear family.
externalizing problems A type of childhood behavior problem in which the behavior is directed at
others, including hitting, stealing, vandalizing, and lying.
family child care home A child care arrangement in which a person cares for three or four children
in his or her home.
family system A group of related people composed of interdependent members and subsystems;
changes in the behavior of one member of the family affect the functioning of the other members.
field experiment An experiment in which researchers deliberately create a change in a real-world set-
ting and then measure the outcome of their manipulation.
flipped classrooms Classrooms in which students spend most of their time engaged in interactive
learning activities, such as debates or peer reviews, with the teacher helping as needed and giving
personalized feedback.
focus group A group interview in which an interviewer poses questions that are answered by the
­participants.
gang A group of adolescents or adults who form an allegiance for a common, often deviant purpose.
gender constancy The awareness that superficial alterations in appearance or activity do not alter
gender.
gender identity The perception of oneself as either male or female.
gender role Composite of the behaviors actually exhibited by a typical male or female in a given cul-
ture; the reflection of a gender stereotype in everyday life.
gender segregation A child’s choice to spend time with same-gender peers.
 Glossary  579

gender stability The fact that gender, as defined by chromosomal make-up, does not change over time.
gender stereotype Belief that members of a culture hold about acceptable and appropriate attitudes,
interests, activities, psychological traits, social relationships, occupations, and physical appearance
for males and females.
gender typing The process by which children acquire the values, motives, and behaviors considered
appropriate for their gender in their particular culture.
gender-based belief An idea that differentiates males and females.
gender-role preference A desire to possess certain gender-typed characteristics.
gender-schema theory The view that children develop schemas, or naive theories, that help them
organize and structure their experience related to gender differences and gender roles.
gene A portion of DNA located at a particular site on a chromosome and coding for the production
of a specific type of protein.
gene by environment interaction (G × E) model People in the same environment are affected differ-
ently depending on their genetic makeup.
generativity A concern for people besides oneself, especially a desire to nurture and guide younger
people and contribute to the next generation.
genotype The particular set of genes a person inherits from his or her parents.
glial cell A cell that supports, protects, and repairs neurons.
habituation An individual reacts with less and less intensity to a repeatedly presented stimulus until he
or she responds only faintly or not at all.
Head Start A federally funded program that provides preschool experience, social services, and medi-
cal and nutritional care to disadvantaged preschool children.
hedonistic reasoning Making a decision to perform a prosocial act on the basis of expected material
reward.
heterozygous Alleles for a particular trait from each parent are different.
holophrase A single word that appears to represent a complete thought.
homophily The tendency of individuals to associate and bond with others who are similar.
homozygous Alleles for a particular trait from each parent are the same.
hormone A powerful and highly specialized chemical substance produced by the cells of certain body
organs, which has a regulatory effect on the activity of certain other organs.
hostile attribution bias A tendency to interpret neutral or ambiguous social behavior of another per-
son as being hostile.
human behavior genetics The study of the relative influences of heredity and environment on indi-
vidual differences in traits and abilities.
id In Freud’s theory, instinctual drives that operate on the basis of the pleasure principle.
identification The Freudian concept that children think of themselves as being the same as their same-
sex parent.
identity The definition of oneself as a discrete, separate entity.
immanent justice The notion that any deviation from rules will inevitably result in punishment or
retribution.
imprinting Birds and other infrahuman animals develop a preference for and follow the person or
object to which they are first exposed during a brief, critical period after birth.
independent variable The factor that researchers deliberately manipulate in an experiment.
indirect aggression Hostile behavior committed by an unidentified perpetrator that hurts another per-
son by indirect means.
individual self Aspects of the self that make a person unique and separate from others.
informed consent Agreement to participate in a study based on a clear and full understanding of its
purposes and procedures.
580  Glossary

insecure-ambivalent attachment Babies tend to become very upset at the departure of their mother and
exhibit inconsistent behavior on the mother’s return, sometimes seeking contact, sometimes pushing
their mother away. (This is sometimes referred to as insecure-resistant or anxious-ambivalent attachment.)
insecure-avoidant attachment Babies seem not to be bothered by their mother’s brief absences but
specifically avoid her when she returns, sometimes becoming visibly upset.
insecure-disorganized attachment Babies seem disorganized and disoriented when reunited with their
mother after a brief separation.
instrumental characteristics Aspects of a person involving task and occupation orientation. They are
more typical of males.
internal working model A person’s mental representation of himself or herself as a child, his or her
parents, and the nature of his or her interaction with the parents as he or she reconstructs and inter-
prets that interaction.
internalize The process by which children acquire the rules and standards of behavior laid down by
others in their culture and adopt them as their own.
internalized reasoning The most advanced type of prosocial reasoning in which justifications for help-
ing are based on the importance of maintaining societal obligations or treating all people as equal.
internalizing problems A type of childhood behavior problem in which the behavior is directed at the
self rather than others, including fear, anxiety, depression, loneliness, and withdrawal.
intervention A program provided to improve a situation or relieve psychological illness or distress.
joint legal custody A form of postdivorce child custody in which both parents retain and share respon-
sibility for decisions regarding the child’s life, although the child usually resides with one parent.
joint physical custody A form of postdivorce child custody in which parents make decisions together
regarding their child’s life and also share physical custody so that the child lives with each parent for
about half the time.
laboratory analogue experiment Researchers try to duplicate in the laboratory features or events that
occur naturally in everyday life in order to increase the ecological validity of the results.
latchkey children Youngsters who must let themselves into their homes after school because their par-
ents are working outside the home.
late starters Children who begin to act aggressively in adolescence and tend not to continue their
aggressive behavior in adulthood.
lateralization The process by which each half of the brain becomes specialized for certain functions—
for example, the control of speech and language by the left hemisphere and of visual-spatial process-
ing by the right.
learned helplessness A feeling that results from the belief that one cannot control the events in one’s
world.
life history theory The schedule of key events over the life course is influenced by natural selection to
produce the largest possible number of surviving offspring and thus maximize the successful passing
on of the organism’s genes.
longitudinal design A study in which investigators follow the same people over a period of time, observ-
ing them repeatedly.
lurking Viewing others’ social media posts without posting or commenting oneself.
macrosystem In Bronfenbrenner’s ecological theory, the system that surrounds the microsystem, mesosys-
tem, and exosystem, representing the values, ideologies, and laws of the society or culture.
magic window thinking The tendency of very young children to believe that television images are as
real as real-life people and objects.
maternal bond Feeling of attachment by a mother to her infant, perhaps influenced by early infant
contact.
maturation A biologically determined process of growth that unfolds over a period of time.
mesosystem In Bronfenbrenner’s ecological theory, the interrelations among the components of the
microsystem.
 Glossary  581

meta-analysis A statistical technique that allows the researcher to summarize the results of many stud-
ies on a particular topic and to draw conclusions about the size and replicability of observed differ-
ences or associations.
microsystem In Bronfenbrenner’s ecological theory, the context in which children live and interact
with the people and institutions closest to them, such as parents, peers, and school.
mirror neuron A nerve cell that fires both when a person acts and when a person observes the same
action performed by someone else, as if the observer himself or herself were acting.
modifier genes Genes that exert their influence indirectly by affecting the expression of other genes.
monozygotic Identical twins created when a single zygote splits in half and each half becomes a distinct
embryo with nearly the same genes; both embryos come from one zygote.
moral absolutism Rigid application of rules to all individuals regardless of their culture or circumstance.
moral realism Piaget’s second stage of moral development in which children show great respect for
rules and apply them quite inflexibly.
moral reciprocity Piaget’s third stage of moral development in which children recognize that rules may
be questioned and altered, consider the feelings and views of others, and believe in equal justice for all.
multifinality The divergence of developmental paths in which two individuals start out similarly but
end at very different points.
multischematic Possessing multiple ideas about appropriate behaviors that can be displayed depend-
ing on the particular situation.
mutual antipathy A relationship of mutual dislike between two people.
myelination The process by which glial cells encase neurons in sheaths of the fatty substance myelin.
natural experiment An experiment in which researchers measure the results of events that occur natu-
rally in the real world.
natural mentors Individuals beyond the nuclear family such as extended family members, family
friends, neighbors, teachers, coaches, after-school program staff, and religious group leaders who
provide support and guidance to children and youth.
naturalistic observation Information collected in the child’s natural settings, at home, in child care, or
in school without interfering with the child’s activities.
needs-oriented reasoning Prosocial judgments in which children express concern for others’ needs
although their own needs may conflict with them.
negative gossip Adverse or detrimental information shared about another child with a peer.
neglected children Youngsters who are often socially isolated and, although they are not necessarily
disliked, have few friends.
neural migration The movement of neurons within the brain that ensures that all brain areas have a
sufficient number of neural connections.
neuron A cell in the body’s nervous system, consisting of a cell body, a long projection called an axon,
and several shorter projections called dendrites; neurons send and receive neural impulses, or mes-
sages, throughout the brain and nervous system.
neuron proliferation The rapid formation of neurons in the developing organism’s brain.
niche picking Seeking out or creating environments compatible with one’s genetically based predisposi-
tions.
nonaggressive-rejected children Excluded youngsters who tend to be anxious, withdrawn, and socially
unskilled.
nonshared environment The nonshared environmental effect in behavior-genetic research reflects
both within and outside the family (nongenetic) factors that make siblings different, and also
includes measurement error.
nuclear family Parents and their children living together.
object permanence The realization in infancy that objects and people do not cease to exist when they
are no longer visible.
582  Glossary

observer bias An observer’s tendency to be influenced by knowledge about the research design or
hypothesis.
oedipus complex Freud’s theory that boys become attracted to their mother and jealous and fearful
of their father.
open classroom A relatively unstructured organization in which different areas of the room are devoted
to particular activities and children work either alone or in small groups under the teacher’s supervision.
operant conditioning A type of learning that depends on the consequence of behavior; rewards
increase the likelihood that a behavior will recur, but punishment decreases that likelihood.
operationalization Defining a concept so that it is observable and measurable.
parallel play Interaction in which very young children are doing the same thing, often side by side, but
are not engaged with each other.
participant observations Research strategy used to gain familiarity with a group of individuals by
means of involvement in their activities, usually over an extended period of time.
passive gene–environment association Environment created by parents with particular genetic charac-
teristics encourages the expression of these tendencies in their children.
peer group network The cluster of peer acquaintances who are familiar with and interact with one
another at different times for common play or task-oriented purposes.
peer tutoring A method of instruction in which an older, more experienced student tutors a younger,
less experienced child.
perceived popularity Ratings of how well a child is liked by his or her peers, made by teachers, parents,
and children.
permissive parenting A child-rearing style that is lax and inconsistent and encourages children to
express their impulses freely.
Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA) Federal legisla-
tion designed to reduce single-parent families’ long-term reliance on welfare or cash assistance.
phenotype The visible expression of a person’s particular physical and behavioral characteristics cre-
ated by the interaction of the person’s genotype with the environment.
physical abuse Physical injury or maltreatment by a responsible person that harms or threatens a
child’s health or welfare.
physical aggression A form of hostile behavior that inflicts physical damage or discomfort.
popular children Youngsters who are liked by many peers and disliked by very few.
postconventional level Kohlberg’s third phase of moral development in which judgments are con-
trolled by an internalized ethical code that is relatively independent of the approval or disapproval
of others.
pragmatics A set of rules that specify appropriate language for particular social contexts.
preconventional level Kohlberg’s first phase of moral development in which justification for behavior
is based on the desire to avoid punishment and gain rewards.
prejudice A set of attitudes by which an individual defines all members of a group negatively.
premoral stage Piaget’s first phase of moral development in which children show little concern for
rules.
pretend play Make-believe activity in which objects are used symbolically.
primary emotions Fear, joy, disgust, surprise, sadness, and interest, which emerge early in life and do
not require introspection or self-reflection.
primary prevention policies A set of planned actions designed to alter environmental conditions and
prevent problems before they develop.
proactive aggression Behavior in which a person is hurt or injured by someone who is motivated by a
desire to achieve a specific goal.
programmed neuronal death The naturally occurring death of immature nerve cells during early
development of the nervous system.
 Glossary  583

propensity score matching A statistical technique that, in the absence of a true experiment, attempts
to better estimate the true causal effect of an experience or policy by accounting for the range of
possible confounds that predict receiving the experience or policy.
prosocial behavior Conduct to help or benefit other people.
prosocial reasoning Thinking and making judgments about prosocial issues.
prospective Measurement that occurs while experiences are occurring rather than after they occurred
(i.e., via retrospective measurement).
psychodynamic theory Freud’s theory that development is determined by innate biologically based
drives shaped by encounters with the environment in early childhood.
psychological domain An area of social judgment focused on beliefs and knowledge of self and
others.
psychophysiological Physiological bases of psychological processes measured by brain activity, brain
waves, and heart rate.
psychosocial theory Erikson’s theory that each stage of development depends on accomplishing a
psychological task in interactions with the social environment.
public policy Government-based social policy.
pygmalion effect A phenomenon in which teachers’ expectations that students will do well are realized.
qualitative study Research using nonstatistical analysis of materials gathered from a relatively small
number of participants to gain an in-depth understanding of behavior and contexts.
quantitative study Research involving statistical analysis of numerical data.
reaction range The range of possible developmental outcomes established by a person’s genotype in
reaction to the environment in which development takes place.
reactive aggression A form of hostile behavior in response to an attack, threat, or frustration, usually
motivated by anger.
reactivity The change in a person’s behavior because he or she is being observed.
reflex smile A upturned mouth seen in the newborn that is usually spontaneous and appears to depend
on some internal stimulus rather than on something external such as another person’s behavior.
rejected children Youngsters who are disliked by many peers and liked by very few.
relational aggression Behavior that damages or destroys interpersonal relationships by means such as
exclusion or gossip.
relational self Aspects of the self that involve connections to other people and develop out of interac-
tions with others.
religious identity Recognition that religion is an important aspect of one’s self-definition.
representative sample A research sample in which participants are drawn from strata or catego-
ries (e.g., social classes or ethnic groups) in the same proportions as they are found in the larger
­population.
reputational bias Tendency to interpret peers’ behavior on the basis of past encounters with and feel-
ings about them.
rituals Family activities involving formal religious observances and family celebrations.
routines Day-to-day activities such as making dinner or washing the dishes.
script A mental representation of an event or situation of daily life including the order in which things
are expected to happen and how one should behave in that event or situation.
secondary or self-conscious emotions Pride, shame, guilt, jealousy, embarrassment, and empathy,
which emerge in the second year of life and depend on a sense of self and the awareness of other
people’s reactions.
secondary prevention policies A set of planned actions targeted at children who are already at risk of
developing serious problems.
secure attachment Babies are able to explore novel environments, may or may not be disturbed by
brief separations from their mother, and are efficiently comforted by her when she returns.
584  Glossary

secure base The flip side of the safe haven function of attachment, which reflects the fact that primary
caregivers represent a safety zone the infant can retreat to for comfort and reassurance when stressed
or frightened, the secure base function of attachment is the idea that secure attachments to primary
caregivers support infants’ confident exploration of the environment.
self-disclosure The honest sharing of information of a personal nature, often with a focus on problem
solving; a central means by which adolescents and others develop friendships.
self-esteem The evaluative component of self that taps how positively or negatively people view them-
selves in relation to others.
self-fulfilling prophecy Positive or negative expectations that affect a person’s behavior in a manner
that he or she (unknowingly) creates situations in which those expectations are fulfilled.
self-regulation The ability to use strategies and plans to control one’s behavior in the absence of exter-
nal surveillance, including inhibiting inappropriate behavior and delaying gratification.
self-report Information that people provide about themselves either in a direct interview or in some
written form, such as a questionnaire.
separation anxiety Fear of being apart from a familiar caregiver (usually the mother or father), which
typically peaks at about 15 months of age.
separation distress or protest An infant’s distress reaction to being separated from the attachment
object, usually the mother, which typically peaks at about 15 months of age.
serotonin A neurotransmitter that regulates endocrine glands, alters attention and emotions, and is
linked to aggression.
sexual abuse Inappropriate sexual activity between an adult and a child for the perpetrator’s pleasure
or benefit.
shared environment In the context of behavior-genetic research, the shared environment is a technical
term that refers to the degree to which siblings living in the same family are similar to one another on
a particular social behavior for nongenetic reasons, not necessarily whether the pairs had objectively
similar observable experiences.
social aggression Making verbal attacks or hurtful nonverbal gestures, such as rolling the eyes or stick-
ing out the tongue.
social cognitive theory of gender development An explanation of gender role development that uses
cognitive social learning principles such as observational learning, positive and negative feedback,
and the concept of self-efficacy.
social comparison The process by which people evaluate their own abilities, values, and other qualities
by comparing themselves with others, usually their peers.
social-conventional domain An area of social judgment focused on social expectations, norms, and
regularities that help facilitate smooth and efficient functioning in society.
social dyad A pair of social partners, such as friends, parent and child, or marital partners.
social information-processing theory An explanation of a person’s social behavior in terms of his or
her assessment and evaluation of the social situation as a guide in deciding on a course of social
action.
social policy A set of planned actions to solve a social problem or attain a social goal.
social referencing The process of reading emotional cues in others to help determine how to act in
an uncertain situation.
social sensitivity A heightened awareness of the social world and regarding social evaluations.
social smile An upturned mouth in response to a human face or voice, which first occurs when the
infant is about 2 months old.
social structural theory of gender roles An explanation of gender roles that focuses on factors such
as institutionalized constraints on male and female opportunities in educational, occupational, and
political spheres.
socialization The process by which parents and others teach children the standards of behavior, atti-
tudes, skills, and motives deemed appropriate for their society.
 Glossary  585

sociocultural theory Vygotsky’s theory that development emerges from interactions with more skilled
people and the institutions and tools provided by the culture.
sociometric technique A procedure for determining a child’s status within her or his peer group; each
child in the group either nominates others whom she or he likes best and least or rates each child in
the group for desirability as a companion.
sole custody A form of postdivorce child custody in which the child is exclusively with either the
mother or the father.
specimen record Researchers record everything a person does within a given period of time.
stage–environment fit The degree to which the environment supports a child’s developmental needs.
stereotype A general label applied to individuals based solely on their membership in a racial, ethnic,
or religious group, without appreciation that individuals within the group vary.
stereotype consciousness The knowledge that other people have beliefs based on ethnic stereotypes.
Strange Situation Procedure A research procedure in which parent and child are separated and
­reunited so that investigators can assess the nature and quality of the parent–infant attachment
­relationship.
stranger distress or fear of strangers A negative emotional reaction to unfamiliar people, which typi-
cally emerges in infants around the age of 9 months.
structured observation A form of observation in which researchers create a situation so that behaviors
they wish to study are more likely to occur.
superego In Freud’s theory, the personality component that is the repository of the child’s internaliza-
tion of parental or societal values, morals, and roles.
sympathy The feeling of sorrow or concern for a distressed or needy person.
synapse A specialized site of intercellular communication that exchanges information between nerve
cells, usually by means of a chemical neurotransmitter.
synaptic pruning The brain’s disposal of the axons and dendrites of a neuron that is not often
­stimulated.
synaptogenesis The forming of synapses.
systems Developmental contexts made up of interacting parts or components, for example, a family.
telegraphic speech Two-word or three-word utterances that include only the words essential to convey
the speaker’s intent.
temperament An individual’s typical mode of response including activity level, emotional intensity,
and attention span; used particularly to describe infants’ and children’s behavior.
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Federal legislation that provides block grants to
states, introduces time limits on cash assistance to individuals, and imposes work requirements.
theory of mind Children’s understanding that people have mental states such as thoughts, beliefs, and
desires that affect their behavior. It allows children to get beyond people’s observable actions and
appearances and respond to their unseen states.
time sampling Researchers record any of a set of predetermined behaviors that occur within a speci-
fied period of time.
transactional Ongoing interchanges between social partners such as a parent and child across time
that result in modifications of the social behavior of each.
uninvolved parenting A child-rearing style in which parents are indifferent and neglectful and focus on
their own needs rather than those of their children.
verbal aggression Words that inflict pain by yelling, insulting, ridiculing, humiliating, and so on.
victimization The process of being threatened or harmed on a consistent basis by a more powerful
peer.
zone of proximal development The difference between children’s level of performance while working
alone and while working with more experienced partners.
 AU TH O R IN DE X

