Exam 2 Lecture Slides CPSY 4331

What is the empirical evidence regarding the role of parents?

Cross-fostering studies with animals and with humans (adoption studies): adoption by a high nurturant mother was linked to higher social functioning.

Intervention with parents: random assignment to intervention or control group

Animal Studies: variations in parenting behaviors are related to functioning of offspring.

Interventions with parents—> Do they produce changes in child outcomes?

Ex 1: Parents of 4 year olds randomly assigned to parenting groups. Had 16 weekly meetings and observational and teacher report of child behaviors.

Results: children had fewer behavior problems. Decrease in aggression and increase in social competence, maintained at the 10 year follow up.

Ex 2: divorced mothers randomly assigned to parenting group; parent and child behavior assessed before and after program. Chidlren in grades 1-3 and weekly parent training for about 16 weeks.

Results: mothers less coercive and more postive parent-child observations. Mothers’ behavior change predicted child behavior change. Decrease behavior problems, increase in school adjustment (teacher, maternal and self reports).

a

a

Authoritative parenting is

warm, responsive and restrictive/demanding

authoritarian parening is

rejecting and unresponsive and restricting and demanding

Permissive parenting is

premissive and understanding and warm and responsive

Uninvolved parenting is

rejecting unresponsive and permissive and undemanding

optimal parenting is associated with:

warmth and responsiveness

being firm and in control- setting appropriate demands and expectations

Reciprocal exchange- including child in decision making

Associated outcomes in children with authoritative parenting

socially competent, self-controlled, cooperative

Cope well with stress

Associated outcomes in children who have permissive parenting

Impulsive noncompliant

authoritarian parenting (depeding on cultural context) has outcomes in children

fearful, withdrawn or rebellious

Uninvolved parenting has associated outcomes in children like

low self-esteem; impulsive, aggressive

Issues with research on parenting

how are we measuring parenting?

Is parenting style stable? Consistent?

What if styles of parents differ?

What about impact of child’s behavior?

Is it capturing effective parenting in different cultures?

Individualistic cultures (US, Canada, Europe)

increased reciprocal exchange

Value autonomy and emphasize personal and emotional expression

collectivist cultures (China, india, mexico)

increase in demandingness

Value interdependence and emphasize social harmony, cooperation, and empathy.

traditional vs. modern cultures cultural varations

less responsiveness

Harsher punishment

Higher rates of spanking

Effects of spanking

Meta-analysis by gershoff linked with higher anxiety and aggression in children in US

Effects of spanking vary depending on normativeness of physical punishment: in countries where spanking is normative- no link with increase aggression or anxiety.

But, countries in which physical punishment is normative tend to have higher rates of societal violence.

Characteristics of sibling relationships

not optional (unlike relationships with peers or even best friends): children can choose friends but not siblings.

More equal in status than hierarchical parent-child relationships.

• often provide children with their first peer like experiences.

More conflict than many relationships: lack of conflict is abnormal! Associated with poor peer relationships.

Ways siblings contribute to socialization

1. Learn new social skills: allow then to practice without possible dissolution of the relationship (unlike peers) or large power differential (unlike parents).

2. learn conflict resolution skills: seeing other side of the argument, negotiating, compromising

3. Siblings as “cultural broker”: introduce them to social understandings, rules and practices of family and community

Quality of sibling relationships depend on what factors

child’s relationship with parents

parents’ relationship with each other (more harmonious couples—> less sibling conflict)

sibling’s relationship with parents: older sibling ofen models disciplinary strategy of parents.

Parental role in the resolution of sibling conflict: 2 key elements= conflict settlement strategies and differential treatment

Conflict settlement strategies

Hands off: let children settle it on own

Peacemaker: distract children, persuade children to abandon argument

Mediator: help children to reason through the isses and resolve it on their own.

Judge: impose a resolution

Findings of parent conflict settlement strategies

Parents often misconstrue or miss much of the conflict

Peacemaker or mediation seems to work best

what leads to more conflict= inconsistency in strategies and judge-like behavior

Differential treatment

parents tend to intervene and favor younger/weaker child. Related to increases in sibling conflict

Perception of favoritism often exists, despite efforts at equal treatment

• perceived inequality—> more sibling conflict

Is possible to treat all siblings the same? Most children do not percive differential treatment due to age as unfair

What variations should we pay attention to?