A Amodio, D. M., 466

Abecassis, M., 317, 318 Anderson, C. A., 59, 149, 150, 281, 285, 365, 497
Aber, J. L., 510 Anderson, D. R., 496
Abitz, M., 94 Anderson, K. E., 261
Ablow, J. C., 62 Anderson, P., 373
Abma, J. C., 535 Anneken, K., 93
Aboud, F. E., 236, 237, 239 Archer, J., 481
Abrahams, B. S., 111 Ariel, S., 302
Abrams, D., 238 Aries, P., 2
Ackerman, D., 91 Arndt, T. L., 111
Acosta, S., 173, 188, 201 Arnett, J. J., 218, 219
Adam, E. K., 421 Arsenio, W. F, 25, 26, 313, 446, 457
Adams, M., 412, 524 Artz, S., 483
Adams, R. E., 524 Asakawa, K., 469
Adamson, L. B., 173 Asendorpf, J. B., 452
Adler, S. M., 357, 358 Asher, S. R., 69, 308, 309, 313, 315, 317, 325, 326, 331, 332,
Administration for Children and Families, 543 339–340, 390, 502
Adolphs, R., 98 Aslin, R., 88
Agha, S., 368 Astuto, J., 549
Ahadi, S. A., 115 Atance, C. M., 232
Ahn, H. J., 195 Atkin, C., 496
Ahnert, L., 148 Atkinson, L., 142
Ahrens, K., 362 Aubé, J., 392
Ainsworth, M. D., 136–138, 140, 142, 148, 159, 161–163, 174 Auerbach, S., 200, 358
Akirav, I., 91 Augoustinos, M., 236
Aksan, N., 69, 451, 452, 454, 456–458, 460 Auyeung, B., 402
Albert, D., 305, 459 Aviezer, O., 469
Alderson, P., 77 Avis, J., 235
Aldrich, N. J., 188, 544 Ayduk, O., 454
Alexander, G. M., 390, 391 Ayoub, C. C., 191
Alfano, K. M., 167 Azar, S. T., 544–546, 550
Alibali, M. W., 25 Azim, E., 402
Allen, J. P., 143
Allen, J. S., 402 B
Allen, M., 304 Babcock, L. C., 394
Allhusen, V. D., 11, 148, 150, 529–531 Bachner-Melman, R., 465
Almas, A. N., 49 Baeck, U. K., 357
Alvarez, J. M., 231 Baer, D. M., 20
Amato, P. R., 285–287, 290 Bagwell, C. L., 332
Ambady, N., 184 Bailey, J. M., 226, 375
American Academy of Pediatrics, Committee on Education, 364 Baillargeon, R., 27, 129, 230
American Association of Suicidology, 198 Baillargeon, R. H., 481
American Psychiatric Association, 110, 111 Bakeman, R., 70, 184, 426
American Psychological Association, 24, 26, 37, 76, 81, 121, 159, Baker, D., 262
160, 202, 245, 269, 293, 302, 340, 367, 427, 428, 455, 486, 499, Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J., 105, 143, 145, 465
516, 554, 555, 569, 570, 572 Bakker, M. P., 314

587
588  Author Index

Bales, W. D., 150 Benenson, J. F., 304, 420

Ball, H. A., 507 Benigni, L., 262
Baltes, P. B., 35 Benner, A. D., 349
Ban, P. L., 134 Benson, E. S., 103, 219
Banaji, M., 220, 236 Berdan, L. E., 310
Bandura, A., 21–25, 40, 167, 305, 325, 346, 347, 384, 408, Berenbaum, S. A., 402
466, 469 Berg, M., 322
Banerjee, R., 312, 404, 546 Berger, C., 481
Bank, L., 65 Bergeron, N., 495, 496
Banks, R., 514 Bergman, L. R., 286
Bannon, W., 224 Berkman Center for Internet and Society, 378
Banny, A. M., 483 Berlin, L. J., 143, 159
Barber, B., 349 Berman, P. W., 405
Barber, B. L., 338 Bernal, M. E., 220, 221
Barber, B. K., 254, 255, 349 Bernard, K., 144
Barber, J. S., 266 Berndt, T. J., 328, 330, 332, 421
Barends, N., 257 Bernier, A., 451
Bargh, J. A., 376 Bernstein, D., 72
Barker, R. G., 347 Berry, G., 418
Barkley, R. A., 110, 480 Berry, G. L., 418
Barnas, M. V., 150 Berry, H., 163
Barnett, M. A., 469, 528 Berry, J. W., 224
Barnett, W. S., 469, 528 Bersoff, D. M., 441
Baron, R. A, 46, 47, 77 Best, D. L., 397
Baron-Cohen, S., 111, 205, 230, 231, 233 Best, P., 380
Barr, C. S., 108 Betancourt, T. S., 494
Barr, R. G., 71 Beyers, J. M., 492
Barret, D. E., 482 Bianchi, B. D., 426
Barrett, J., 141, 263 Bianchi, S., 277
Barry, C. M., 468 Biblarz, T. J., 283
Bartels, A., 120, 263 Bickham, N. L., 270
Bartkowski, J. P., 468 Bidell, T. R., 92
Basham, P., 352 Bielick, S., 352
Basow, S. A., 412 Bierman, K. L., 120, 196, 324, 326
Bassett, H. H., 183 Bigbee, M. A., 503
Bates, E., 93, 240 Bigelow, B. J., 28, 328, 381
Bates, J. E., 416, 487 Bigler, R. S., 220, 237, 396, 426
Batson, C. D., 450 Bijou, S. W., 20
Bauer, P. J., 525 Bingenheimer, J. B., 493
Baumeister, R. F., 212 Birch, S. A., 228, 232
Baumrind, D., 255–257 Birch, S. H., 355
Bauserman, R., 289 Biringen, Z., 92
Bayard, K., 394 Birmaher, B., 201
Baydar, N., 267 Bjorklund, D. F., 28, 33, 37, 38, 90, 478, 480, 483
Beah, I., 494 Black, B., 309
Bearman, P. S., 541 Black, J. E., 94, 95
Beauchamp, G. K., 88 Blackless, M., 399
Becker, S. W., 464 Blake, C., 352
Beelmann, A., 236, 238 Blakemore, J. E. O., 391, 405
Beer, B., 329 Blakemore, S.-J., 92, 97, 98
Belacchi, C., 188 Blanchard-Fields, F., 191
Bell, D., 218, 371 Blatchford, P., 303, 350, 351
Bell, M. A., 10 Block, J. H., 412
Belle, D., 360, 361 Block, J. J., 319
Beller, A. H., 394 Bloom, B., 149
Belsky, J., 4, 34, 107, 108, 143, 145, 148, 257, 258, 530, 545 Bloom, L., 10
Bem, S. L., 407, 426 Bloom, P., 450
Benard, S., 394 Boccia, M., 176
Bendersky, M., 489 Bohlin, G., 176
 Author Index   589

Boldizar, J. P., 426 Bullock, D., 7, 106

Bolger, K. E., 323, 324, 546 Bumpus, M. F., 279
Bolzani-Dinehart, L. H., 173 Burchinal, M., 148, 150, 259, 529–533
Bonkowski, S. E., 287 Bureau of Labor Statistics, 528, 533
Book, A. S., 488 Buriel, R., 7, 156, 224, 234, 274, 411
Booth, A., 310 Burk, L. R., 507
Booth, C. A., 277 Burkam, D. T., 355
Boothby, N., 494 Burks, J., 43
Borders, L. D., 394 Burleson, B. R., 502
Borke, H., 186 Burn, S. M., 392
Bornstein, M. H., 32, 72, 89, 90, 241, 257, 273, 280, 284, Burnett, S., 98
382, 390 Burnham, D., 410
Bos, H., 283, 416 Burton, L. M., 70, 79, 80
Bourne, V. J., 403 Burton, R., 196
Bousch, D. M., 371 Burton, R., V., 452
Bowker, J. C., 332, 508 Bushman, B. J., 59, 366, 369, 370, 375, 484, 496
Bowlby, J., 32, 130, 131, 135, 136, 146, 155, 159, 161, 164 Buss, D. M., 401
Boykin, A. W., 276 Buss, K. A., 178
Boyum, L., 68 Bussey, K., 408, 409, 418
Brach, E. L., 287 Byne, W., 400
Bradley, R. H., 273, 274, 523
Braungart-Rieker, J. M., 178 C
Brendgen, M., 108, 317, 484, 486 Caglayan, A. O., 111
Brennan, P. A., 498 Cahill, L., 402, 403
Brenner, E. M., 300 Cairns, B. D., 484
Brenner, J., 300 Cairns, R. B., 61, 484, 520
Brentano, C., 285, 286, 288, 290, 291, 542 Calkins, S. D., 10, 119, 139
Bretherton, I., 146, 159, 321 Callanan, M., 412
Brewer, M. B., 207 Calvert, S. L., 237, 239, 364, 366, 368–371, 417, 418, 468, 545
Bridges, L. J., 188 Calzo, J. P., 227
Briones, T. L., 94 Cameron, C. A., 455
Brody, G. H., 109, 322, 358 Cameron, L, 239
Broidy, L. M., 481, 484 Cameron, N., 92
Bromell, L., 355 Campbell, F. A., 527
Bromley, D. B., 232 Campbell, N. D, 533
Bronfenbrenner, U., 30, 31, 40, 146, 202, 249, 267, 272, 383, Campbell, S. B., 12, 89, 110, 417, 465, 484, 487, 527
384, 438, 571 Campione-Barr, N., 268
Brooks, J. H., 488 Campos, J., 168, 176–178, 183, 447
Brooks-Gunn, J., 208, 260, 278, 523, 542, 554 Camras, L. A., 71, 145, 171, 184, 185, 193
Brophy, J., 354 Candee, D., 450
Brown, B. B., 63, 301, 336, 338 Cantor, N., 366, 373
Brown, G. L., 143 Capaldi, D., 258
Brown, J. D, 368 Caplan, M., 479
Brown, P., 535 Caputi, M., 231, 312
Brown v. Board of Education, 359, 387 Caravita, S., 313, 503
Brownell, C. A., 68, 70, 298, 300, 301, 462, 463, 466 Card, N. A., 59, 317, 318, 390, 478, 481–483, 504, 573
Bruce, E., 223, 363, 425 Cardoza-Fernandes, S., 251
Bruck, M., 551 Carleton, R.A., 362
Bruer, J. T., 94 Carlo, G., 448, 464, 469
Brunwasser, S. M., 201 Carlson, E. A., 154, 155
Buchman, D. D., 419 Carlson, M., 289
Buckey, R., 551 Carlson, S. M., 9
Buckner, C., 396 Carlsson, J., 87
Buddin, B. J., 186, 187 Carnagey, N. C., 375
Bugental, D. B., 33, 65, 118, 545, 546, 548 Carney, J. V., 507
Buhs, E. S., 491 Carpendale, J., 231, 466
Buijzen, M., 371, 372 Carpenter, L. P., 258
Bukowski, W. M., 314 Carranza, E., 396
Bullock, B. M., 257 Carstensen, L. L., 190, 191
590  Author Index

Carter, C. S., 93, 145 Cillessen, A. H. N., 309, 310, 313, 322, 478, 507
Carter, E. J., 98, 111 Clark, K .E., 320
Carver, K., 333 Clark, N., 539
Carver, L., 87 Clark, S., 539
Carver, P. R., 227 Clarke-Stewart, K. A., 3, 11, 118, 140, 148–150, 154, 284–286,
Case, R., 179 288–291, 320, 321, 529–531, 542, 551
Casiglia, A. C., 307 Clearfield, M. W., 410
Casper, D. M., 318, 573 Cloninger, C. R., 498
Caspi, A., 7, 100, 103, 105, 107, 119–121, 484, 485, 487, 499, 500 Closson, L. M., 309
Cassidy, J., 62, 131, 137, 138, 143, 146, 156 Coalition to Stop the Use of Child Soldiers, 493
Cassidy, K. W., 234 Coan, J. A., 141
CBS News, 277, 459 Coats, A. H., 191
CBS News Poll, 277 Cohen, D., 336
Ceci, S. J., 551 Cohen, D. A., 506, 535
Celizic, M., 381 Cohen-Kettenis, P. T., 400
Center for Media and Public Affairs, 370 Cohn, J., 89
Centers, R. E., 391 Coie, J. D., 10, 308, 319, 320, 323, 397, 477–485, 488–490, 492,
Cervantes, C. A., 412 498, 501, 502
Chalk, F., 238 Colby, A., 435, 437, 440
Chamberlain, P., 509 Colder, C. R., 118
Chambers, R. A., 92 Cole, C. F., 365
Chandler, M. J., 198, 434 Cole, P. M., 184, 186, 198, 200, 273, 451
Chandra, A., 368, 535 Cole, S. A., 550
Chang, F.-M., 115 Cole, H., 380
Chang, L., 275 Coleman, L., 551
Chao, R. K., 276 Coley, R. L., 526, 538
Charles, S. T., 190, 191 Colin,V. L., 140
Charlesworth, R., 305 Colle, L, 156, 183
Charney, E., 99 Collignon, F. E., 358
Chase-Lansdale, P. L., 525, 526, 538, 554 Collins, R. L., 3, 4, 65, 299, 332, 368, 373, 502, 535
Chatters, L. M., 226 Collins, W. A., 333, 370
Chauhan, G. S., 406 Collins-Standley, T., 392
Chavous, T. M., 222 Coltrane, S., 412, 417, 427
Cheadle., 334 Comstock, G., 60, 364, 368, 417, 418, 496
Cheah, C. S. L., 254 Conant, C., 300
Cheek, N. H., 336 Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group, 512
Chen, C., 336, 362 Conger, K. J., 268, 290
Chen, E. C., 231 Conger, R. D., 35, 259, 260, 268, 270, 290, 323, 333, 468, 491
Chen, F. R., 498 Connolly, J. A., 334
Chen, I., 98, 307 Connolly, K. J., 530
Chen, S., 306 Conry-Murray, C., 396
Chen, X., 115, 307, 469 Contreras, J. M., 155, 156
Cheng, T. C., 526 Cooksey, E. C., 279
Cheng, Y., 403 Cooney, T. M., 280
Cherlin, A. J., 277, 287 Cooper, H. M., 59
Cherney, I. D., 391, 395, 421 Cooper, R., 352
Chess, S., 34, 113, 114, 119, 182 Cooper, R. P., 88
Cheyne, J. A., 481 Coopersmith, S., 215
Child Trends, 63, 271, 283, 284, 347, 364, 495, 502, 504, 519, Coplan, R. J., 310, 320
535, 555, 556 Corapci, F., 310
Child Welfare Information Gateway, 281, 546 Corboz-Warner, A., 264
Children Now, 369 Cornell, A. H., 394
Children’s Defense Fund, 480, 523 Cornwell, R. E., 141
Children’s Rights, 76, 441, 547, 548 Correll, S. J., 394
Chin, J. C., 189, 369 Corriveau, K. H., 153
Chirkov, V., 254 Corter, C., 88, 142
Christiansen, K. O., 497 Corwyn, R. F., 273, 274
Cicchetti, D., 12–14, 74, 160, 183, 192, 200, 215, 251, 271, 323, Cote, S. M., 482
324, 544–547 Coughenour, J. C., 150
 Author Index   591

Courchesne, E., 111 Dayan, J., 329

Cowan, C. P., 156, 250, 252, 253, 257, 392 De Boysson-Bardies, B., 240
Cowan, P. A., 250, 252, 253, 257, 392 De Caroli, M. E., 396
Cox, M. J., 264, 390 de Chateau, P., 132
Coyne, S. M., 478, 480, 483, 496 De Genna, N. M., 535
Craig, I. W., 107, 337, 500 De Goede, I. H. A., 334
Craig, W., 503 de Guzman, M. R. T., 469
Cramer, P., 219 de Haan, M., 87
Crane, D. A., 446 De Pauw, S. S. W., 121
Crick, N. R., 26, 103, 309, 478, 479, 481–483, 501, 503, 504 de Pillis, E., 397
Crijnen, A. A., 481 de Quervain, D. J.-F., 397
Crockenberg, S., 151, 251 de Silva, D. G. H., 547
Crockett, L. J., 535 Deal, J. E., 118, 182
Crosnoe, R., 334, 347 Dearing, R. L., 531
Cross, D., 29 Deater-Deckard, K., 273, 275, 310, 489, 547
Crouch, M., 132 DeBacker, T. K., 440
Crouter, A. C., 279, 323, 395, 417 DeCasper, A. J., 88
Crowley, K., 412 Decety, J., 97, 98, 180, 466, 467
Crowson, H. M., 440 DeClaire, J., 192, 193
Cruz, J. S., 37, 368, 371 DeCrescenzo, T., 398, 399
Cryer, D., 532 DeGarmo, D., 289
Crystal, D., 240, 445 Degner, J., 237
Crystal, R. G., 113 Dehaene-Lambertz, G., 93
Csikszentmihalyi, M., 61 Del Giudice, M., 92, 156, 183
CTIA, 376 Delgado, C. E. F., 173
Cui, M., 333, 489 DeLoache, J., 8, 9, 395
Cuijpers, P., 201 Denham, S. A., 10, 167, 178, 179, 181–183, 188, 189, 191, 194–196,
Cullen, D., 319 202, 203, 467
Cummings, E. M., 12, 13, 150, 192, 250–252, 287, 291–292, 495 Dennis, W., 174
Cunningham, W., 237 Denton, K., 439, 440, 450
Curtner-Smith, M., 507 DeRosier, M., 306
Cvencek, D., 423 Deschesnes, M., 339
Deutsch, G., 93, 363
D Development Research, 60
Dabholkar, A. J., 94, 95 Di Martino, A., 111
Daddis, C., 306 Diamond, A., 92, 226, 227
Dahl, A., 447, 466 Dick, D. M., 109, 173, 500, 504
Daly, M., 33 Dickson, K. L., 173
Daniels, H., 28 Diekman, A. B., 417
Daniels, P., 280 Diener, E., 8
Dannemiller, J. L., 87 DiMatteo, M. R., 60
Dansereau, D. F., 352 Dimidjian, S., 201
Dapretto, M., 97, 111, 211 Dines, G., 367
D’Argembeau, A., 97 Dinstein, I., 96
Darvill, D., 481 Dionne, G., 486
Darwin, C., 2, 3, 10, 42, 167, 179 DiPietro, J., 281
D’Augelli, A. R., 227 Dishion, T. J., 249, 257, 305, 317, 332, 337, 492, 509, 513
David, K. M., 310 Dittrichova, J., 167
David-Ferdon C., 505 Dixon, C., 287
Davidson, E. S., 418 Dixon, H. G., 371
Davidson, R. J., 93, 167, 171 Doan, S. N., 184
Davies, K., 225 Dodge, K. A., 10, 25, 26, 178, 260, 275, 276, 311, 312, 319, 320,
Davies, L. C., 290 397, 416, 478–486, 488–492, 498, 502, 509, 512, 513, 515, 516,
Davies, P. T., 12, 166, 250–251 519–521, 528
Davila, J. A., 333 Dodson, T. A., 394
Davis, A. N., 469 Doherty, W. J., 287
Davis, R.E., 364 Domitrovich, C. E., 196
Davis, S., 132 Donahue, E. H., 539
Dawson, G., 93, 111, 141, 200, 211 Dong-Ping, L. I., 487
592  Author Index

Donnellan, M. B., 333 Elliott, D. S., 31

Donnelly, D. A.545 Elliott, R., 314
Donnelly, K., 393, 426 Ellis, B. J., 14, 33, 302, 415, 416, 507, 535
Donnelly, M., 550 Ellison, C. G., 275
Doornenbal, J., 449 Else-Quest, N. M., 179, 180, 390, 413, 423, 457
Doornwaard, S. M., 336 Eluvathingal, T. J., 95
Doucet, S., 88 Embry, L., 200
Dougherty, L. M., 169 Emde, R. N., 146, 174, 175
Douglas, W., 417 Emerson, E. S., 330
Downs, C. A., 411 Emerson, P. E., 129, 134
Doyle, A. B., 223 Emery, R. E, 289, 290
Dozier, M., 147 Emslie, G. J., 201
Drennan, J., 506 Enders, C. K., 76
Dressel, P. L., 149 Engelhardt, C. R., 375, 497
Drew, C. J., 21, 111, 177, 197, 201 Ensor, R., 188, 233, 234
Driesen, N. R., 403 Entertainment Software Association, 373, 374
DuBois, D. L., 362, 363 Epstein, J. L., 357
Duchenne, G., 171–174, 183 Erdley, C. A., 325, 502
Dumas, J. E., 509 Erickson, L. D., 362
Dunbar, R. I. M., 173 Erikson, E., 15–19, 217
Duncan, G. J., 14, 31, 523 Espelage, D. L., 492
Dunham, Y., 235 Etaugh, C., 291
Dunifon, R., 278, 279 Ettema, J. S., 418
Dunn, J., 11, 28, 115, 193, 194, 243, 265, 266, 268, 269, 289, 290, Evans, D. E., 119
300, 301, 327, 446–449, 455 Evans, J., 341
Dunsmore, J. C., 192, 194 Evans, O., 395
Duran, R., 358 Everette, A., 263
Durtschi, J. A., 252
Dweck, C. S., 22, 216, 244, 245, 324 F
Dwyer, J. H., 76 Fabes, R. A., 192, 194, 303, 304, 350, 390, 421, 468
Dykas, M. J., 146 Fabricius, W. V., 289
Dzielska, A., 314 Fadiga, L., 96
Fadjukoff, P., 219
E Fagan, E. C., 141
Eagly, A. H., 396, 397, 401, 409, 464 Fagot, B. I., 406, 411, 420, 423
East, P. L., 266–269, 537 Fahey, R., 373
Eccles, J. S., 337, 348, 412, 423 Falbo, T., 266
Eckerman, C. O., 52, 175, 300, 305 Falck-Ytter, T., 96
Eddy, J. M., 509 Faldowski, R. A., 349
Edwards, A., 267, 549 Farina, E., 188
Edwards, C. P., 268, 302, 469 Farr, R. H., 283, 416
Egan, S. K., 227, 426 Farrant, B.M., 156, 470
Egeland, B., 13, 67, 118, 155, 161, 545 Farrell, A. D., 490
Eggermont, S., 368 Farrington, D. P., 485
Egley, A. Jr., 492 Farroni, T., 86, 87, 182
Ehrenberg, M. F., 287 Farver, J. M., 307, 492
Ehrhardt, A. A., 402 Fearon, R. M. P., 143, 145, 151, 155
Eiduson, B. T., 414 Fecica, A. M., 233
Eisenberg, N., 72, 119, 181, 185, 188, 189, 192, 224, 233, 261, 271, Feerick, M. M., 545
302, 315, 321, 457, 461–466, 469, 472, 482, 489 Fegley, S., 466
Eisenberg-Berg, N., 463 Fein, G. G., 301
Eisenberger, N. I., 316 Feinman, S., 176
Ekman, P., 32, 113, 167, 173, 184, 417 Feiring, C, 69
El Nokali, N., 257 Feldman, R., 86, 88, 141, 320
Elder, G. H., 9, 11, 35, 36, 219, 323, 468 Felner, R. D., 349
Eley, T. C., 486 Feng, D., 118, 287
Elfenbein, H. A., 184 Feng, X., 118, 287
Elias, M. J., 510, 513 Ferguson, T. J., 375
Elkins, V. H., 132 Fernald, A., 88
 Author Index   593

Ferrari, P. E., 488 Fuertes, A., 481

Ferris, C. F., 263 Fujioka, K., 183
Feyerick, D., 381 Fukushima, H., 183
Field, T. M., 89 Fuligni, A. J., 292, 293
Fields, J. M., 290 Fuller-Rowell, T. E., 225
Fiese, B. H., 65, 270–272 Fung, H., 9, 60
Fight Crime: Invest in Kids, 506 Funk, J. B., 375, 419
Figlio, D. N., 314 Furman, W., 153, 303, 326, 332–334, 341, 368
Fincham, F. F., 251 Furstenberg, F. F., 538
Fine, S. E., 188, 501 Fyfe, K., 366, 368
Finkelhor, D., 379, 550
Finkelstein, J. W., 488 G
Finkelstein, N. W., 488 Gabel, K., 149
Finn, J. D., 350 Galand, P., 218
Finnegan, R. A., 507 Galbraith, S. J., 117
Finnie, V., 322 Galen, B. R., 478, 483
Fischer, K. W., 92 Galinsky, E., 150
Fish, M., 152, 541 Gallimore, R., 357
Fisher, C. B., 77 Ganiban, J. M., 260
Fisher-Thompson, D., 411 Garbarino, J., 324
Fite, J. E., 312 Garber, J., 201
Fivaz-Depeursinge, E., 264 Garcia Coll, C., 358
Fivush, R., 184, 193 Garcia, M. M., 269
Flannery, D. J., 468 Garner, P. W., 188, 193, 462
Flavell, J. H., 231, 232, 370 Garrett, A. S., 109
Fleming, A. S., 88, 141, 142, 263, 264 Garrigan, B., 442
Fletcher, A. C., 304 Gartstein, M. A., 118
Flock, E., 493 Gaspar, H. B., 112
Flook, L., 392 Gatti, U., 338
Florsheim, P., 537 Gauvain, M., 10, 28, 29
Fobre, N., 31 Gazelle, H., 201, 309, 349, 504
Fogassi, L., 96 Ge, X., 7, 392
Fogel, A., 171–173 Geangu, E., 188
Folb, K. L., 368 Gearhart, J. P., 402
Foley, D. L., 500 Geary, D. C., 401, 410
Fonagy, P., 147 Gegeo, D. W., 268
Fontaine, R. G., 502 Gelfand, D. M., 21, 197, 201
Foote, R. C., 234, 556 Gelles, R. J., 547
Forman, D. R., 457 Gelman, S. A., 231
Foster, E. M., 512 Gennetian, L. A., 526
Fox, N. A., 49, 93, 116, 120, 167, 171, 173 Gentile, D. A., 417, 496, 497
Fraley, R. C., 35, 60, 64, 77, 138, 151, 152, 155, 158 George, C., 137, 138, 144, 251, 286
Frank, R. H., 426 George, M., 570
Fraser, A. M., 375, 511, 519 Georgiou, S. N., 507
Frederikson, K., 216 Gerbner, G., 369
Freedman, D. G., 115 Gerhold, M., 310
French, D. C., 307, 309, 329, 331 Gerris, J. R. M., 257
Fretts, R. C., 264 Gerrits, M. H., 297
Freud, S., 3, 15, 16, 330 Gershoff, E. T., 21, 255, 261, 275, 490, 522, 545
Frey, K. S., 406, 510 Gerson, K., 278, 279
Frick, J. E., 173 Gervai, J., 413
Frick, P. J., 428, 456 Geschwind, D. H., 111
Friedman, H. S., 55, 58, 117, 286, 368, 418 Gesell, A. L., 3, 12, 69
Friedman, S. L., 410, 418, 522 Gest, S. D., 303
Friedrich, L. K., 48 Gettler, L. T., 142
Frith, C. D., 466 Gewirtz, J. L., 129, 171
Frodi, A. M., 405, 545 Gibbs, J. C., 412, 437, 450
Frosch, C. A., 250 Gifford-Smith, M. E., 26, 312, 480, 501
Fu, G., 455 Gilbert, N., 553
594  Author Index

Giles, J. W., 407 Gregory, A. C., 14, 34, 100, 101

Giletta, M., 306, 332 Gregson, J., 349, 536
Gilissen, R., 118 Griffin, M. B., 134
Gilligan, C., 439–442 Griffin, P. B., 103, 134
Gilliom, M., 189, 480 Griffiths, M. D., 374, 380
Ginsburg, H. J., 32 Grigorenko, E. L., 34
Giordano, P. C., 485 Grills, A., 504
Girard, K., 149 Grimes, C. L., 254, 320
GLAAD, 366, 368, 369 Grimm-Thomas, K., 279
Gleason, T. R., 421 Groenendyk, A. E., 456
Glick, G. C., 332 Groh, A. M., 139, 151, 155, 156, 320
Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children, 275 Grolnick, W. S., 188, 489
Goble, P., 422 Gross, E. E., 190
Goddard, R. D., 347 Gross, E. F., 286, 375
Goeke-Morey, M. C., 250 Gross, R. T., 188
Goetz, G., 177 Grosse, G., 242
Goetz, T. E., 324 Grossman, F. K., 363
Goldbaum, S., 507 Grossman, J. B., 216
Goldberg, A., 276, 277, 282, 283, 416 Grossmann, K. E, 159
Goldberg, W., 278 Grossman, T., 97
Goldman-Rakic, P., 92 Grotevant, H. D., 281, 282
Goldsmith, H. H., 111, 117, 182, 486 Grotpeter, J. K., 478
Goldstein, J. M., 403 Grusec, J. E., 24, 28, 33, 255, 321, 373, 457, 464
Golinkoff, R. M., 88 Grych, J., 251
Golombok, S., 281, 283, 284, 393 Guastella, A. J., 87
Goleman, D., 166 Guerra, N. G., 450, 480, 482, 492, 504, 506, 509, 513
Golter, B. S., 323 Guidubaldi, J., 287
Goncu, A., 301 Gump, P. V., 347
Gonzales, N. A., 43, 66 Gunderson, E. A., 216, 412, 423
Gonzalez, Y .S, 331 Gunji, A., 211
Goodman, W. B., 200, 279 Gunnar, M. R., 73, 80, 530, 531
Goodvin, R., 156 Gur, R. C., 403
Gordon, N., 360 Gurtner, J., 419
Gosselin, P., 183
Gotlib, I. H., 13, 200 H
Gottesman, I. I., 104, 486 Haas, L., 262
Gottfried, A. E., 278 Haddad, E., 362
Gottfried, A. W., 278 Hadfield, L., 265, 268
Gottlieb, A., 8, 9 Hadjikhani, N., 97, 111
Gottlieb, G., 108 Hafen, C. A., 318
Gottman, J. M., 69, 166, 192, 193, 243, 250, 251, 267, 287, 303, Hagekull, B., 176
310, 327–329 Hahn, C.-S., 281
Gould, E., 233 Haight, W. L., 301, 303
Graham, S., 180, 284, 349, 489, 509, 510 Hair, E. C., 323, 523
Grant, T. R., 271 Haith, M. M., 86
Grant, W. T, 341, 571, 572 Halberstadt, A. G., 184, 185, 191, 321
Graue, M. E., 68 Hales, D. J., 132
Gray, P., 142 Halim, M. L., 395
Graziano, P. A., 310 Hall, G. S., 3
Green, K. E., 136 Hall, J., 402
Greenberg, B. S., 368 Hall, N. W., 402
Greenberg, M., 144 Hall, S. S., 109
Greenberger, E., 279 Halle, T., 163, 523
Greene, J. D., 439 Halligan, S. L., 501
Greene, M., 222 Halpern, D. F., 350, 403, 423, 424
Greenfield, P. M., 60, 208, 273, 276, 355, 356, 358, 374, Halverson, C. F., 117, 182, 407
377, 378, 383 Hamermesh, S., 314
Greenough, W., 95 Hamann, S., 403
Gregor, T., 496 Hamburger, C., 400
 Author Index   595

Hamilton, A. F., 97, 111, 233 Henry, J. D., 365

Hamlin, J. K., 461–463 Herbert, J., 423, 488
Hammen, C., 200, 201, 258 Hernandez, D. J., 14, 327
Hampson, S. E., 55 Herrenkohl, T. I., 499
Hand, M., 463 Herrera, N. C., 266
Hane, A. A., 118, 310 Herrold, K., 357
Hanish, L. D., 504 Hertz, M. F., 505
Hansen, M., 281 Hertz, R., 80, 284
Hanson, T. L., 73, 513, 514 Hespos, S. J., 88
Han, S., 181 Hesse, E., 137, 146
Han, W.-J., 181, 278, 279 Hetherington, E. M., 65, 255, 258, 285, 287, 288, 290, 291, 413
Happaney, K., 545 Hewlett, B. S., 262
Harbaugh, B. T., 466 Heyman, G. D., 231, 232, 235, 407
Harden, K. P., 252 Higgins, T., 263
Harford, T. C., 490 Hill, D. E., 398
Harker, L., 173 Hill, J. P., 341
Harlow, H. F., 129, 154, 326 Hill, K. G., 274
Harmon, E., 255 Hill, N. E., 355–358, 381–382, 492, 502
Harmon, R. J, 175 Hilliard, L. J., 423
Harmon-Jones, E., 96 Hilt, L. M., 197
Harper, M. S., 178, 333 Hinduja, S., 506
Harrington, H., 107, 120 Hines, M., 388, 389, 391, 399, 402, 403
Harris, E., 318 Hinshaw, S. P., 510
Harris, P. L., 152, 153, 186, 188, 224, 228, 235, 371, 538 Hiraki, K., 209, 402
Harris-Britt, A., 224 Hirsch, B. J., 362
Harrison, A. O., 276, 332, 333, 336 Hirschfeld, L. A., 237
Harsha, K., 381 Hobara, M., 135, 136
Hart, B., 272, 466 Hodgdon, H., 480
Hart, C. H., 262 Hodges, E. V. E., 318, 504, 508
Hart, D., 273, 466 Hoehl, S., 176
Hart, S. L., 179, 180 Hoff, E., 239–242, 272
Harter, S., 186, 187, 207, 209, 210, 212–215, 232, 244, 306, 426 Hoffman, C., 194, 200
Hartl, D. L., 120 Hoffman, L. W., 181, 278, 279, 447
Hartmann, D. P., 68–70 Hoffman, M. L., 469
Hartup, W. W., 299, 305, 329, 330 Hogan, D., 253
Harvey, E., 278 Hogan, M. J., 372
Harwood, R. L., 140 Hogg, K., 390, 411
Hasebe, Y., 448 Hoglund, W. L. G., 311, 317, 504, 505
Hastings, P. D., 416, 464, 465 Holden, G. W., 67, 254, 260
Hatchett, S. J., 276 Holleran, S. E., 68
Hattie, J. 351 Hollon, S. D., 201
Hauser, D., 541 Hong, D. S., 108
Havighurst, R. F., 434 Holmes-Lonergan, H. A., 234
Hawkins, J. D., 513 Holt, R. W., 319, 371
Hawley, P. H., 32, 309, 335, 478 Honeycutt, H., 401
Hay, D. F., 298, 300, 463, 478, 479, 481 Hooker, C., 438
Hayden, L., 317 Hopmeyer, A., 438
Hayward, C., 289 Horn, S. S., 314, 336, 446
Hazen, N., 309 Horowitz, S. M., 538
Hazler, R. J., 507 Houlette, M. A., 360
Heaven, P. C. L., 336 House, B. R. 465
Heiges, K. L., 289 Howard, S., 369, 466
Heinz, A., 108, 435, 439 Howe, N., 234, 266, 268, 546
Hektner, J. M., 61 Howe, T. R., 234, 266, 268, 546
Helfinstein, S. M., 117 Howell, J. C., 492
Helwig, C., 434, 440–443, 449 Howell, S., 496
Hembree, S. E., 318 Howes, C., 135, 148, 157, 189, 297, 298, 300, 315, 327, 358, 534
Henderlong, J., 353 Hsu, H.-C., 173
Henker, B., 110 Huang, L., 451
596  Author Index

Hubbeling, D., 536 Johnson, S. W., 359

Hudley, C., 509, 513 Johnson, W., 168
Hudson, A. S., 189 Johnston, J., 418
Huesmann, L. R., 78, 366, 369–371, 375, 481, 482, 484, 485, 496 Jonassohn, K., 180, 238
Hughes, C., 193, 194, 233, 234, 347, 355 Jones, C. J., 392
Hull, C. L., 20 Jones, D. J., 492
Humes, K, R., 223 Jones, E. W., 120
Hupp, J. M., 415 Joormann, J., 201
Hurd, N. M., 362 Jorgensen, C., 400, 401
Hurst, S., 513 Joussemet, M., 484, 489
Huston, A. C., 365, 369, 372, 383, 384, 520, 523, 768 Juang, L., 184
Huttenlocher, P. R., 94, 95 Judge, T. A., 395
Hwang, P., 132, 262 Judy, B., 450
Hyde, J. S., 389, 392, 423, 440, 484, 572 Jusczyk, P. W., 88
Hygen, B., 487 Just, M. A., 111
Hymel, S., 308, 319 Justice, L. M., 305
Hymowitz, K., 373 Juvonen, J., 309, 348, 360, 504, 505, 507, 510