Those that impede or disrupt optimal parenting

Marital conflict and child outcomes: The spillover hypthesis (Erel and Burman)

Conflict spills over in 2 possible ways:

• marital conflict—> diminished parenting—> child behavior problems

• Marital conflict—> parent-child conflict—> child behavior problems

link b/w marital conflict and children’s behavior

marital distress associated with: higher levels of internalizing and externalizing problems. Poorer relationships with peers and siblings

Moderated by individual differences in emotion regulation

Study that shows marital distress and children’s behavior

compared couples with 4-5 yrs old. Couples completed measures of marital satisfaction. Observed parent-child interaction and child’s peer interactions

Results: “distressed” parents= were more cold, unresponsive, angry, stressed, ineffective with their children. And had children who were: less compliant, more angry, more negative with peers, more stressed

Compared elementary school-aged children of aprents with high levels of marital conflict. Measured emotion regulation while listening to simulated argument between a couple. Questionnaire data gathered on children’s interalizing and externalizing behaviors

Results: marital conflict associated with higher levels of internalizing and externalizing. But children with better emtoin regulation were less afftected by couple conflict

Do children benefit from dissolving high-conflict marriages?

Separation and divorce are linked to increasing behavior problems, regardless of pre-divorce conflict.

In marriages that do not break up, high conflict linked to even greater increase in children’s problems than if parents separated/divorced

consequences of single parenting

to parents:

• economic: about 30% of single parents live below poverty threshold. Especially true for never married mothers.

• Social: social isolation, loneliness, lack of daily social support.

• Parenting: often overburdened, diminished parenting

To children:

• less likely to have secure attachment

• higher risk for behavior problems and delinquency. Both internalizing and externalizing.

• Less gender role stereotypical.

• More resposniblity and helpfulness as adolescents.

effects of single parent structure confounded with___ and depend on ____

poverty and social support

risks of poverty

single headed households

irregular hours

food and healthcare insecurity

lower quality housing and neighborhood.

pullution, poison, lead, and noise exposure

crowding

parental stress

less access to early learning materials

less access to childcare

lower quailty schools

effects of poverty on development

physcial deficts: low birth weight, higher infant mortality

cognitve deficts: links to brain development, less access to early education, lower academic achievement, higher dropout rate

Social deficits: more behavior porblems, less effecitve parenting, higher risk of abuse and neglect

programs aimed at reducing poverty

effective programs: begin early in life and continue over a long period of time and focus on improving both parent-child relationships and families’ natural support systems

How important are peers?

children spend more and more itme with peers.

By age 5- more time with age mates

Large increase in middle childhood.

What if children had little or no contact with peers?

Harlow et al.’s monkey studies, revisited

Raised some monkeys with mothers only and denied opportunity to interact with peers.

• Abnormal patterns of social behavior

• Fearful; avoided age-mates

• Highly aggressive if approached

BUT when raised with peers and NOT mothers

• cling to one another

• highly agitated by minor stresses

• unusually aggressive toward outsiders

• Normal-ish social behavior within own peer group only

How important are peers from human parallel concentration camp oprhan study

raised themselves from about age 1-3

when rehabilitated

• highly destructive, hostile toward staff

• upset if seperated from each other

• remarkable prosocial behavior within group

• After one year, established more postive relationships with others

Social perspective taking

peers help with this. ability to infer others’ thoughts, intentions, motives, and attitudes.

social persective taking (hollos, 1975)

compared farm children in norway who were bused in to school 3x a week (very limited peer interaction), compared to urban children; 7-9 year olds.

Measured social perspective-taking with a Piagetian task (re-counting story to another child, after some vital information was omitted).

• given 7-picutre cartoon sequence telling an obvious story

• 3 pictures removed; remaining 4 tell a different story.

• How will kids re-tell story to new listener?

• Urban kids did better at this.