I K
Iacoboni, M., 96, 466 Kagan, J., 115–117, 119, 120, 182, 393
Ialongo, M., 510 Kaiser Family Foundation, 365, 539
Iervolino, A. C., 404 Kaiser, J., 355
Imuta, K. 312 Kalil, A., 542
Inoff-Germain, G., 69, 488 Kalish, C. W., 183
Institute of Medicine, 77 Kamibeppu, K., 377
International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Kandel, E. R., 93, 94
Reproductive, 281 Kanner, L., 110, 111
Irizarry, K. J., 117 Kantrowitz, B., 95
IRS, 454 Kanwisher, N., 87
Irvine, A. B., 382, 570 Kaplow, J. B., 546
Isaacowitz, D. M., 190 Karasik, L. B., 6
Isabella, R., 143 Karcher, M. J., 363
Ishikawa, F., 300 Kärnä, A., 511
Isley, S., 254 Karn, M. A., 194
Izard, C. E., 169, 177, 178, 182, 196 Karnik, R. B., 302
Kårstad, S. B., 188
J Kärtner, J., 466
Jabbi, M., 97 Karraker, K. H., 410
Jaccard, J., 535 Kasprian, G., 93
Jackson, J. S., 276 Kass, J., 319
Jackson, K. F., 223 Kass, L., 112
Jackson, P. L., 97 Katz, L .F., 192, 193, 265
Jacobsen, T., 153 Katz, P. A., 237
Jacobson, J. L., 537 Katz-Wise, S. L., 392
Jacobvitz, T., 144, 489 Kavanaugh, K., 509
Jacques, S., 189 Kazdin, A., 353, 509
Jaffe, J., 105, 240 Kebir, O., 110
Jaffee, S., 46, 106, 440, 490, 498 Kearney, M. S., 539
Jambon, M., 444 Kee, D. W., 396
Jellinek, M. B., 199 Keenan, K., 492
Jensen-Campbell, L. A., 334 Keijsers, L., 323
Jia, Y., 270, 355 Keil, F., 92
Jodl, K. M., 291 Keiley, M. K., 500
Johns, S. E., 110, 536, 570, 571 Kellas, J. K., 270
Johnson, A. D., 569 Keller, M., 329, 331
Johnson, C. F., 547 Keltner, D., 173
Johnson, J. G., 377 Kennedy, D. E., 194
Johnson, M. H., 8, 9, 87, 88, 94, 98 Kennedy, D. N, 403
Johnson, S., 571 Kennell, J. H., 131, 132
 Author Index   597

Kenny, M. C., 550 Kokko, K., 485

Kenyon, D. B., 513, 514 Kolb, B., 94, 95
Kensinger, E. A., 190 Kopelman, S., 168
Kerns, K. A., 137, 153 Kopp, C. B., 170, 451, 504
Kerr, M., 115, 323, 391 Koren-Karie, N., 143
Kesler, S. R., 108 Korner, A., 171
Keverne, E. B., 145 Kosfeld, M., 145
Keysers, C., 96, 97 Koskinen, O., 284
Khoo, S. T., 269 Kost, K., 469
Khoury-Kassabri, M., 350 Kostelny, K., 324
Kids Are Waiting, 547 Kotila, L. E., 264
Kiel, E. J., 178 Kouno, A., 547
Kiernan, K. E., 537 Kovacs, D. M., 326
Killen, M., 235, 440, 444–449, 460, 471 Kovacs, E. A., 260, 261
Kilner, J. M., 96 Kovacs, M., 200
Kim, H., 91 Kowal, A., 267
Kim, J., 378 Krall, S. C., 93
Kim, S., 21, 452 Kramer, L., 194, 267, 268, 296
Kimball, M. M., 418 Krappman, L., 323
Kimbro, R. T., 260 Krebs, D. L., 439, 440, 450
Kim-Cohen, J., 500 Kreider, R. M., 290
King, J. A., 466 Kreppner, J., 122
King, N. J., 197 Kress, J. S., 510, 513
King, P. E., 225, 226 Kretschmer, T., 320
Kinsley, C. H., 263 Kroger, J., 218, 219
Kinzler, K. D., 88 Kruegera, F., 97
Kirby, D. B., 535, 541 Kuczynski, L., 4, 249, 260
Kirby, J. D., 286 Kuhn, B. R., 255, 489
Kiselica, M. S., 538 Kuhn, D., 92
Kisilevsky, B. S., 87 Kuk, L. S., 92, 255, 489
Kister, M. C., 243 Kuklinski, M. R., 354
Kitamura, C., 410 Kumru, A., 469
Kitzinger, S., 132 Kunkel, D., 368, 371
Kiuru, M., 113 Kupersmidt, J. B., 306
Klaczynski, P. A., 312 Kuzawa, C. W., 141
Klahr, D., 25 Kwon, K., 336
Klasen, F., 495 Kwok, O., 355
Klaus, M., 131, 132, 515 Kyratzis, A., 243
Klausli, J. F., 250
Klebold, D., 318 L
Klein, M. M., 262 La Barbera, J. D., 183
Kliegel, M., 191 La Greca, A. M., 332, 333, 336
Kliewer,W., 499 LaBounty, J., 193, 233
Klima,T., 317 Ladd, G. W., 65, 201, 261, 306, 309, 310, 314, 317, 320–325, 327,
Klimes-Dougan, B., 69 329, 330, 340, 341, 355, 491, 507
Klomek, A. B., 505 LaFontana, K., 309
Klute, C., 304, 336 LaFrance, M., 171, 172
Knafo, A., 404, 465, 470 LaFreniere, P. J., 32, 106, 170, 172, 174, 182, 183
Knight, G. P., 469, 470 Lagattuta, K. H., 177, 444
Knobloch, S., 418 Laible, D. J., 156, 446
Knoester, C., 323 Laird, J., 513
Kochanska, G., 21, 35, 70, 117–119, 178, 180, 259, 260, 451, 452, Laird, R. D., 323, 491
457, 458, 460, 471, 472 Lakatos, K., 116
Kochel, K. P., 313 Lam, B. T., 304
Kochenderfer-Ladd, B., 504, 507 Lamb, M. E., 11, 132, 134, 148, 159–160, 262, 305, 405,
Koenig, J., 257 545, 551, 552
Kohl, P. L., 200, 499 Lambert, K., 262
Kohlberg, L., 28, 406, 433, 435, 437–440, 443, 450, 463, 473, 474 Lambert, K. G., 262, 263, 317
Kohnstamm, G. A., 115 Lamborn, S. D., 215
598  Author Index

Landers, A., 508 Liew, J., 72

Lang, J., 333 Lillard, A. S., 230, 233, 300, 302
Langrock, A. M., 251 Lin, A. J., 541
Lansford, J. E., 273, 275, 303, 489, 490, 547 Lincoln, A., 23, 437
Lareau, A., 14, 273 Lindberg, S. M., 392, 423
Larose, S., 154 Lindell, A. K., 403
Larsen, J. T., 187 Linder, J. R., 496
Larzelere, R. E., 255, 489 Lindhout, I. E., 118
Latendresse, S. J., 108 Lindsey, E. W., 301, 320
Laub, J. H., 31, 485 Linnoila, V. M., 488
Laursen, B., 330, 332–334, 508 Lintern, V., 404
Lawry, J., 419 Lipman, E. L., 284
Lawton, M. P., 190 Lippa, R. A., 393
Le, H.-N., 9 Lipscomb, S. T., 119
Leadbeater, B. J., 334, 504, 505, 507, 510, 514–515, 537, Liss, M. B., 391
538, 542 Liu, D., 229, 397
Leaper, C., 303, 389–391, 395, 396, 409–412, 414, 417, 418, Livesley, W. J., 232
422, 427, 464, 483 Livingston, B. A., 265, 395
Leavell, A. S., 411 Lobel, T. E., 397, 398
Leclerc, C. M., 190 Lobmaier, J. S., 141, 405
LeDoux, J., 91, 94, 403 Lochman, J. E., 509
Lee, J. H., 355 Logan, J., 381
Lee, K., 455 Lollis, S. P., 321
Lee, K.-H, 481 Lomax, R. G., 75
Lee, M. L, 189 London, K., 395, 421, 515
Lee, O., 297 Longley, R., 394
Lee, R. M., 226 Lopez, A. B., 225, 226
Lee, V. E., 365 Lorber, M. F., 118
Leeb, R. T., 390 Lorberbaum, J. P., 263
Leerkes, E. M., 143 Lord, H., 360
Legare, C. H., 232 Lorenz, K., 31, 130, 476
Legerstee, M., 89 Lounds, J. J., 152
Leidy, M., 290 Lovas, G. S., 410
Leinbach, M. D., 406 Love, J. M., 163
Leman, P. J., 390 Lowen, L., 541
Lemerise, E. A., 25, 26, 178, 313, 457 Lucas, T. A., 298
Lempers, J. D., 242 Lucassen, N., 143
Lengua, L. J., 182, 260, 261 Lucas-Thompson, R., 154, 278, 320, 321
Lenhart, A., 375, 376, 379 Ludwig, J., 527
Leonard, C., 314 Luecke-Aleksa, D., 408
Lepper, M. R., 353, 410 Lumb, J. A. G., 403
Lerman, R. L., 538 Luntz, B. K., 490
Lerner, R. M., 11, 224, 292, 382, 471, 472 Lussier, P., 481
Leve, L. D., 107, 108, 411 Luthar, S. S., 13, 271, 273, 495
Leventhal, T., 31, 71, 260, 322, 524, 545 Lutzker, J. R., 549
Levine, L. J., 186, 539 Luyckx, K., 219
Levitt, M. J., 151 Lyman, D. R., 498
Levy, G. D., 408 Lynch, S. M., 101, 417
Lewis, M., 68, 115, 130, 134, 157, 166, 176, 178, 179, 184, 208, Lynn, M., 168, 237, 268
228, 231, 244, 261, 456, 457 Lyons-Ruth, K., 144, 489
Leyens, J.-P., 496 Lytton, H., 134, 411
Li, X., 301, 307, 338
Liben, L. S., 237, 396, 423, 426 M
Lickliter, R., 14, 108, 401 MacBeth, T. M., 50, 418
Liddle, E. B., 110 Maccoby, E. E., 80, 257, 262, 303, 414, 420, 421, 464
Lieb, R., 320 MacDonald, K., 141
Lieberman, M. D., 316, 437 MacEvoy, J. P., 329, 332
Liebert, R. M., 46, 47, 78 MacIver, D. J., 349
Lieven, E. V. M., 240 MacKinnon, D. P., 75, 76
 Author Index   599

MacMillan, H. L., 97, 549, 551 Maurer, D., 86, 87, 182
MacWhinney, B., 25 Maximo, J. O., 111
Madsen, S. D., 4, 333 Maxwell, J. A., 67
Maestripieri, D., 405 Mayeux, L., 308, 309
Maggin, D. M., 353 Maynard, A. E., 268
Mahfouda, B. A., 400 Mazur, E., 287
Mahoney, J. L., 405 Mazzie, C., 88
Main, M., 137, 138, 146, 153, 156, 490 Mbwana, K., 372
Majidi-Abi, S., 412 McCabe, K. M., 287, 417
Malatesta, C. Z., 90, 182 McCall, R., 422
Malcolm, K. T., 332 McCandless, B. R., 508
Malti, T., 180, 397, 445, 478, 479, 484, 489, 495 McCartney, K., 7, 101, 105, 106, 465, 555
Mallick, S. K., 508 McCaul, K. D., 488
Mallon, G. P., 398, 399 McCloskey, L. A., 251
Mandara, J., 223 McClure, E. B., 390
Mandell, S., 223 McDevitt,T. M., 346
Manderson, L., 132 McDowell, D. J., 32, 262, 320, 321, 323
Mangelsdorf, S. C., 176, 188 McLellan, J. A., 467
Manlove, J., 535, 542 McElwain, N. L., 154, 194, 269, 320
Manly, J. T., 490 McGue, M., 106
Manning, C. K., 285 McGuire, S., 239
Maratsos, M., 9 McHale, S. M., 409
Marcia, J. E., 217–218 McKee, L., 410
Mares, M., 365, 369, 468 McKenna, K. Y. A., 376
Markovic, A., 332 McKinney, K., 513
Marin, M. M., 88 McKown, C., 235, 236
Mark, G. Y., 181, 513 McLanahan, S. S., 285, 289
Markham, R., 184 McLaughlin, A. E., 400, 525, 527
Markman, E. M., 243 McLean, A., 353
Maroun, M., 91 McLoyd, V. C., 276, 292, 492, 523
Marsh, H. W., 214 McWayne, C., 357
Marshall, N. A., 483 Mead, M., 70
Martens, J. P., 179 Meaney, M. J., 107, 108
Martin, C. L., 166, 201, 257, 280, 286, 303, 314, 406–408, 411, 412, Mednick, S. A., 497
420–422, 427–428 Medrich, E. A., 247, 322
Martin, J. A., 255 Meehan, B. J., 355
Martin, L. R., 55 Meeus, W., 217, 218
Martin-Storey, A., 335 Mehl, M. R., 68, 88
Martinez, G. M., 535 Mehler, J., 88
Martinez, J., 412 Mehta, C. M., 303, 304, 421
Martinez, M., 488 Meier, A., 271, 506
Marvin, R. S., 138 Meins, E., 233
Marx, T., 243 Mellanby, J., 214
Mash, E. J., 545 Melson, G. F., 136
Masse, N., 528 Mendle, J., 349
Masten, A. S., 13, 287, 494, 495 Mennella, J. A., 88
Mastro, D. E., 367 Menon, M., 212, 314
Masuda, T., 184 Merrill, L., 7, 106, 340
Matas, L., 153 Messinger, D. S., 169, 172, 173
Mather, M., 190 Metropolitan Area Child Study Research Group, 512
Mathiesen, K., 118 Mettetal, G., 327, 328
Mathur, R., 421 Metz, E., 467
Matson, J. L., 255 Meyer, S., 132
Matsumoto, D., 167, 184 Meyerowitz, J., 400
Matsuoka, S., 469 Meyers, B., 132
Matthews, A. E., 371 Miga, E. M., 321
Mattis, J. S., 225, 226 Mikami, A.Y., 375
Mattson, W. I., 173, 174 Milgram, S., 445
Maughan, A., 200 Miller, C. F., 298
600  Author Index

Mills, R. S. L., 118 Murray, J. P., 149

Mills-Koonce,W. R., 139 Murray, L., 200
Milner, D., 220 Murray, T. A., 112
Minagawa-Kawai, Y., 98 Musick, K., 271
Miner, J. L., 118 Mustanoja, S., 507
Mintz, S., 14 Musu-Gillette, L., 528
Minuchin, P., 351 Myers-Walls, J. A., 177
Minze, L. C., 489
Mirowsky, J., 280 N
Mischel, W., 454 Nabi, R. L., 539
Mitchell, K. J., 348, 376, 378, 379 Nagin, D., 484
Mitsis, E. M., 498 Nagy, G., 423
Miyazaki, M., 209 Nakato, E., 87
Mize, J., 324 Nan, X., 369
Moeller, T. G., 13, 377, 487 Nangle, D. W., 507
Moffitt, T. E., 3, 100, 103, 105, 107, 121, 481, 484, 487, 489, Nansel, T. R., 502
498–500, 514, 515, 537 Narumoto, J., 98
Moilanen, K. L., 390, 451 Narusyte, J., 101
Molenaar, P. C. M., 535 Nash, A., 371
Mollborn, S., 535 Nathanson, A. L., 373
Moller, L. C., 395 National Campaign to Prevent Teenage and Unplanned
Molloy, L. E., 303 Pregnancy, 381, 539, 556
Monahan, K., 459 National Institute of Mental Health, 291, 341
Moncloa, F., 542 National Institutes of Health, 103, 382, 471, 572
Money, J., 402, 425 Neblett, E. W., 223, 224
Monk, C. S., 200 Needle, R. H., 287, 406
Montague, D. P. F., 183 Neiderhiser, J. M., 101, 106
Moore, K. A., 139, 352, 372, 505, 507, 537, 542, 555, 556 Nelson, C. A., 49, 73, 80, 87, 90, 92–95, 144, 166, 167, 183, 228,
Morelli, G., 134 281, 282, 317, 410, 450, 482, 489, 539, 550
Morgan, B .L., 395 Nesdale, D., 317
Morgan, G .A., 176 Netzley, S. B., 369
Morikawa, H., 88 Neugarten, B. L., 434
Moroz, K., 305 Neville, B., 280
Morrison, D. R., 287 Neville, H. J., 93, 280
Morrongiello, B. A., 390, 407, 411 New York Times, 393, 394
Moshman, D., 217 Newcomb, A. F., 309
Moss, E., 152, 393, 489 Newhouse, P., 390
Moss-Racusin, C. A., 394 Nguyen, B., 314, 488
Mostofsky, S. H., 111 NICHD Early Child Care Research Network, 92, 148, 154, 157,
Mott, F. L., 287 280, 321, 361, 480, 484, 530, 531
Mounts, N. S., 323 Nielsen, M., 211
Mrug, S., 314 Nigg, J. T., 111
Msall, M. E., 253 Nikken, P., 370
Mueller, E., 298, 300 Nilsen, E. S., 233, 243
Muir, D. W., 87 Nolen-Hoeksema, S., 197
Mullally, P. R., 266 Norlander, T., 426
Mumme, D. L., 88, 176 Norrick, N. R., 270
Mumola, C., 149, 150 Nucci, L., 443, 444, 447
Munholland, K. A., 146, 159, 321 Nunner-Winkler, G., 452, 460
Munroe, R. H., 406, 420
Muris, P., 118, 177 O
Murnen, S. K., 417 Oakhill, J., 396
Murphy, B. C., 310 Obama, B., 223, 225, 239, 394, 454, 538, 571
Murphy, F. C., 173 Oberlander, S. E., 537
Murphy, K. C., 372 Oberman, L. M., 97, 111
Murphy, S. M., 243 Ocampo, K. A., 221
Murphy-Cowan, T., 259 O’Connell, P., 504
Murray, J., 497 O’Connor, T. G., 261
 Author Index   601

Oden, S., 325 Pauker, K., 235

O’Donnell, K., 357 Pauletti, R. E., 426
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 361 Paulussen-Hoogeboom, M. C., 118
Ogbu, J. U., 222 Pavlov, I. P., 20
Oh, W., 309 Pawluski, J. L., 263
Ojanen, T., 215 Peake, P. K., 456
Olds, D. L., 549 Pearce, M. J., 333
Ollendick, T., 197, 504 Pearson, J. L., 276
Olsen, J. A., 349 Pearson, T. E., 231
Olweus, D., 484, 488, 504, 507, 510, 511 Pecheux, M., 89
O’Neil, R., 320, 322, 491 Pedersen, S., 314, 317, 332
Onishi, K. H., 230 Pedro, M. F., 264
Ontai, L. L., 156 Peeters, A. L., 370
Ooms,T. J., 538 Peets, K., 318, 501, 503, 504
Orfield, G., 360 Pegg, J. E., 88
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Peisner-Feinberg, E. S., 530
(OECD), 532 Pel’aez-Nogueras, M., 530
Orlick, T., 307 Pelka, S., 405
Ormel, J., 118, 310 Pellegrini, A. D., 90, 303, 420, 483
Ormrod, J. E., 346 Pelphrey, K. A., 98, 111
Oster, H., 88 Pena, D. C., 357
Osterman, K. F., 346 Penman-Aguilar, A., 535
Ostrov, J. M., 478, 479 Pepler, D. J., 68, 268, 483, 504, 507
Owen, M. T., 250 Perlman, S. B., 145, 183, 193, 547
Oyserman, D., 274 Perls, T. T., 264
Ozer, E. J., 492, 499 Perner, J., 228, 234
Perper, K., 535
P Perrett, D. I., 141
Padilla-Walker, L. M., 448 Perry, B. D., 79
Paek, H.-J., 417 Perry, D. G., 215, 277, 279, 330, 390, 418, 426, 482, 504,
Paik, H., 59 507, 525
Paley, B., 264 Perry-Jenkins, M., 279
Panksepp, J. A., 26, 34 Perry-Parrish, C., 179, 314, 390
Pannozzo, G. M., 267, 350 Persson, G. E. B., 468
Parech, A. F., 260 Petersen, I. T., 108
Parents Television Council, 366–368 Peterson, J. L., 289
Paris, S., 29 Pettigrew, T. F., 225, 238, 359, 360
Park, J. H., 369, 487 Pettit, G. S., 261, 312, 321, 323, 335, 349, 416, 486, 491,
Park, J. Z., 369 501, 509
Parke, R. D., 3, 7, 11, 32, 68, 71, 112, 135, 149, 189, 192, 224, 260, Pew Research Center, 63, 454
262, 268, 274, 278, 280, 281, 284, 320, 321, 323, 330, 339, 392, Phelan, J. E.,422
405, 410, 411, 545, 546 Phillips, D. A., 527
Parker, J. G., 180, 277, 303, 308, 314, 317, 326, 327, 329, 331, 571 Phillips, S. U., 357
Parker, K., 277 Phinney, J. S., 220, 222, 223, 225
Parkhurst, J. T., 309, 317 Phipps, M. G., 537
Parkin, C. M., 4 Piaget, J., 6, 20, 27–29, 36, 42, 129, 433–435, 470, 473, 567
Parks, M. R., 376 Pianta, R. C., 347, 350, 355
Parten, M., 301 Pickles, A., 49
Partnership for Children News, 185 Pierce, K. M., 63
Pascual-Leone, A., 97 Pine, K. J., 371
Passman, R. H., 135 Pinto, S., 529
Pasterski, V. L., 135, 397, 402 Pinquart, M., 264
Pasupathi, M., 438 Piper, W., 23
Patchin, J., 506 Pizarro, D. A., 450
Patriarca, A., 64 Pleck, J. H., 261, 277, 278
Patterson, C. J., 282, 323, 324 Pleil, K. E., 391
Patterson, C. H., 416 Plomin, R., 14, 34, 35, 100, 103, 106, 107, 115, 116, 465
Patterson, G. R., 21, 490, 499 Pluess, M., 4, 107, 530
602  Author Index

Poehlmann, J., 149 Ragozin, A. S., 280

Polce-Lynch, M., 392 Rah, Y., 321
Polit, D. F., 266 Raikes, H. A., 145, 154, 156, 320
Pollak, S. D., 95, 145, 160, 183, 192, 490, 501 Raine, A., 487, 488
Polman, H., 497 Rajalakshmi, J., 360, 361
Pomerantz, E. M., 411, 413, 571 Ramakers, A., 485
Pomerleau, A., 410 Ramasubramanian, S., 225
Pomery, E. A., 269 Rakoczy, H., 228
Pons, F., 170, 187, 188 Ramey, C. T., 525–528
Pontin, J., 64 Ramey, S. L., 526
Poole, M. K., 550 Ramos-McKay, J. M., 274
Pope, B., 226 Ramsburg, D., 267
Porter, R. H., 88 Rapee, R., 320
Portwood, S. G., 550 Rasanen, P., 498
Posada, G., 140 Ray, B. D., 352, 353, 551
Posner, M. I., 113, 117, 123 Raymore, L. A., 338
Postlethwait, J. H., 91 Raz, N., 403
Pott, M., 306 Razzel, M., 506
Poulin, F., 332 Ream, G., 227
Povinelli, D. J., 209 Recchia, H. E., 268, 438
Power, T. G., 302, 303, 324 Reck, C., 200
Powers, C. J., 120, 324, 496 Reddon, J. R., 488
Powlishta, K. K., 236 Reddy, R., 216
Pöyhönen, V., 504 Redford, J., 352
Pozner, J. L., 366 Regnerus, M. D., 468
Prakash, K., 310 Reich, S. M., 377
Pratt, M. W., 65, 270, 447, 462 Reid, J. B., 166, 347
Prentice, D. A., 396 Reiner, W. G., 402
Preston, S. D., 465 Reinius, B., 404
Price, T. S., 105 Reiss, A., 109
Priess, H. A., 392 Reiss, D., 106, 118
Princiotta, D., 352 Rejskind, F. G., 390
Prinstein, M. J., 305, 336, 378 Repetti, R., 279, 317
Prior, M., 118 Repinski, D. J., 65
Pryor, J., 290, 291, 467 Rest, J. R., 439
Przybylski, A. K., 379 Retz, W., 110
Puffer, K. A., 217, 218 Revelle, G. L., 243
Pulkkinen, L., 121, 485 Reynolds, A. J., 423
Putallaz, M., 310 Rhee, S. H., 486, 489
Putnam, F. W., 546 Rheingold, H. L., 52, 175, 463
Putnam, S. P., 13, 546 Rhodes, J. E., 216, 243, 266, 361, 363
Putnick, D. L., 254, 273, 280 Ribak, R., 376
Pyrooz, D. C, 338 Ricciuti, H., 176
Richards, M. H., 65, 392
Q Richmond, M. K., 267, 321, 334, 553
Qian, M. K., 220 Ricks, M., 211
Qiuxia, H., 426 Rideout, V. J., 364, 365, 372–374
Qualter, P., 201 Rieger, G., 227
Quevedo, K., 74, 141 Rieffe, C., 166
Quintana, S., 221, 222 Riese, M. L., 116
Rigby, E., 533
R Rigby, K., 504, 507
Raabe, T., 236, 238 Rishel, C., 362
Raaijmakers, Q. A. W., 440 Risley, T. R., 272
Rabiner, D. L., 26, 312, 480, 501 Ritchie, S. J., 402
Radiukiewicz, K, 314 Rivadeneyra, R., 369, 417
Radke-Yarrow, M., 69 Rivas-Drake, 222, 223
Raeff, C., 356 Rizzo, M., 337
Raffaelli, M., 535 Robarchek, C. A., 496
 Author Index   603

Robarchek, C. J., 496 Rutter, M., 14, 35, 49, 99, 100, 103, 107, 108, 111, 116, 122, 147,
Robbins, L., 68 167, 281, 485, 500
Roberts, B., 218 Ryan, A. M., 327, 353, 360, 533
Roberts, D. F., 372 Rymer, R., 5
Roberts, L. D., 417
Roberts, W., 376 S
Robertson, G., 440, 454 Saarni, C., 10, 32, 166, 168, 171, 172, 174–176, 178, 180,
Robinson, B., 537 183, 185, 188
Robinson, E. B., 111 Sabbagh, M. A., 115
Robinson, J. L., 128, 167 Sabol, T. J. 525
Roche, T., 319 Sadeghirad, B., 371
Rodgers, B., 287 Saenz, E., 391
Rodkin, P. C., 309, 313, 318, 340, 478, 481, 507, 531 Saffran, J. R., 71, 88
Roe, K., 93 Sagi, A., 142, 175
Roeser, R. W., 348 Sagi-Schwartz (Sagi), A., 142
Rogers, L. O., 48, 221, 321 Sagone, E., 396
Rogoff, B., 9, 29, 37, 60, 302 Sailor, K. A., 94
Rohner, R. P., 275 Salapatek, P., 86, 87
Roisman, G. I., 35, 54, 59, 67, 74, 107, 118, 151, 155, 158, 159, Salmivalli, C., 503, 504
309, 333, 531 Sameroff, A. J., 4, 14, 115, 119, 261
Romero, J., 399 Sampaio, R., 94
Romney, D. M., 303, 411, 420 Sampson, R. J., 31, 351, 485
Ronka, A., 485 Sanders, L. D., 94
Rook, K. S., 269 Sanders, M. G., 357
Roopnarine, J. L., 134, 262, 276 Sanderson, J. A., 317
Roos, S., 179, 180 Sandfort, T. G. M., 416
Roosa, M. W., 320 Sandler, I. N., 152, 286
Rosario, M., 227 Sandstrom, M. J., 323, 489
Rose, A. J., 153, 277, 303, 306, 309, 331, 334, 368, 390, 418 Sanson, A., 34, 118
Rose, S. A., 66, 87 Santelli, J. S., 541
Rosenbaum, J. E., 541 Santucci, A. K., 541
Rosenkoetter, L. I., 49 Saroglou, V., 218, 468
Rosenkrantz Aronson, S., 278 Savin-Williams, R. C., 227, 336
Rosenstein, D., 88 Savulescu, J., 113
Rosenthal, D., 223 Sawhill, I., 113
Rosenthal, R., 59, 68, 354 Sax, L., 350
Rosenzweig, M. R., 94, 95 Saxbe, D. E., 498
Rosewarne, D. L., 236 Sayfan, L., 177
Rosin, H., 399 Scaramella, L. V., 259, 491
Rosner, S. R., 109 Scarr, S., 7, 99, 101, 105, 106, 465
Ross, H. S., 210, 234, 300, 326 Schaefer, D. R., 347, 526
Rothbart, M. K., 4, 34, 114–120, 122, 123, 182, 189, 260, 457 Schaffer, H. R., 86, 89, 129, 133, 134, 140
Rothbaum, F., 140, 184, 306 Schanzenbach, D. W., 525
Rothenberg, J., 180, 184, 306 Scheiber, C., 423
Rotherman-Borus, M. J., 198 Scharrer, E., 86, 89, 129, 133, 134, 140
Rovee-Collier, C. K., 167 Schell, K., 323
Rubin, K. H., 120, 178, 180, 213, 220, 298, 300, 301, 303, 308, 309, Schermerhorn, A. C., 252
314, 317, 320, 332, 464, 505 Schilt, K., 394
Ruble, D. N., 396, 398, 404, 406–408, 411, 412, 414, 415, Schlossman, S., 520
420–422, 426 Schmidt, L., 115
Ruby, P., 466 Schmitt, K. L., 377
Ruck, M. D., 354, 355, 441 Schneider, B. H., 155, 306, 307, 328–330, 495, 496
Rudolph, K. D., 303, 313, 341, 349, 390, 418, 504 Schockner, A. E., 420
Ruffman, T., 233 Schoffstall, C. L., 506
Rump, K. M., 211 Scholnick, E. K., 409
Russell, A., 322 Schoppe-Sullivan, S. J., 264, 392, 410
Russell, J. A., 183, 185 Schreiber, N., 551
Rust, J., 417 Schulenburg, C., 366
Rutland, A., 238 Schulman, M., 227
604  Author Index

Schulte-Rüther, M., 403 Shonkoff, J. P., 14, 86, 92, 553–556

Schultz, R. M., 281 Shrum,W., 336
Schulz, M. S., 421 Shulman, S., 262
Shumaker, D. M., 268 Shure, M. B., 501
Schumacker, R. E., 75 Schwalb, B. J., 262
Schumm, W. R., 274 Shwalb, D. W., 262
Schwartz, A., 118 Shweder, R. A., 438
Schwartz, D., 332, 507 Shyers, L., 352
Schwartz, M., 272, 371 Sickmund, M., 338, 339
Schwartz, S. E. O., 362, 363 Siegal, M., 317
Schwartz, S. J., 507 Siegler, R. S., 6, 25
Schweinhart, L. J., 525 Signorella, M. L., 396, 407, 408
Scott, S., 191, 509, 516 Silberg, J. L., 200
Seal, J., 331 Silk, J. B., 465
Sears, R. R., 129 Silvern, D., 303
Seay, B., 129 Silverstein, L., 66
Sebanc, A. M., 129 Simmons, R. G., 349
Sedikides, C., 207 Simon, S., 319
Seem, S. R., 396, 397 Simons, R. L., 286, 287
Segal, U. A., 547 Simpkins, S. D., 330, 347, 412
Seidman, E., 348 Simpson, J. A., 154, 320, 450
Seidman, L. J., 403 Sinclair, S., 237
Seiffge-Krenke, I., 333 Singer, D. G., 42, 302, 365, 373, 494
Seifritz, E., 264 Singer, E., 449
Seiter, J. S., 168 Singer, J. L., 45, 302
Self-Brown, S., 550 Singer, P. W., 493, 494
Seligman, M. E. P., 172, 201 Sinha, P., 95, 183, 192
Selman, R. L., 232, 234 Sirotnak, A. P., 53
Semel, E, 109 Skalamera, J., 334
Seol, K. O., 226 Skinner, B. F., 20
Sera, M. D., 9 Slater, A. M., 313
Serbin, L. A., 390, 395, 396, 413 Slaughter, V., 312
Serketich,W. J., 509 Slavin, R. E., 352
Serpell, J. A., 357 Slomkowski, C., 491
Servin, A., 402 Smetana, J. G., 28, 268, 302, 323, 440, 443–445, 447–450, 471
Sever, I., 302 Smith, C. L., 258, 507
Shaffer, A.,167 Smith, E. P., 480
Shakin, M., 410 Smith, H. J., 116
Shanahan, M. J., 9, 35, 36 Smith, J., 234
Shell, M. D., 349 Smith, K., 537
Sheng, F., 181 Smith, P. K., 530
Shi., B., 491 Smith, P. L., 258, 272
Shapiro, E. K., 351 Smith, S., 373
Sharabany, R., 331 Smith, T. E., 390
Shaver, P. R., 152, 158 Smock, P. J., 284, 285
Shaw, D. S., 152, 158 Smollar, J., 328
Shea, D. L., 419 Smyke, A. T., 144
Sheeber, L., 62 Smyth, J. M., 380
Sheridan, M. A., 73 Snarey, J. R., 19, 218, 438
Sherif, M., 238 Snell, T. I., 150
Sherman, M. H., 270 Snidman, N., 117, 119, 182
Shernoff, D. J., 63 Snyder, H. N., 338, 339
Shield, B., 324, 351 Snyder, J., 491, 492
Shields, A., 324 Society for Research on Child Development, 76
Shiner, R. L., 7, 119 Solomon, J., 137, 138, 144
Shin,Y. L., 307 Solomon, S. E., 282, 286
Shipman, K. L., 192 Sommer, I. E., 403
Shoda,Y., 454 Song, M., 241
Shomaker, L. B., 334 Sorber, A. V., 194
 Author Index   605

Sowell, E. R., 94 Sturge-Apple, M. L., 249, 251, 257

Spangler, G., 150 Subrahmanyam, K., 365, 374–376, 378, 379, 419, 420
Spar, D. L., 281 Sugden, K., 107
Spears, B., 506 Sugiura, H., 377
Spelke, E. S., 88 Suleman, N., 265
Spence, J., 396 Sulik, M. J., 108
Spence, M., 88 Sullivan, C. J., 305
Spencer, M. B., 223, 224, 330, 363 Sullivan, M. L., 538
Spergel, I. A., 492 Sullivan, M. W., 183
Spieker, S. J., 135, 138, 148, 157, 358, 453 Sulloway, F. J., 266
Spiker, D., 211 Sun, Y. C., 377
Spinrad, T. L., 451 Suomi, S. J., 154, 326, 488
Spivack, G., 501 Susman-Stillman, A., 150
Spock, B., 8, 9, 67 Sutherland, L., 131
Sponsel, L. E., 496 Suzuki, L. K., 60, 355, 356, 358
Sprengelmeyer, R., 141 Svetlova, M., 469
Springer, S. P., 93 Swain, J. E., 263
Sroufe, L. A., 67, 131, 151, 154, 155, 160, 161, 171, 172, 174, Sweeting, H., 420
176, 178, 334 Swist, T., 506
Stams, G. J. M., 153, 156, 450, 470 Syed, M., 363
Stangor, C., 445 Sylva, K., 531
Stanley-Hagan, M., 288
Starsen, M., 366 T
Stattin, H., 366 Taddeo, C., 506
Steffen, S., 381 Tajfel, H., 171
Stein, A. H., 48 Takeshita, C., 513
Steinberg, L., 92, 224, 274, 276, 304, 356, 459, 480, 845 Takeshita, I., 513
Steiner, J. E., 88 Talwar, V., 152, 573
Steinhart, D., 149 Tamang, B. L., 186, 273
Stenberg, C., 176, 178 Tamis-LeMonda, C. S., 276
Stephan, C., 313 Tao, T., 451
Stephan, K. E., 93 Tan, P. Z., 143, 153, 184, 186, 273
Stephens, B. R., 87 Tangney, J. P., 458
Steptoe, A., 395 Tanner Stapleton, L., 257
Sterling, L., 111 Taras, M., 255
Stern, D. N., 88 Tarullo, A. R., 118, 451
Stern, M., 410 Taumoepeau, M., 233
Stewart, J. H., 148, 149, 272, 489 Taylor, A., 107, 352
Stice, E., 201 Taylor, J., 352
Stiles, J., 93 Taylor, P., 227
Stipek, D. J., 423, 457, 531 Taylor, R. J., 223
Stocker, C. M., 251, 321, 334 Teichman, Y., 236
Stone, M., 337 Teisl, M., 546
Stoneman, Z., 417 Tenenbaum, H. R., 184, 193, 354, 355, 412, 427
Storey, A. E., 141, 334 Terman, L., 55
Story, L. B., 279 Teti, D. M., 266–268
Stouthamer-Loeber, M., 338, 491 Teubert, D., 264
Strambler, M. J., 236 Thanasekara, P., 360, 361
Strasburger, V. C., 368 Tharp, R. G., 357
Strathearn, L., 142 Thevenin, D. M., 240
Straus, M., 272, 489, 545, 550 Thijs, J., 507
Strayer, J., 467, 470 Thomaes, S., 215, 468
Streri, A., 89 Thomas, A., 34, 113, 114, 119, 182, 292, 569
Stright, A. D., 118 Thompson, I., 112
Stringer, M., 259 Thompson, R. A., 90, 131, 145, 155–157, 188, 202, 257, 450, 457
Strough, J., 303, 304, 421 Thornberry, T. P., 478, 492
Struck, S., 374 Thorne, B., 303
Stuewig, J., 251, 458 Thurber, C. A., 189
Stupica, B., 153 Tinbergen, N., 31, 476
606  Author Index