• peers are important in development of social perspective taking.

modeling behavior

children learn a great deal about how to behave simply by observing the actions of their peers.

reinforcing and punishing behavior

children learn what is and is not acceptable in the peer group and conflict resolution

Social comparison

peer group serves as basis for comparison and realistic self appraisal

peer interactions in infancy (0-12 months)

infants touch and look at eachother; responsive to each other’s behaviors

Peer socialbility during preschool

Parten- observed 2-4 ½ year olds in free play at a nursery school

identified 4 categories of play: non-scoail, parallel, assocaitive, cooperative

non-social play

play alone, may watch others

parallel play

play side by side but interact little

associative play

share toys and swap materials, but no shared goal

Cooperative play

collaborate toward shared goal

What are the findings associated with peer sociability during preschool when it comes to play?

solitary and parallel play tend to decrease with age

associative and cooperative play increase with age

complexity of play with peers predicts later social competence (solitary play is common at all ages)

Importance of pretend play (appears age 2 and peaks at 6): allows kids experience roles and feelings of others in a playful context, teaches children to function as part of a social group

Peer sociability during school-age: self-segregation by gender

girls play styles: quiet game, small groups, near building, close adults, unstructured, more intimate exchange than boys

boy play styles: high energy, run, take 10x more space, more competive and aggressive

Changes in peer relations by middle childhood and adolescence

during middle childhood and adolescnece, perceptions of social support shifts to peers.

Support from friends decrease cortisol levels in stressful situations

Size of peer group becomes much larger

less closely supervised by parents and other adults

encounter peers in wider range of settings

Concerns about acceptance from peers increases during middle-childhood.

What can peers infulence in middle childhood and adolescnece

syles of interpersonal behavior, selection of friends, fashion and entertainment

use of alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs

Peers are most influential in absence of parental support

peer prescence vs peer pressure

the mere prescence of peers influences adolsecnet decison making

How to study peer status: sociometric status. classifactions

peer ratings: on a scale from 1-5, please rate how much you like to play with___

peer nominations: postive= circle the names of 3 kids who you like the most, negative= circle the names of 3 kids who you like the least

popular kids

liked by many and dislike by few (accpeted and well liked)

friendliness, porsocial behavior

average kids

have some friends but are not as well liked as popular kids

neglected kids

are often socially isolated and, although they are not necessarily disliked, have few friends

shy/withdrawn or socially uninterested

controversial kids

liked by many peers but also disliked by many

rejected kids

disliked by many peers and liked by very few

aggressive or shy/withdrawn

why is rejection so stable?

less opportunities to affiliate with positive peers

more contact with other rejected children

declining self-esteem

others’ stable attributions for negative behavior

Attributions for rejected children’s negative behavior

liked peer= postive behavior= stable attribution —> will continue

liked peer= negative behavior= unstable attribution—> won’t continue

disliked peer= postive behavior= unstable attribution—> won’t continue

disliked peer= negative behavior= stable attribution—> will continue

Being exclueded causes

pain ted talk

concurrent prob: loniness, dression, anxiety. deliquency, academic difficulties

can lead to future problems: mental health prob, criminality, higher drop out rates

what’s associated with peer acceptance?

• temperament:

  • high activity level, poor effortful control—> aggressive-rejected

  • high inhbition—> shy/withdrawn-rejected

  • Goodness of fit

    • Martial conflict or ineffictve parenting makes this worse

• Cognitvie abilites:

  • Academic performance and IQ are lower among rejected kids

    • social cognition: perspective-taking and understand others mental states, emotions, and motives

What’s associated with peer acceptance? Understanding social faux pas

6 and 9 year olds, studied 3x over 2 years; sociometric measure of peer accpetance

watched story involving faux pas then asnwered comprehension questions

Results: increase faux pas understanding predicted increase peer acceptance and decrease pas understanding predicted increase peer rejection (and understanding increased with age)

what’s associated with peer acceptance? Social skills

accepted children are good at initiating social interactions; more cooperative; use more prosocial conflict resolution strategies (taking turns, compromising, negotiating)

children’s behavior predicts thier peer classification in unfamilar peer group.

• children who get accpeted observe what is going on, make positive comments, join group

• chidlren who get rejected tend to be pushy or self-serving

what’s associated with peer acceptance? Physical attractiveness

raters of attractiveness blind to peer status, rate popular/accepted kids as more attractive.