Tinker, E, 10 Vairami, M., 321

Tisak, M. S., 444, 446 Vaish, A., 176, 456
Toeplitz, Z., 468 Valentine, J. C., 214
Tolan, P. H., 492 Valenzuela, M., 146
Tolley-Schell, S. A., 490, 501 Valiente, C., 118, 185, 192, 310
Tolson, T. F., 276 Valkenburg, P. M., 369, 371–373, 377, 378, 392
Tomlinson, M., 146 van den Boom, D. C., 151
Tomasello, M., 33, 90, 228, 230, 231, 241 Van Den Oord, E. J. C. G., 181
Tomasetto, C., 412 van der Mark, I. L., 181
Tomizawa, K., 263 van Dulmen, M. H. M., 333
Toms, F. D., 276 Van Houtte, M., 214
Torquati, J. C., 533 Van IJzendoorn, M. H., 105, 139, 145, 147, 465
Toth, S. L., 13, 14, 192, 200, 215, 271, 323, 544–547 van Lier, P. A. C., 510
Tracy, J. L., 178, 179 Vandell, D. L., 63, 318, 361, 530
Tranel, D., 98 Vander Stoep, A., 230
Tremblay, R. E., 479, 484, 487–489 Vanderbilt, K. E., 230
Trenholm, C., 541 Vaughn, B. E., 150, 151, 451, 478
Trentacosta, C. J., 188, 501 Vazsonyi, A. T., 451
Trickett, P. K., 546 Veenstra, R., 503
Triebenbacher, S. L., 136 Vega, E., 358
Tronick, E. Z., 89, 90, 134, 174, 178, 189 Ventura, S. J., 280
Troop-Gordon, W., 420, 504, 507 Verkuyten, M., 507
Tropp, L., 225, 238, 359 Verma, S., 265, 304
True, M. M., 144 Vigil, J. M., 401
Trumbull, E., 354, 358 Virkkunen, M., 469
Truwit, C., 94 Vitaglione, G. D., 469
Trzesniewski, K. H., 58 Vitale, A., 399
Tsao, D. Y., 87 Vitaro, F., 317, 498
Tschann, J. M., 118 Vogel, C. A., 525
Tse, H. C.-H., 274, 307 Voices of Youth Newsletter, 548
Tseng, V., 276 Volkmar, F. R., 111
Tudge, J. R. H., 302 Volling, B. L., 179, 266, 267, 269, 456
Turati, C., 87 Von Korff, L., 282
Turiel, E., 28, 396, 438, 439, 441, 443, 444, 448, 470–472 von Salisch, M., 188, 189
Turkheimer, E., 35, 103, 104 von Suchodoletz, A., 451
Turner, J., 226 Vorria, P., 321
Turner, P. J., 413 Votruba-Drzal, E., 530
Turner-Bowker, D. M., 417 Voyer, D., 423
Twenge, J. M., 252, 377, 393, 417, 426, 467 Vybiral, Z., 379
Tynes, B., 223, 225, 376
Tyree, T., 225, 369 W
Tyson, D. F., 357 Wachs, T. D., 115
Waddington, C. H., 105
U Waelde, L. C., 223
Uhls, Y. T., 377, 378 Wagner, K. D., 201
Umana-Taylor, A. J., 222, 223 Wahler, R. G., 171
UN Data, 495 Wainryb, C., 438, 441, 443, 444
Underwood, M. K., 304, 379, 420, 478–480, 482, 483 Waite, E. B., 268
Ungerer, J., 321 Wakschlag, L. S., 259, 276
U.S. Bureau of the Census., 276 Wald, M. S., 14
U.S. Department of Agriculture, 280 Walden, T., 176
U.S. Department of Energy, 103 Waldie, K. E., 111
U.S. Department of Labor, 276 Waldinger, R. J., 270
US Magazine, 265 Waldman, I. D., 486, 489
Walker, L. J., 438, 440, 447, 450
V Walker, T. R., 287
Vagi, K. J., 482 Walker-Andrews, A. S., 183
Vaillancourt, T., 484 Waller, B. M., 173, 309
 Author Index   607

Walsh, D. J., 68 Wilcox, W. B., 390

Walsh, S. P., 377 Williams, C. L., 398
Walters, G. C., 255 Williams, J. C., 279, 300
Wang, A. T., 229 Williams, K., 506
Wang, Q., 210, 229 Williams, S. T., 300
Wang, X.-L., 456 Williams, T. M.., 50
Wang, Y, 307 Willis, R., 496
Wang, Z.-H., 210 Wilson, A. E., 372, 454
Ward, L. M., 368, 418 Wilson, M. I., 33
Wardrop, J., 507 Wilson, S. L, 184
Wark, G. R., 439 Wilson-Mitchell, J. E., 415
Warshak, R. A., 289 Wimmer, H., 228
Wartella, E. A., 45, 263 Winberg, J., 88
Watamura, S. E., 74 Winkielman, P., 96
Waters, E., 136, 139, 146, 151, 152, 160 Wismer Fries, A. B., 145
Watson, C. M., 334 Wiswall, M., 394
Watson, J. B., 3, 20, 103 Wojslawowicz, J. C., 332
Watson-Gegeo, K. A., 268 Wolak, J., 506
Watt, H. M. G., 423 Wolchik, S. A., 285, 288
Web Wise Kids, 381 Wood, J. J., 320
Weber, E. K., 447 Wood, L, 347
Weber, R., 378, 497 Wood, W., 396, 397, 401
Webster-Stratton, C., 509 Woodard, E. H., 365
Weimer, A. A., 186 Woodhouse, S. S., 317
Weinberg, R. A., 99 Woodward, A. L., 228, 365, 416, 468
Weingarten, K., 280 Worrell, F., 220
Weinraub, M., 130 Wright, J. C., 369, 370, 372
Weinstein, R. S., 235, 354 Wu, C., 156
Weisgram, E. S., 391 Wynn, K., 461, 463
Weisner, T. S., 14, 31, 268, 303, 415 Wyrobek, A. J., 280
Weiss, C. C., 372
Weissman, M. M., 489 X
Weisz, J. R., 140, 189 Xiao, N. G., 220
Wellman, H. M., 228, 235, 242 Xiao, W. S., 220
Wells, A. S., 359 Xie, H., 6, 483, 485
Wells, K. C., 509 Xie, Y. L., 314
Welsh, D. P., 333 Xu, F., 45
Wentzel, K. R., 462, 468
Werker, J. F., 88 Y
Werner, N. E., 492, 502 Yale, M. E., 240
Wessells, M. G., 494 Yamasue, H., 402
Weston, D., 156 Yang, C. Y., 403
Weyer, M., 286 Yang, D., 355
Whalen, C. K., 110 Yang, F., 307
Whitebook, M. C., 531, 533 Yau, J., 444
Whitehead, E., 496 Yarrow, M., 54, 67
Whiting, B. B., 268 Yavorsky, J., 252, 392
Whiting, J. W. M., 469 Ybarra, M. L., 379, 506
Whitlock, J. L., 380 Yeager, D. S., 509, 571
Whitman, T. L., 537 Yeung, W. J., 262, 402
Wicker, B., 111 Yip, T, 225
Widen, S. C., 182, 183, 185 Yoshikawa, H., 523
Widom, C. S., 546 Young, A. W., 141
Wiedenmayer, C., 32 Young, S. K., 466
Wieser, K. G., 357 Young, W. C., 402
Wigfield, A., 348, 412, 423 Young, R., 420
Wild, L., 259 Youngblade, L., 251
Wilbourn, M.P., 396 Young-Eisendrath, P., 217
608  Author Index

Youniss, J., 328, 467 Zeman, J., 189, 314, 390

Yovel, G., 87 Zeratsion, H., 285
Yuill, N., 231 Zevalkink, J., 273
Zhou, Q., 261
Z Zhou, X., 468
Zaff, J. F., 469 Zigler, E. F., 514
Zahn-Waxler, C., 184, 458, 464, 465, 467 Zill, N., 61, 289, 392
Zajonc, R. B., 266 Zimmer-Gembeck, M. J., 156, 333
Zahnow, R., 492 Zimmerman, F. J., 371
Zakhireh, B., 181 Zimmerman, M. A., 362
Zand, D. H., 363 Zimmerman, R. R., 129
Zani, B., 334 Zimring, F. E., 492
Zarbatany, L., 303, 507 Ziol-Guest, K. M., 542
Zaslow, M., 279 Ziv, Y., 143
Zeanah, C. H., 49, 144 Zollo, P., 271
Zehr, J. L., 402 Zosuls, K. M., 406
Zeifman, D., 158 Zucker, K. J., 226
Zeki, S., 263 Zukow-Goldring, P., 268, 303
Zeller, M. H., 314 Zuzanek, J., 261
 SUBJ E CT IN DE X

A neighborhood influences on, 492–3, 495, 495f

ABAB experiment, 51 neurological correlates of, 487–8
Abstinence education, 540–1, 540t parents’ as providers of opportunities for, 491
Accommodation, 26, 273 parents’ influence on, 489–90
Active gene–environment association, 106 peer influences on, 491–2
Adaptive behaviors, preparedness for social interaction and, 90 prenatal conditions and, 488–9
Adolescents standing trial as adults, 459–60 sociocognitive factors in development of, 500–2
Adoption, 281–2 stability, 479, 483–4
Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA), 552 temperament and, 487
Adoption studies, 100–2, 106, 486, 489 types of, 477–8, 478t
Adult Attachment Interview (AAI), 146, 154 violence in electronic media and, 496–7
Affect Knowledge Test, 202 Aggression, control of, 508–14
African American children by catharsis (letting off steam), 508
aggressive behavior of, 479–80, 490 by cognitive modification strategies, 509
drug use and, 109 multifaceted approach to, 510
early childhood education for children in poverty and, 527 parents as agents for, 509–10
ethnic identity and, 220–5 schools as venue for intervention, 510
parent–child interactions and, 66 Aggression, determinants of
physical appearance and peer status and, 313 combined social and biological influences, 497–9, 499f
prejudice against, 236 cultural determinants, 513
preverbal communication and, 239–40 hormonal influences, 479t
racial integration in schools and, 359 mass media influences, 489
smiling rates of, 171–2 neighborhood influences, 30, 480, 489, 492–3, 495,
suicide rates among, 198 495f, 500
teacher–student relationships of, 355 neurological influences, 487–8
violence in, preventing, 513 parental influences, 489–90
Age cohort, 35, 54, 55 peer influences, 478, 489, 491–2
Aggression, 476–517. See also Bullying prenatal conditions, 488–9
abusive parents and, 490 sociocognitive factors, 500–2
adaptive/maladaptive functions, 33, 118, 249, 309, temperamental influences, 487
312, 462, 478 Aggression, theories of
brain and, 488 biopsychological model, 486
child soldiers and, 493–5 coercion model, 490–1
coercion model of, 490–1 social information processing model, 501, 502
combined biological and social influences on, 497–9, 499f transactional model, 486, 486f
cultural determinants of, 495–6 Aggression, types of
developmental changes in, 20, 479–80, 479t, 516 direct aggression, 478, 478t, 503
deviancy training, 492 hostile aggression, 477, 479, 479t, 516
environmental triggers of, 499–500, 500f indirect aggression, 478, 478t
gender differences in, 16, 481–3, 482f, 517 instrumental aggression, 477, 479t, 516
genetics and, 486–7, 499–500, 500f physical aggression, 477, 478t
hormonal contributions to, 488 proactive aggression, 477
indirect aggression, 478, 478t, 503 reactive aggression, 477
individual differences, 34, 483–4, 516 relational aggression, 477, 478t

609
610  Subject Index

Aggression, types of (continued) Attachment, assessing

social aggression, 478 Attachment Q-Set (AQS), 139, 139t
verbal aggression, 477, 478t Adult Attachment Interview (AAI), 146, 154
Aggressive-rejected children, 309 California Attachment Procedure (CAP), 140
Alleles, 104, 112 coding children’s behavior, 138
Alpert, Phillip, 381 in different cultures, 140
Altruistic behavior, 461–70, 463t. See also Prosocial behavior Strange Situation Procedure, 140
American Academy of Pediatrics, 364 Attachment, consequences of, 153–61
American family, changing, 276–93 in exploration and cognitive development, 153–4
adoption, 281–2 in later development, 156–7
divorce, 284–93 in self-esteem, 156
gay and lesbian parents, 282–3 in social development, 154–6, 155f
parenting after thirty, 280 Attachment, parents’ input into, 141–50
parenting alone, 283–4 biological preparation for, 141–2
remarriage, 290–3 caregiving and, 142–4
reproductive technologies, new, 281 children in child care and, 148–50
work stress and children’s adjustment, 279 continuity in, 146–7
working mothers, 277–9 family and community contexts and, 144–6
American Psychological Association Task Force on the mothers in prison and, 149–50
Sexualization of Girls, 367 Attachment Q-Set (AQS), 139, 139t
Amygdala, 91, 97, 97f, 98, 403 Attachment types, 136–41, 137t
Analyses of variance (ANOVA), 74 Ainsworth’s classification of, 136–8
Androgynous, 425–7 brain and, 141
Anger, 177–8 insecure–ambivalent (resistant) attachment (Type C), 137t, 138
Anger recognition, 183 insecure–avoidant attachment (Type A), 137t, 138
Anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), 97, 97f insecure–disorganized attachment (Type D), 137t, 138
Anterior insula (AI), 97, 97f in institutionalized children, 144t
Anxious-ambivalent attachment, 138 association between mother’s and children’s, 147t
Approach-avoidance behavior, 144 secure attachment (Type B), 137t, 138
Asian American children, 210, 222, 227 Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), 109, 115
Assimilation, 26 Attrition, 54
Assisted reproductive technique, 112 Attunement, 89
Associative play, 301, 301t Auditory (hearing) preparedness, 85, 87–8
Attachment, 127–61 Authoritarian parenting, 255, 257, 258t, 272, 274
to caregiver, 142–4 Authoritative parenting, 256, 258t, 274, 288, 304, 448
consequences of (See Attachment, consequences of) Autism, 110–11, 211, 229–31
cultural differences in, 140 Autism spectrum disorder (ASD), 110–11, 211
defined, 127 Autonomous adults, 146, 147t
development of, 132–5, 133t Average children, based on sociometric evaluation, 308
to fathers, 135, 142 Avoidance, 18, 117, 138, 144, 236, 322
to grandparents, 134 Axon, 94
hormones supporting attachment, 145
infant characteristics and, 150–1 B
infants’ attachment development, parents’ role in, 141–50 Babbling, 105, 173, 240
in the making phase, 133t Baby and Child Care (Spock), 8, 67
maternal bonding and, 131–2 Baltimore Study of Teenage Motherhood, 538
to mother, 134, 141 Becoming a Family project, 253
mothers in prison and, 149–50 Beeper (experience sampling) method, 62
to objects, 135 Behavior genetics, 100–2
in older children, 153 adoption studies and, 100–2, 106
parent’s input into (See Attachment, parents’ input into) shared/nonshared environments and, 102
representation, 146 twin studies and, 100–2
to siblings, 134 Benjamin, Spock, 67
stability of, 151–61 Biological foundations for social development, 85–123
theories of, 128–32 genetic, 99–103
types (See Attachment types) neurological, 90–8
 Subject Index   611

for social interaction, 86–90 Changes over time, research methods for, 52–6
temperament, 113–23 comparison of methods, 56t
Biological perspectives, 31–5 cross-sectional design, 52, 56f
ethological theory and, 30f, 31–2 cross-sequential design, 55–6, 56f
evolutionary developmental theory and, 32–3 longitudinal design, 52–6, 53f, 56f
human behavior genetics and, 34–5 Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA), 552
Biological preparedness, 86–90 Child abuse within the family, 543–53
auditory (hearing) preparedness, 85, 87–8 aggression and, 490
biological rhythms, 86 child neglect, 544–5
gustatory (taste) preparedness, 88–9 children’s rights and, 547–8
olfactory (smell) preparedness, 88–9 consequences of, 546–7
social rhythms, 86 death as a result, 543, 543f
tactile (touch) preparedness, 88–9 ecology of, 545–6
visual preparedness, 86–7 federal and state policies for, 551–3
Biological rhythms, 86 intergenerational cycle of abuse, 545
Biopsychological model, 486 interrogations and legal policy suggested for, 551–2
Biracial and bicultural children and youth, 223–4 peer rejection and, 323–4, 324f
Bloods (gang), 339 physical abuse and, 490, 497, 507, 543–4
Brain, 91–8 preventative programs for, 548–51
aggression and, 488 sexual abuse, 544
attachment types and, 141 statistics on, 543
cerebral cortex, 91, 91f Child care, 528–31
experience-dependent processes, 95 quality of, 530–1, 530t
experience-expectant processes, 95 social policy needed for, 531–4, 532f
growth and development, 91–2, 95 time in, 531
hemispheric specialization and, 93–4 types of, 529
mirror neurons and, 95–8 Child neglect (and abuse), 544–5
neurons and, 94–5 Child Protective Services (CPS), 553
social brain, 95–8 Child rearing patterns, 273–6, 275f
structure and gender typing, 402–4, 403f Child Soldiers Global Report, 493
synapses and, 94–5 Childhelp National Child Abuse Hotline, 550
Brain imaging techniques. See Psychophysiological techniques Childhood depression, 197–201
Brown, Brooks, 319 biological foundations of, 200
Bucharest Early Intervention Project, 49 cognitive correlates of, 201
Bullying, 502–8 cultural roles in, 198
behavior of bullies and, 503–5 diagnosing, 198
conditions leading to, 507–8 social causes of, 200–1
consequences of, 505, 507 suicide and, 199
cyberfighting and cyberbullying and, 505–6 treating, 201
Megan Pledge and, 506 Children’s Institute International (CII), 551
victimization, 504 Chorionic villi sampling, 112
Chromosomes
C behavior genetics and, 34–5, 99
California Attachment Procedure (CAP), 140 gender identity and, 401, 404
Canalization, 105 genetic anomalies and, 108–13, 281
Carnegie Foundation, 349 models of genetic influence and, 104
Carolina Abecedarian Project, 527 prosocial behavior and, 465
Case study, 51–2 X chromosomes, 108, 404
Catharsis, 508 Y chromosomes, 108, 404
Ceausescu, Nicolai, 49 Chronosystem, 30f, 29, 276
Cells to Society (C2S): Center on Social Disparities and Classical conditioning, 20
Health, 554 Clear-cut attachment phase, 133t
Center care, 529 Clinton, Bill, 552
Cerebral cortex, 91, 91f Cliques, 298, 319, 336, 480, 562
Cerebral hemispheres, 93, 403 Coding, 70, 103, 138, 169f, 321
Cerebrum, 91 Coercion model of aggression, 490–1
612  Subject Index

Cognitive behavior therapy, 201, 460 Coparenting

Cognitive development perspectives, 26–9 cooperative, 264, 289
cognitive developmental theory and, Piaget’s, 26, 27t defined, 264
social cognitive domain perspective and, 27–8 hostile, 264
sociocultural theory and, Vygotsky’s, 28 imbalanced, 264
Cognitive developmental theory of gender typing, 406 Corporal punishment, 275, 547
Cognitive developmental theory, Piaget’s Corpus callosum, 93
attachment and, 129–30 Correlation, 45–6, 74, 106, 151, 404, 465, 478
cognitive developmental perspectives and, 26, 27t Cortisol, 73, 145
Cognitive factors in gender typing, 405–8 Couple system, 249–53
multischematic gender typing, 429 children and, affect on, 249–50
Cognitive learning perspectives, 21–5 new baby and, impact of, 252–3
cognitive social-learning theory, 21–2 overcoming problems, 252
evaluating, 24 parents fight, 250–2
reciprocal determination and, 22–4, 23f Crips (gang), 339
self-efficacy and, 22–4 Critical period, 31, 130. See also Sensitive period
Cognitive modification strategies, 509 Cross-sectional design, 52, 56f
Cognitive social learning theory, 21–2, 408, 466 Cross-sequential design, 55–6, 56f
Cognitive theory of moral judgment, Kohlberg’s, 435–42, Crowds, 336
436t, 437f “Cuddle” hormone (Oxytocin), 145
levels and stages in, 435–7, 436t, 437f Cyberbullying, 505–6
limitations of, 438–9 Cyberfighting, 505–6
study of moral development revised and expanded
from, 439–41 D
Cognitive theory of moral judgment, Piaget’s, 433–5 Daniel Tiger’s Neighborhood, 365
evaluation of, 434–5 Darfur, genocide in, 238
stages of moral reasoning in, 433–4 Data analyses, 74–6
Collective efficacy, 24, 347 analyses of variance (ANOVA), 74
Collective self, 207 correlation, 74
Columbine massacre, 319 mediation, 75
Communication, 239–45. See also Language path analysis, 75, 75f
babbling, 240 Data collection methods, 61–74, 64f, 72t, 73f
cooing, 240 direct observations, 66–9
critical listening skills and, 243 eavesdropping techniques, 68
phonological processing and, 403 ethnography, 70–1
preverbal, 239–40 event sampling, 70
semantic development of, 241 experience sampling method (ESM) and ecological
speech adjustment and, 242–3 ­momentary assessment (EMA), 61, 64f, 79
telegraphic speech and, 241 focus groups, 65–6, 70
Comprehensive sex education, 540–2, 558 interviews, 62, 65, 70, 74
Conscience observer/interview bias, 68
defined, 451 puppet interviews, 62
in Kohlberg’s theory of moral development, 436t questionnaires, 62, 65
moral behavior and, development of, 451–2, 460, 493 reactivity issues, 68
self-regulation and, 451 self-reports, 61–4
socialization and, 255 specimen record, 70
superego, 16 structured diaries, 65
temperament, 118 structured observation, 69
Constructs, 44, 70, 75, 209, 472 surveys, 64, 70
Contact maintenance, 138 time sampling, 70
Controversial children, based on sociometric evaluation, 308 Debriefing, 77
Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), 547 Deception, 47, 77, 230, 456, 573
Conventional level of moral development, 435, 436t, 437f Delay of gratification, 117, 451
Cooing, 240 Dendrites, 94
Cooperative learning, 220 Dependent variable, 47, 50, 51
Cooperative play, 301, 301t Depression. See Childhood depression
 Subject Index   613

Desensitization, 21, 366, 375, 497 Emotional display rules, 170t, 185, 188, 204
Deviancy training, 492 Emotional expressiveness
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV), 500 individual differences in, 181–2
Diathesis–stress (or dual-risk) interaction model, 107 in infancy and early childhood, 170t
Differential susceptibility model, 107 Emotional regulation, 188–9, 192
Diffusion, identity, 217t, 218 Emotional scripts, 185–6
Direct aggression, 478, 478t Emotional socialization, 189–97, 191f
Direct observations model of, 191f
defined, 66 by parents, 191–4
naturalistic observation, 66–8 by peers and siblings, 194
structured observation, 69 by teachers, 195–6
Dismissing adults, 147, 147t Emotional understanding, 182–8
Divorce, 284–93 of cultural differences, 184–5
custody of children and, 289–93 of recognizing emotions in others, 182–5
effects of, 285–6 in understanding about emotions, 185–8
remarriage and, 290–3 Emotions, 165–203. See also Primary emotions; Secondary
single-parent household and, 288–9 emotions
Dizygotic twins, 101 defined, 166
DNA development of, 168–82
autism and, 111 importance of, 166
markers, 103 moral (See Moral emotions)
microarrays, 103 Empathic reasoning, 463
substance abuse predicted by, 109 Empathy
Domain specificity, 28 defined, 180
Dominance hierarchy, 335 perspective taking and, 469–70
Dreams from My Father (Obama), 223 Enron Corporation, 453
Drive reduction theory, 20, 129 Entertainment Software Association, 374
Duchenne smiles, 171, 173, 183 Epigenetics, 105
Duplay smiles, 172f, 173 Epistasis, 104
Equifinality, 12
E Ethnic identity
Early Head Start, 524 biracial and bicultural children and youth, 223–4
Early starters, 484, 498 defined, 220
Eavesdropping techniques, 68 development of, 220–3
Ecological theory, 29, 30f faces of, 220t
Ecological validity, 47, 48, 51, 69 factors that promote, 224–5
EEG (electroencephalography), 72, 72t, 73f types of, 224f
Effect size, 59, 285, 486 Ethnography, 70
Ego, 16, 18 Ethological theory, 30f, 31–2, 130–2
Egocentric, 26, 181, 232, 233t, 322 Event sampling, 70
Electra complex, 16 Event–related brain potentials (ERP), 229
Electronic media, 364–75. See also Internet Evocative gene–environment association, 106
aggression from violence in, 496–7 Evolutionary developmental theory, 32–3
children’s understanding of, 369–72, 370t, 372f Evolutionary theory, gender development and, 400–1
gender typing and, social influences on, 416 Exosystem, 29
modifying negative effects of, 372–3 Experience sampling method (ESM) and Ecological Momentary
playing video games, 374–5 Assessment (EMA), 61, 64f, 79
screen media, 364–9 Experience-dependent processes, 95
used by adults, 373–4 Experience-expectant processes, 95
Emotional competence, 193, 196–7, 202, 459 Experimental methods
Emotional development, perspectives on, 166–8 field experiments, 48–50
biological, 167 interventions, 48–9
functional, 168 lab-and-field experiments, 50–1
learning, 167 laboratory experiments, 46–8
Emotional development, problems in, 197–203. See also Childhood natural experiments, 49–50
depression Expressive characteristics, 392
614  Subject Index

Extended family, 30f, 265, 274, 276, 514, 528, 562, 563, 574 patterns, 331–2
Externalizing problems, 118, 155, 267, 291, 372, 492 pros and cons of, 332
romantic, 332–4
F Frontal cortex, 91
Face-to-face interactions, 89–90, 182 Frontal insula (FI), 97f, 98
Family, 248–93. See also American family, changing; Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI)
School–family links example of, 73f
extended, 30f, 265, 274, 276, 514, 531, 562, 563, 574 explained, 72, 72t
family system and, 249–72 to study attachment types, 141
large, 265, 544 to study brains of lactating mothers, 263
members, 64–5 to study children exposed to violent video games, 497
social class and culture and, 272–6 to study facial recognition, 87
teenage pregnancy and, problems caused by, 537 to study mirror neurons, 96
Family child care home, 529 to study theory of mind, 229
Family Lifestyles Project, 414 to study uncomfortable feeling of physical pain, 316
Family systems
coparenting system, 264–5 G
couple system, 249–53 Gandhi, Mahatma, 437
defined, 249 Gangbangers, 337, 338
family mealtimes across developmental periods, 272t Gangs, 336–9
parent–child system, 254–64 Gay and lesbian parents, 282–3, 428
sibling system, birth order and, 265–70 Gender constancy, 389, 408, 414t
stories, rituals and routines in, 270–2 Gender, defining, 388–9
Fast Track Project, 511 Gender differences, 389–92
Fatherhood and generativity, 19 in adolescence and adulthood, 392
Fathers in aggression, 481–3, 482f, 486f
absence of, gender typing and, 413, 415–16 in emotional development, 390
attachment to, 135, 142, 156–7 in global self-esteem, 214–15
biological preparation for fatherhood and, 142 in interests and activities in childhood, 390–2, 391f
divorced, 289 overlapping characteristics of, 389, 389f
in parent–child system, 261–4 in peer interaction, importance of, 303–4
teenage, problems for, 537–8 in prosocial behavior, 464
transition to fatherhood and, 253 Gender identity, 17t, 389, 398–400, 405–6, 414t, 427
Fear, 174–7 Gender roles
phases of, 174 androgyny and, 425
reactions to, changes in, 177 in countercultural families, 414–15
separation anxiety, 177 defined, 389
social referencing and, 176 in gender typing, 418, 420–2
stimuli causing, 177t peer interaction and, 418, 420–2
of strangers, 174, 175f, 175t summary of, 414t
Female brain, 402 Gender segregation, 303, 304, 420–1
Field experiments, 48–50, 566 Gender stability, 389, 406, 408, 414t
5-HTT (serotonin transporter) gene, 109 Gender stereotypes
Florida Child Care Quality Improvement Study, 534 in children’s literature, 417
Focus groups, 65–6, 70 cultural differences in, 414t
Foreclosure, identity, 217t, 218 defined, 389
Foster care, attachment and, 131, 133, 144, 149–50 in girls vs. boys, 392
Fragile X syndrome, 108 modeling parents’ characteristics and, 413
Fraternal twins, 101 prosocial behavior and, 464
Friendship, 326–32 stability and, 393
changes in, age and, 326–9, 327t Gender typing
earliest, 326–7 defined, 388
expectations in, changing, 328–9, 328t development of, 414t
goals in, 327–8 sex differences in, 395
interactions in, 329–31 stability of, 393
love and protection in, 330 summary of, 414t
 Subject Index   615

Gender typing, biological factors in, 398–405 for gene–environment feedback loops, 108
brain structure and, 402–4, 403f for transmission of traits, 104
evolutionary theory and gender development and, 400–1 Genetic markers, 112
genetics of gender and, 404 Genetic studies, 100–3
hormones and social behavior and, 401–2 biological, 100–2, 108
prenatal androgens, 402 molecular, 102–3
Gender typing, cognitive factors in, 405–8 Genetics
cognitive developmental theory of gender typing aggression and, 486–7, 500
and, 406–7 behavior (See Behavior genetics)
gender-schema theory and, 407–8 human behavior, 34–5, 100
Gender typing, social influences on, 408–25 molecular, 102–3, 515
books and television and, 417–18 Genie, 5
computers and, 419–20 Genocide, 238–9
father absence and, 413, 415–16 Genomic self, 208
gender segregation, 420–1 Genotype, 100, 105f, 107
nature and nurture, 425 Glial cells, 94, 263
parents’ behavior with infants and toddlers, 410–11 Goal-corrected partnership, 133, 133t
parents’ behavior with older children, 411–12 Good Behavior Game, 510
parents’ characteristics, modeling, 413 Goodness of fit, 119
parents’ influence on, 409–10 Grandparents, attachment to, 134
schools and, 422 Great Depression, children of, 11
siblings and, 416–17 Group interactions, 334–9
social cognitive theory of gender development and, 408–9 in cliques, 336
social structural theory of gender roles and, 409 in crowds, 336
teachers and, 422–3, 424t, 425 dominance hierarchies in, 335–6
Gender-role preferences, 389 in gangs, 336–9
Gender-schema theory, 407–8 peer group networks and, 334
Gene by environment (G × E) interaction models, 106–8, 107f Guilt
Gene expression, 104–5, 105f birth order and, 266
Gene interactions, 104 bonding theory and, 132
Gene makeup, 105–6 development of, 180, 186
Gene–environment feedback loops, 108 factors determining, 459
Geneline therapy, 113 in Freud’s and Erikson’s developmental stages, 17t
Generativity, 17t, 18, 19 frontal insula and, 98
Genes gender identity and, 399
aggressive behavior and, 499–500 internalizing problems and, 118, 149
defined, 99 as moral emotion, 456–60
modifier, 104 nonverbal signs of, 170t
potential determined by, 99 parent-rated, 458f
Genetic anomalies, 108–13 prosocial reasoning and, 461
ADHD, 109 as secondary or self-conscious emotion, 166, 178
autism, 110–11 Gustatory (taste) preparedness, 88–9
chorionic villi sampling and, 112
fragile X syndrome, 108 H
Turner syndrome, 108 Habituation, 71
Williams syndrome, 109 Hamburger, Christian, 400
Genetic foundations for social development, 99–103 Harter Self-Perception Profile for Children, 213t
genetic anomalies and, 108–13 Head Start, 524–5
models of, 103–8 Early Head Start, 524
studying, methods of, 100–3 evaluations of, 525
temperament, 113–23 functions of, 524
Genetic influence, models of, 103–8 funding for, 524
for gene by environment (G × E) interactions, 106–8, 107f REDI, 196–7
for gene expression, 104–5, 105f TANF, 525
for gene interactions, 104 Hedonistic reasoning, 436t, 463, 464
for gene makeup, 105–6 Hemispheric lateralization, 93
616  Subject Index

Heritability coefficients, 100 Insecure–avoidant attachment (Type A), 137t, 138

Heterozygous, 104 Insecure–disorganized attachment (Type D), 137t, 138
Historical events, 9–10, 35 Institutional Review Board (IRB), 76
Holocaust, 238–9 Institutionalized children, attachment types in, 144t
Holophrases, 241 Instrumental aggression, 477, 479t, 516
Homophily, 327 Instrumental characteristics, 392
Homozygous, 104 Intentions
Hormone replacement therapy, 400 cognitive modification strategies and, 509
Hormones early understanding of, 228
aggression and, 488 other people’s, understanding, 32, 97, 233, 328
attachment and, 145 in Piaget’s theory of moral ­development, 433
biological preparation for parenthood and, 142 Internal working models, 146
defined, 73 Internalized reasoning, 463, 464
social behavior and, 401–2 Internalizing problems, 118, 451
testosterone, 141, 402, 488 Internet, 364
Hostile aggression, 477, 479, 479t, 516 Interparietal sulcus (IPS), 97, 97f
Hostile attribution bias, 501, 509, 510 Interventions
Human behavior genetics, 34–5, 100 for boosting self-esteem, 212
Human Genome Project (HGP), 102–3 for childhood depression, 201
Human mirror neuron system, 96–7 defined, 48
for improving social perspective-taking ability, 229
I for “lost and found” children, 49
Id, 16 for peer relations problems, 308
Identical twins, 100–2 physical, 447
Identification with same-sex parent, 405 policy-based, 522t, 556
Identity for preventing youth violence, 513–14
defined, 217 TV-based, 418
ethnic, 220, 220t Interviews, 27, 62, 65, 70, 74, 113, 146, 221, 435, 439, 551
integration, 227 IRS, 454
outcomes, 217t
rejection and, 315t J
religious, 225–7 Janjaweed babies, 238
sexual orientation and, 226–7 Jealousy, 2, 170t, 178–80, 267, 333
Identity achievement, 217, 217t Joint legal custody, 289
Identity formation, 216–26. See also Ethnic identity Joint physical custody, 289
in adulthood, 218 Jorgensen, Christine, 400
identity outcomes, 217, 217t Joy, 171–3. See also Smiles
influencing factors in, 218
sexual orientation and, 226–7 K
Ifaluk, 8 Kamehameha Early Education Program (KEEP), 357
Immanent justice, 433 Kidney, Dan, 199
Implicit Association Test (IAT), 236, 566 King, Martin Luther, Jr., 438
Imprinting, 130 Klebold, Dylan, 318
In vitro fertilization (IVF), 265 Klinefelter syndrome, 112
Independent variable, 46, 51
Indirect aggression, 478, 478t, 503 L
Individual self, 207 Lab-and-field experiments, 50–1
Inferior frontal gyrus (IFG), 96, 97f Laboratory analogue experiment, 47, 48
Information-processing perspectives, 24–6, 25f Language, 239–43. See also Communication
aggression and, development of, 501–2 acquisition of, 97
in gender typing, 405 fluency, steps toward, 239–40
in reflective children, 312–13 grammar acquisition and, 241
social information-processing model and, 311 pragmatics, rules of, 242
social information-processing theory and, 25, 25f, 501 word acquisition and, 241
Informed consent, 77 Large families, 265, 544
Insecure–ambivalent (resistant) attachment (Type C), 137t, 138 Latchkey children, 360
 Subject Index   617

Late starters, 484, 487 of child custody, 289

Lateralization, 93, 403 of child rearing, 274
Latino children defined, 59
age groupings in schools and, 349 of identity formation, 218
aggressive behavior of, 479 of parents’ involvement in schools, 357
child rearing cultures and, 274 of physical punishment, 255
cooperative learning and, 351 of Pygmalion effects, 354
ethnic identities explored by, 222 of research on moral development, 450
parents’ involvement with school and, 357–8 of school integration, 359
peer roles and relationships of, 306–7 Methodological imperatives, future, 566–7
racial integration in schools and, 359–60 Mexican American children, 221, 223. See also Latino children
school-family links and, 356 Microsystem, 29, 30f
sexual orientation and identity of, 227 Mirror neuron, 96
socialization of, 66 Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood, 365
suicide rates among, 198 Modifier genes, 104
teacher–student relationships of, 355 Molecular genetics, 102–3, 515
Learned helplessness, 201 Monoamine oxidase A (MAOA) gene, 488, 500
Learning theory perspectives, 20–1 Monozygotic twins, 100
attachment, 129 Moral absolutism, 433
classical conditioning, 20 Moral behavior, 449–56
drive reduction theory, 20 consistency of, across situations and time, 452, 454, 456
evaluating, 21 lies told by children, 454–6, 455f
operant conditioning and, 20 self-regulation of, 451
Les Miserables (play), 194 Moral emotions, 456–60
Lies told by children, 454–6, 455f affecting moral behavior, 458
Life history theory, 33, 536 child characteristics and, 457
Life span perspective, 35–6 development of, 456–8
Limbic system, 91 parents’ behavior and, 457–8
Lincoln, Abraham, 437 sympathy and, 457
Logan, Jessica, 381 Moral judgment, 433–49
Longitudinal design, 52–6, 53f, 56f cultural role in, 449
Longitudinal studies linking childhood and adulthood behavior, 55 justice vs. interpersonal obligations in India and U.S.,
441–2
M Kohlberg’s cognitive theory of, 435–42, 436t, 437f
Macrosystem, 29, 30f leading to moral action, 450
Madoff, Bernie, 453 parents’ and teachers’ roles in, 446–8
Magic window thinking, 369 Piaget’s cognitive theory of, 433–5
Male brain, 429 sibling and peer influences on, 448–9
Male-to-female sex-reassignment surgery, 400 Turiel’s social domain theory and, 443–6
Maternal bond, 131–2 Moral realism, 433
Maternal Infant Bonding (Klaus and Kennell), 131 Moral reciprocity, 433
Maturation, 3, 35, 188, 465 Morality, 432–72
Mealtimes across developmental periods, family, 272t moral behavior and, 449–56
Media. See Electronic media moral emotions and, 456–60
Medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC), 92, 97 moral judgment, 433–49
Mediation, 195, 234, 570 prosocial and altruistic behavior and, 461–70
Megan Pledge, 506 whole moral child and, 460–1
Mentors Moratorium, identity, 217t, 218, 222
determinants of effectiveness, 215–16, 363 Mothers
formal mentoring programs, 216, 363 attachment and, 134, 140, 144, 147t, 156–7
natural mentors, 362 biological preparation for motherhood and, 142
self-esteem influenced by, 215–16 child custody and, 289
Mesosystem, 29, 30f child neglect and, 545
Meta-analysis divorced, 288
of aggression, 478, 486, 488, 497 as emotion socializers for children, 194
of attachment, 139, 142, 147, 151 gender identity of children and, 399, 411
618  Subject Index