• attractive bias: we expect attractive children to have more positive qualities

Attractive children are generally more popular from elementary school onward.

• by age 5, unattractive peers are more aggressive toward peers

How can we promote peer acceptance? Role of parents

Recall Bowlby’s theory of internal working models of expectations in relationships

securely attached children generally have more positive peer relationships= expect relationships to be satisfying

Authoritative parenting: warmth and responsiveness, modeling good social skills, emotion coaching, indirectly monitoring peer relationships.

promote social interactions: choice of neighborhood, playdates, organized activities

• influenced by SES, attitudes toward the benefits of unstructured play

how can we promote peer acceptance? Peers

• unpopular kids benfit from interacting with younger children

• Interaction with children of all genders is helpful.

  • broader range of interaction styles

how can we promote peer acceptance? Interventions

teach communication skills, postive ways to approach and interact with peers

can improve child sense of social self-efficacy

most effective if done early in childhood

What features of daycare are relevant to postive development?

• process measures (how care is provided)

  • Attentive/sensitive caregivers

  • cognitive stimulation, enrichment

• Structural measures (what care is provided)

  • Child:caregiver ratio

  • adequate training

    • safe, healthy environment

How is the US with quaility of daycare

BAD, 60% of childcare characterized by INsensitive and NON responsive caregiving

What are some links between child care and social development? Research example NICHD Study of early child care and youth development

• birth through 4 ½ years

• follow-up through age 15

• Purpose: exaime how variations in child rearing contexts, at home, in child care, and in school are related to children’s”

  • social and emotional development, cognitve and language development, and health

• Participants: 1,364 eleigible births 1991, adequate rep of SES/racial/cultural groups

• data collection: major assessments were done at 1, 6, 15, 24, 36, and 54 months, intervening phone contacts were made every 3 and 4 months

• High-quality care associated with better language and learning skills.

  • Compared to children in low-quaility or no daycare

  • similar findings at follow-up at age 9 and 15

• More hours in daycare assocaited with more behavior problems

  • compared to children in less than 20 hours a week or no daycare

  • similar findings at follow up at age 9 and 15 years

• Home and parenting influences has greater impact on children than daycare: maternal sensitivty and cognitive stimulation

does daycare interfere with secure attachment?

no, but if mother/caregiver is low in sensitivy then poor quality and more hours in daycare increases the risk of insecure attachment

• esp: in daycare from early infancy

is daycare linked to children’s competence with peers?

• in early childhood:

  • more self-confident, outgoing, assertive, verbally expressive

  • initiate more interaction with play with unfamiliar peers

  • less timid, distressed, and fearful in new situations

• Elementary school:

  • have more friends, extracurricular activites, and accpeted

  • less gender-sterotypes belifs, higher educational goals

IF ATTENDED HIGH QUALITY DAYCARE

BUT

• childern who spent more hours in care were rated less socially competent and higher on externalizing behaviors at age 4.5

Is there a link b/w daycare and stress for kids

cortisol levels rise during the day for children in daycare

esp for kids in low quaility care

more hours in care were rated as less competent and higher on externalizing

Why do we send kids to school?

• teach academic skills

• Socialization: how to fit into society, help develop skills to interact with peers and others (social-emotional learning)

  • promotes societal values: teaching rules, norms, and values kids need to get along in society

social emotional learning

SEL programs in school associated with less behavior prob

how do schools promote socialization?

cross cultural comparisions- the three cultures thing

What might make us think that media might have an effect on child development?

• media is a pervasive aspect of modern life

  • tv, movies, internet, phones, etc.

    • kids ages 2-17 spend about 6 hours a day exposed to mass media

who is exposed to more media?

lower income and less educated parents report that thier children have higher screen time because of their high stress

children of divorced and single parent have MORE screen time than kids in two-parent households

background television': about 2/3 of families have a tv on during dinner at least

about 40% of kids live in an in TV on always even if not in the room

What might kids be seeing when the TV is constantly on?