Mothers (continued) Normative events, 35

of high-status children, 319 Norms
hormonal changes during pregnancy and, 263 cultural, 175t, 223, 235, 275
interactive behaviors of, 89 early understanding of, 228
maternal bonding and, 131–2 peer, 510
newborn’s recognition of, 2, 88 social, 184, 228, 280, 361, 443, 481
in parent–child system, 261–4 Nuclear family, 274
school–family links and, 356 Nurse–Family Partnership, 549
single, 288–9
socioeconomic status of, 272–3 O
teenage, problems for, 536–7, 542–3 Obama, Barack, 223, 454, 571
transition from welfare to work and, 525 Object permanence, 27, 129
transition to motherhood and, 253 Observer bias, 48
turn-taking and reciprocal interactions with children “Octomom,” 265
and, 270 Oedipus complex, 16
working, 277–9 Olfactory (smell) preparedness, 88–9, 123
MRI (magnetic resonance imaging), 72 Olfactory reception, 103
Multidomain issue, 445 Online self, 208
Multifinality, 12 Onlooker behavior, 301t
Multischematic gender-typing, 429 Open classroom, 351
Mutual antipathy, 317–18 Operant conditioning, 20, 129, 167, 353
Myelin, 94 Operationalization, 44
Myelination, 94 Others, development of knowledge about, 228–39
communication and, 239–45
N intentions and norms in, 228
National Academy of Sciences, 199 perspective taking and, 232, 233t
National Association of Child Care Resource and Referral prejudice and, 235–9
Agencies, 533 psychological trait labels and, 231–2
National Children’s Study, 58–9 social understanding and, 233–5
National Head Start Impact Study, 525 stereotypes and, 235–9
National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health, 541 theory of mind and, 228–31
National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth Oversampling, 58
(NLSCY), 58, 481 Oxytocin, 145
National Longitudinal Survey of Youth (NLSY), 58
National Middle Schools Association, 349 P
National Staffing Study, 533 Pan American smiles, 172
National Survey of Family Growth, 541 Parallel play, 301, 301t
Natural experiment, 49–50 Parent Management Training (PMT), 509
Naturalistic observation, 66 Parental insightfulness, 143
Nature–nurture issue, 3 Parent–child system, 254–64
Needs-oriented reasoning, 463 bidirectional to transactional approach to socialization
Negative gossip, 328 in, 261
Neighborhood influences on aggression, 492–3, 495, 495f fathers and, 261–4
Neural migration, 94 mothers and, 261–4
Neuroimaging studies. See Psychophysiological techniques parenting styles in, 255–61, 255f, 258t
Neurological basis of social development, 90–8. See also Brain socializing approaches in, 254–5
Neuron proliferation, 94 Parents. See also Fathers; Mothers
Neurons, 94 as abusers, peer rejection and, 323–4, 324f
New baby, impact of, 252–3, 266 after thirty, 280
NICHD Study of Early Child Care and Youth Development, 148, aggression and (See Parents, aggression and)
157, 480, 484, 529, 555 attachment to (See Attachment, parents’ input into)
Niche picking, 106 authoritarian, 255
Nonaggressive-rejected children, 317 authoritative, 256
Nonnormative events, 35 as coaches for peer acceptance, 321–2
Nonshared environments, 102 coparenting, 264–5
 Subject Index   619

emotional socialization by, 191–4 in school years, peer society in, 302–4, 302f
gay and lesbian, 282–3, 428 in toddlers, social exchanges between, 300
gender typing and (See Parents, gender typing and) Peer neglect, based on sociometric evaluation, 308, 340
involved in schools, 357–8 Peer rejection, based on sociometric evaluation, 315–19
moral emotions and behavior of, 457–8 consequences of, 315–16
moral judgment and, role in, 446–8 determinants of, 315, 315t
permissive, 256 mutual antipathy and, 317–18
as positive partners in peer acceptance, 320–1 pain involved in, 316
single, 284, 288–9 reputational bias and, 319
as social arrangers and monitors, 322–3 revenge and, 318–19
social understanding influenced by, 233–4 Peer status, assessment of, 308–19
styles of, in parent–child system, 255–61, 255f, 258t peer ratings, 312
transition to motherhood and, 253 sociometric techniques, 308–9, 342
uninvolved, 256 teacher ratings, 155f, 308
Parents, aggression and types, 308
abusive parents and, 490 Peer status, studying, 308–15
as agents for reduction in, 509–10 Peer tutoring, 352
influence on, 489–90 Peers, 297–343
as providers of opportunities for, 491 aggression and, 491–2
Parents, gender typing and definitions and distinctions in, 298
parents’ behavior with infants and toddlers, 410–11 emotional socialization by, 194
parents’ behavior with older children, 411–12 as friends, 326–32
parents’ characteristics, modeling, 413 group interactions and, 334–9
parents’ influence on, 409–10 moral judgment and, role in, 448–9
Parents Television Council, 368 social understanding influenced by, 233t
Participant observations, 70, 74 Peers as socializers, 304–7
Passive gene–environment association, 106 cultural differences in, 306–7
Path analysis, 75, 75f modeling behavior, 305
Pathways Project, 340 reinforcing and punishing behavior, 305–6
PeaceBuilders Program, 468 social comparison and, 306
Peanuts (cartoon strip), 135 Perceived popularity, 309
Peer acceptance, 308–15 Permissive parenting, 256, 258t
behaviors that affect, 309–10 Perry Preschool Program, 525
biological predispositions and, 310 Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act
blending in and, 314–15 of 1996 (PRWORA), 525
goals of children in social interactions and, 313 Perspective taking, 232, 233t, 469–70
parents as promoters of, 320–4, 324f Phallic stage, 16
peers as promoters of, 343 Phenotype, 100
physical appearance and, 313–14 Phoneme, 240
reflective and thoughtful response and, 312 Phonological processing, 403
researchers as promoters of, 324–6 Physical abuse, 490, 507, 543–4
social information-processing model and, 311 Physical aggression, 477, 478t. See also Aggression
social-cognitive skills and, 310–12 Pirated material, 454
Peer group networks, 334 Play smiles, 173
Peer groups, 16, 30, 183, 311, 314, 332–4, 348, 492 Policy, 519–58
cliques, 298, 319, 336 imperatives, future, 568
crowds, 298, 336–7 primary prevention policy, 521, 556
dominance hierarchies, 335 public, 520–1
gangs, 336–9 secondary prevention policy, 521, 556
Peer interaction, developmental patterns of, 298–303, 301t service oriented policy, 521
in adolescence, 304 social, 523–8
age and, importance of, 303 Popular children, 308
in early childhood, peer play in, 301–2, 301t Positive-emission tomography (PET), 72, 72t
gender and, importance of, 303 Postconventional level of moral development, 435,
in infancy, first encounters, 298–9 436t, 437f
620  Subject Index

Poverty, children in, 523–8 Protein-coding genes, 103

early intervention with, 527–8 Proximity and contact seeking, 138
economic hardship and social disadvantage and, 523 Proximity-seeking vs. avoidance, 138
effects of, 523–4 Psychoanalytic theory, 128
programs to reverse effects of, 524–8 (See also Head Start) Psychodynamic perspectives, 15–19
Pragmatics evaluation of, 18–19
defined, 242 psychodynamic theory and, Freud’s, 16, 17t
rules of, 242 psychosocial theory and, Erikson’s, 16–18, 17t, 217
Preattachment phase, 133t Psychodynamic theory, Freud’s, 16, 17t
Preconventional level of moral development, 435, 436t, 437f Psychological domain, 444
Prejudice, 235–9 Psychological trait labels, 231–2
defined, 212, 236 Psychophysiological techniques, 71–4, 72t, 73f. See also Functional
determinants of, 237 magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI)
expressing, 236 EEG (electroencephalography), 72, 72t, 73f
genocide and, 238–9 MRI (magnetic resonance imaging), 72, 72t
promoting, 237 PET (positive-emission tomography), 72, 72t
reducing, 238–9 TMS (transcranial magnetic stimulation), 72t
Premoral stage, 433 Psychosocial theory, Erikson’s, 16–18, 17t, 217
Prenatal androgens, 402 Public policy
Prenatal conditions, aggression and, 488–9 defined, 519
Preoccupied adults, 147, 147t determining, 520
Preschool Promoting Alternative Thinking Strategies (PATHS), 196 examples of, 522
Pretend play, 300 types of, 521
Pride, 166, 178 Punishment. See Corporal punishment
cultural or ethnic, 210, 224, 513 Puppet interview method, 62
Primary emotions, 169–78 Pygmalion effect, 354
anger, 177–8
defined, 169 Q
disgust, 170 Qualitative study, 74
distress, 170, 174–5 Quantitative study, 74
fear, 174–7 Quasi-experiment, 50
interest, 170 Questionnaires, 2, 62, 65, 534, 566
joy, 171–3
sadness, 178 R
surprise, 170 Random sampling, 61, 525, 534
Primary prevention policies, 521 Reaction range, 105
Programmed neuronal death, 94 Reactive aggression, 477
Project PASS (Promoting Academic Success for Students), 382 Reactivity, 68, 117, 189, 252, 259–60
Promise rings, 541 Real smiles, 173
Propensity score matching, 46 Reciprocal determination, 22–4, 23f
Prospective measurement, 53 Reflex smiles, 171
Prosocial behavior, 461–4, 463t Rejected children, based on sociometric evaluation, 308
age changes in, 461–2, 463t Relational aggression, 477, 478t
biological influences on, 464–6 Relational self, 207
cultural influences on, 468–9 Religious identity, 225–7
early appearance in infancy, 233, 461–2, 463t defined, 225
empathy and perspective taking and, 469–70 determinants, 225
environmental influences on, 466–8 ethnic differences, 225
in girls vs. boys, 464 gender differences, 225
prosocial reasoning and, 462–4 stability, 225
styles of, stability in, 462 Remarriage, 290–3
Prosocial reasoning, 462–4 Representative sample, 57
empathic reasoning, 463 Reproductive technologies, new, 281
hedonistic reasoning, 463 Reputational bias, 319
internalized reasoning, 463 Research Based Developmentally Informed (REDI) Head
needs-oriented reasoning, 463 Start, 196–7
 Subject Index   621

Research ethics, 76–81 impact perceptions, 369

debriefing, 77 minority groups, stereotypes of, 368–9
deception, 47, 77 positive effects of, 364–9
informed consent, 76t, 77 potential negative effects of, 365–6
Research methods, 43–81 television and digital media, 364, 365f
case studies, 51–2 Scripts, 185–6, 228
for changes over time, 52–6 Secondary emotions, 178–81
correlational methods, 45–6 defined, 166
experimental methods, 48–50 empathy, 180–1
hypotheses and, formulating, 44 guilt, 180
Resistance, 138 jealousy, 179–80
Resolving Conflict Creatively Program, 510 pride, 179
Retrospective assessment, 53, 67 shame, 179
Rights of children, 547 Secondary prevention policies, 521
Rituals, 270–2 Secure attachment (Type B)
Robbers Cave Experiment, 238 Attachment Q-Set (AQS), 139, 139t
Rodent genome, 103 to caregiver, 142–4
Romantic relationships, 332–4 in children in child care, 148–50
changes in, over time, 334 defined, 137t, 138
teenage, 333–4 developing, 141–4
Romero, Joey, 399 family income and, 152
Routines, 270–2 to mother, 142
Rudimentary empathic responding, 181 social development and, 154–6, 155f
Rwanda, genocide in, 238 Secure base, 130
Security blanket, 135
S Self, 206–45
Sadness, 178 Self, sense of, 207–11
Sampling strategies, 58 in autistic children, 211
oversampling, 58 self-concept and, 208–10
random sampling, 61 self-representations and, 210–11
representative sample, 57 Self-appraisal, 213–14
Sanford Curriculum Project, 428 Self-concept, 208–10
School integration, 359–60 Self-conscious emotions, 166
School–family links, 355–9 Self-disclosure, 328
after-school programs, 360–1, 361f Self-efficacy, 22–4
parental involvement in schools, 357–8 Self-esteem, global, 212
school as buffer for children, 358–9 boosting through praise, 216
school culture vs. home culture and, 355–6 defined, 212
Schools, 346–63, 384–6 family influences on, 215
age groupings in, 348–9 gender variations in, 214–15
aggression intervention in, 510 mentor influences on, 215–16
coeducational vs. same-gender schools, 349–50 peer influences on, 215–16
cooperative learning in, 351 Self-fulfilling prophecy, 354
gender typing and, influences on, 422 Self-perceptions, 212–16. See also Self-esteem, global
homeschooled children, 352–3 domain-specific perceptions and, 212
open classrooms in, benefits of, 351 Harter Self-Perception Profile for Children and, 213t
peer tutors in, 352 self-appraisal and, learning, 213–14
size of, 347–8 Self-regulation of behavior, 451
small class size in, advantages of, 350–1 Self-reports, 61–4
as social communities, 346–7 Self-representations, 210–11
teachers’ role in (See Teachers) Semantics, 241
Schulz, Charles, 135 Sensitive period, 5, 32, 132, 570. See also Critical period
Screen media Separation anxiety, 177
aggression and violence, 366 Separation distress, 134
children’s exposure to violence on, 366 Separation protest, 134
gender and sexual content, 366–8 Serotonin, 487–8
622  Subject Index

Service-oriented policy, 521 cultural differences and, 8–9

Sex education, 540–2, 540t developmental psychologists and, 13–14
abstinence education, 540, 540t history of, 2–3
comprehensive sex education, 542 mothers’ influence on, 10–12
promise rings, 541 multifinality vs. equifinality in, 12
virginity pledges, 541 social behaviors and, judging and labeling, 13
Sexting, 381 units for studying, 4
Sexual abuse, 544 variations in, historical, 9–10
Sexual orientation, identity formation and, 226–7 Social development, integrating, 560–74
Sexuality methodological imperatives for, future, 566–7
defining, 388 organization and explanation of social child and,
gender typing and, differences in, 395 562–3
Shame, 179 policy imperatives for, future, 568
Shared environments, 102 progress and pathways of, 564–6
Shy children, 120 social agents and contexts for, 563–4
Siblings theoretical imperatives for, future, 567–8
attachment to, 134 views of social child and, 561–2
emotional socialization by, 194 Social domain theory, Turiel’s, 443–6
gender typing and, 416–17 judgments about complex issues and, 445–6
moral judgment and, role in, 448–9 psychological domain and, 444
social understanding influences by, 234 social conventional domain and, 443
Smartphones and social media, 375–84 Social dyad, 4
cyberbullying, 379 Social information-processing
internet identity, 377 model, 311
lurking, 379 theory, 25, 25f
mental health affected by, 380 Social interaction, preparedness for, 86–90
overuse, 377–8 adaptive behaviors and, 90
sex, effects of, 378–9 auditory preparation and, 85, 87–8
sexting, 381 biological rhythms and, 86
social relationships affected by, 376–7 face-to-face interactions and, 89–90
Smell, sense of, 88–9 smell and, 88–9
Smiles social rhythms and, 86
Duchenne, 171, 173, 183 taste and, 88–9
Duplay, 172f, 173 touch and, 88–9
Pan American, 172 visual preparation and, 86–7, 87f
play, 173 Social policy
reflex, 171 for child abuse within the family, 543–53
simple smile, 172f for child care, 531
social, 171 for children in poverty, 523–8
Social aggression, 478 defined, 519
Social child for teenage pregnancy, 534–43
organization and explanation of, 562–3 Social referencing, 176, 561
views of, 561–2 Social rhythms, 86
Social class and culture, 272–6, 275f Social smiles, 171
child rearing patterns and, 273–6 Social structural theory of gender roles, 409
family values and, 272–3 Social understanding, 233–5
Social cognitive domain perspective, 27–8 child abilities, 233
Social comparison, 18, 306 cultural influences on, 235
Social conventional domain, 443 experiences outside the family and, 234
Social development. See also Theoretical perspectives on social parental influences on, 233–4
development peer influences on, 234
biological vs. environmental influences on, 3–4 sibling influences on, 234
children’s behavior in different situations and, 7 Socialization, 248, 254, 261
children’s contribution to, 4 Sociocultural theory, Vygotsky’s, 28
continuity and discontinuity in, 5–7, 6f Socioemotional selectivity theory, 190
cross-domain influences on, 10 Sociometric techniques, 308
 Subject Index   623

Soldiers, children as, 493–5 Temperament, 113–23

Sole custody, 289 aggression and, 487
Specimen record, 70 changes in, from childhood to adulthood, 120
Spock, Benjamin, 8 consequences and correlates of, 117–23
Stage–environment fit, 348 cultural differences in, 115
Steps to Respect program, 510 defined, 113, 116t
Stereotype consciousness, 235 genetic factors in, 115–16
Stereotypes, 235–9, 395–7 measuring, scale for, 116, 122
cultural differences in, 397–8 neurological correlates of, 117
gender, 389 trait, 119
Stereotyping, 235–7 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), 521
Stories, 270–2 Temporoparietal junction (TPJ), 97, 97f
Strange Situation Procedure (SSP), 136 Testosterone, 141, 402, 488
Stranger distress, 174, 175f, 175t Theoretical imperatives, future, 567–8
Stress of working mothers, children’s adjustment to, 279 Theoretical perspectives on social development, 14–38
Structured diaries, 65 attachment theory, 128-31
Structured observation, 69 biological perspectives, 31–5
Substance abuse, genetic risks of, 109 cognitive learning perspectives, 21–5
Suicide, 199 ecological theory, 15t, 29
Suleman, Nadya, 265 ethological approach, 15t, 31–2
Superego, 16 evolutionary perspective, 15t, 32–3
Superior temporal sulcus (STS), 97, 97f, 98 functions of theories and, 14–15
Surveys, 43, 58–9, 64, 70, 121, 267, 271, 372–4, 377, 381, 391, 395, information-processing perspectives, 24–6, 25f
502, 506, 539 learning theory perspectives, 15t, 20–1
Sympathy, 392, 457, 468, 562 life history theory, 33
Synapses, 94 life span perspective, 35–6
Synaptic pruning, 94 psychodynamic perspectives, 15–19
Synaptogenesis, 94 questions related to, 15t
Systems, 29 systems-theory perspectives, 29–31
Systems-theory perspectives, 29–31 variety of perspectives and, 36
Bronfenbrenner’s ecological theory and, 29, 30f Theory of mind, 228–31, 234
Theory-of-mind skills, 97
T Time sampling, 70
t test, 74 TMS (transcranial magnetic stimulation), 72t
Tactile (touch) preparedness, 88–9 Touch, sense of, 88–9
Taste, sense of, 88–9 Trait labels, psychological, 231–2
Tasting Game, 73 Traits, genetic transmission of, 104
Tax gap from underreported income, 454 Transactional process, 4, 252, 261
Teachers, 353–5 Transgender children, 399
classroom discipline and management and, 353–4 Transition to parenthood, 253
emotional socialization by, 195–6 Tribal Youth Program, 513
expectations of children’s success and, 354–5 Turner syndrome, 108, 112
moral judgment and, role in, 446–8 TV. See Electronic media
and peers, 65 Twin studies, 100–2
teacher–student relationships and, 355 Twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome, 99
Teenage pregnancy, 534–43
abstinence education for reducing, 540–1, 540t U
children of teenage mothers and, problems Understanding in infancy and early childhood, 170t
for, 537 Uninvolved parenting, 256, 258t
factors leading to, 535–6
family members and, problems for, 537 V
media support used to reduce, 539–40 Vasopressin, 145
positive outcomes of, 539 Verbal aggression, 477, 478t
teenage fathers and, problems for, 537–8 Victimization, 503–5. See also Bullying
teenage mothers and, problems for, 536–7, 542–3 Video games. See Electronic media
Telegraphic speech, 241 Virginity pledges, 541
624  Subject Index

Visual preparedness for social interaction, 86–7 X

Visual processing, 403 Xytex Corporation, 112

W Y
Williams syndrome, 109, 465 YouTube, 497
Working models
cross-time relations between, 155, 155f Z
internal, 146 Zone of proximal development, 28
purpose of, 321, 502 Zygotes, 101
 WILEY END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT
Go to www.wiley.com/go/eula to access Wiley’s ebook EULA.