• violence: verbal and relational aggression, by age 10 see about more than 100,000 acts of violence on TV

• racial stereotypes

• gender stereotypes

• sexaul images/messasges

• advertisements

• prosocial and educating

Catharsis hypothesis

people reduce aggressive energy by thinking about or fantasizing about aggression

lets off steam

social learning theory

media violence might enhance aggressive or antisocial tendencies (feelings, behaviors) through: learning negative behaviors through modeling and reducing inhibitions about aggression (if they see approval in media like the good guy always using force to beat the bad guy)

What are media links with aggression?

• correlational evidence

  • postive relationship between TV violence and aggression documented across age groups (preschool, grade-school, hs, and adults) in western countries.

  • problem with this procedure is that they can’t infer causality, other factors may act for link

• possible solution is cross-lag study= allows us to see if they prefer violent tv in 2nd grade is correlated with later aggression, while controling for agression in grade 2

what are some conclusions we can draw from media’s affects on social development?

findings from correlational lab and field studies consistently find temporal links between watching violence and behaving aggressively

meta-analytic data find effect size about.3 (impressive)

social learning

What are the links with attention problems when it comes to media’s affects on social development?

Christakis et al., 2004 studied ~1300 kids at age 2, 3, and 7

measured watching tv at age 2, 3, and attention prob at age 7 (parent report)

Results: each hour of tv watched daily by age 3 linked to 10% increase risk for attention problems at age 7

• average tv watched daily at age 3= 3.6

Correlational; controlled for SES but were there attention problems there to begin with? Experimented with mice to see if there was a short term causal link. Other studies have replicated temporal link into adolescence

Content matters- more entertainment content (educational) associated with more attention problems

Links with gender stereotyped behvior when it comes to the media’s affects on social development

more commerical tv viewing associated with more gender steryotypes

• women as subservient, materialistic, sexually provactive

• men as powerful and dominant

• ex: watching more dinsey content is assocatied with more gender stereotyped toy preferences

Links with body image concerns: Becker et al., studied adolsencent girls’ self-image and eating habits BEFORE AND AFTER introduction to commerical TV on Fiji island

results: after 3 years od TV: 75% reported being too fat and being on diet and there was the appearance of purging behavior

Other negative effects of TV/screen media when it comes to its effects on social development

• protrayal of minorities

  • Frequently shown in negative sterotypes or underrepresented

  • Linked with stereotyped, biased views

  • “that’s not me I see”

Imapct of parent-child releationships with media’s influence on social development

• technoference- being distracted by a mobile device (or background tv linked to)

  • Caregivers: less sensitive, responsive, verbal

  • children: more acting out behaviors, concurrent and longitudal finds, lower quality play

• placing limits/removing devices linked to increase conflict

  • especially if limits not set early on

Using media to soothe or calm a young child may hinder their ability to learn passive emotion regulation strategies

Impact of social media on media’s affect on social development

• provides opportunites for identity exploration

• Learning to present slef; refine social skills

• gain more feedback about the self

  • Positive feedback—> increased self-esteem

  • Negative feedback—> decrease self-esteem

What are the concerns of social media’s impact on social development

Overuse- checking device exessivly; addiction- this is by design

impact on mental health- linked to higher rates of depression/anxiety

Risky social support- vary widely, but may be even more harmful than in real life bullying

may hinder emotional understanding: Uhls et al., 105 12-year olds, pre and post test interpeting emotinal cues; ½ spent 5 days at outdoor camp with no technology, ½ went about their usual lives

• Results: outdoor camp group improved ability to read emotional cues

Educational tv shows linked to prosocial behavior, school readiness, long-term achievements, higher rated graduation

How can we lessen the effects and increase positive effects of media on social development? Parent involvment

Varies by family resources, poverty, education, stress

• awarness of media influences

• watch and process shows/movies/video games/etc. with kids

• moninter internet and social media usage

• active mediation (convey values)

• Set limits early on, and be consistent: model good habits

How can we lessen the effects and increase positive effects of media on social development? Other levels of influence

• schools: media literacy curriculum, set screen limit and the mere prescnce can be distracting

• goverment led programs: limit marketing to kids, rating system, work in progress- low regulating social media

• mass media: offer-high quaility media programs, limit addictive design, and features to the young

• child characterisitics: temperament, emotional regulation