Child Development - Lecture notes - 7 PDF

Preview

Summary

Download Child Development - Lecture notes - 7 PDF

Description

Tuesday, November 12th, 2013 Infant-Caregiver Attachment II Attachment Styles: - Babies experience changes in everyday life (i.e., in the super market) - Non-clinical (no disabilities, disorders, neglect, etc.), middle-class, American babies - Secure (~62-68%) o Infant explores while mother is present o When stranger enters, shows wariness, but not distress o Upset and anxious when mother leaves - Insecure-Avoidant (~15%): o Too independent, explores without involving their mother o Indifferent to mother’s behaviours o No wariness when stranger enters o Not upset when mother leaves, nor happy when she returns - Insecure-Resistant/Ambivalent (~10%) o Clings to mother, is needy  Especially in novel situations o Does not explore o Very wary of stranger, a source of stress o Very distressed when the mother leaves o However, the baby is ambivalent upon the mother’s return  Seeks comfort from the mother, but when she leaves and returns, he/she protests out of anger because they are upset she has left - Disorganized/Disoriented (~15%) o Added by a separate group of researchers o A mix of insecure-avoidant and insecure-ambivalent o Associated with high risk home conditions  Especially in an abusive environment (i.e., neglect, physical abuse)  These children have a higher risk of being categorized this way o Carlson (1989):  Children studied had the same IQ and were the same age  Group #1 was sexually assaulted by family member(s)  Over 80% developed disorganized and disoriented type attachment  Group #2 was economically deprived  Almost 20% developed disorganized and disoriented type attachment Cultural Variations: - Similar classifications across numerous cultures o i.e., China, Western Europe, various parts of Africa - There are still some important differences in certain other cultures - Israel:

o o o o

-

-

-

Roughly the same numbers of secure children as in the U.S. Roughly the same number of insecure-resistant as in the U.S. Not many children in the insecure-avoidant category Have close contact with mothers in the evening, but stay with other women in the village during the day; familiar female figures are with them all of the time

Japan: o Separation from mothers is not the norm in Japan and so they hardly ever develop insecure-avoidant attachment, but instead often develop a secure attachment Germany: o Many insecurely-avoidant babies o Cultural emphasis on independence (i.e., Allowing your child to cry instead of going to comfort them) The Strange Situation Test in Efé (Congo, Africa) o Interview with Gilda Morelli o Children live in a rich social environment  The village helps care for the children  Children participate in village activities o Often, children are securely attached (over 80% of the infants)

Influences on Attachment and Long-Term Effects: - Temperament Hypothesis (Kagan, 1984, 1989) o Harvard University o ‘Easy’ vs. ‘difficult’ temperaments influence the quality of the motherinfant relationship and thus, attachment style  Babies that are difficult make it hard for their parents to be kind and patient all of the time  A very easy temperamental baby is easier to take care of, which makes parenting much easier in comparison to difficult babies o Longitudinal studies determine if there is a consistency or change over time  The ways in which the study is conducted alter to reflect the child’s age and abilities o Evidence against the temperament hypothesis:  Evidence has shown that infants can have both secure and insecure attachments  Changing parental behaviour can change attachment of the child  If a baby is believed to be developing an insecure attachment, parents can change their parenting styles to prevent this and consequently, the child will develop instead, a secure attachment - Caregiving Hypothesis (Ainsworth, 1979) o Comparison of attachment with parenting behaviours  Secure  Sensitivity, affectionate, positive, available, stimulating  Resistant  Inconsistent, anxious

 Avoidant  Rejecting, aversion to bodily contact, less affectionate  Disorganized  Neglect or physical abuse o Long-term effects:  Securely attached infants have, often, more positive outcomes behaviourally, socially, and cognitively  Higher academic achievements (i.e., SAT scores as adults)  Better at maintaining relationships with others  Insecurely attached infants often have negative developmental outcomes  Rejection by peers  Acting aggressively  More likely to commit problematic activities (i.e., Crime)  May have difficulty creating a strong and secure bond with their children when they become parents  Continuity from preschool years through to adulthood  How to explain this ‘continuity’?  Bowlby: Internal Working Model of Attachment o A mental representation of the self, of attachment figures, and of relationships in general o Guides interaction with caregivers and others in infancy and at older ages o Form ideas of themselves based on the caregiver’s actions (i.e., A kind caregiver allows the child to feel loved and capable of loving both now and as an adult) o This determines that kind of expectations we have regarding ourselves, future partners, friends, etc. in the future Thought Questions: - How to foster secure infant-caregiver attachment? o Parental sensitivity training  How to read signals from their babies  How to take better care of your babies o Parents with training developed secure attachment, whereas children of parents in the control group who did not receive the training often developed an insecure attachment - What about infants raised in institutions (i.e., Orphanages)? - How does early attachment relate to romantic relationships in adulthood?

Family The Child in the Context: - The child is embedded in a very complex set of systems o There are five different levels of systems (Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Model):  Microsystem: Direct interactions between children and their surroundings (I.e., Parents, peers, teachers, etc.)  Mesosystem: Connections among children’s immediate settings (i.e., schools, clinics, etc.)  Exosystem: Extended family, mass media, neighbourhoods, etc.  Macrosystem: Broad ideology, laws, cultural customs, etc.  Chronosystem: Changes in a person’s environment over time (i.e., Wars) - Family: o A social system or network of reciprocal relationships - Family structure: o Nuclear families o Extended families o Single-parent families o Blended families - In all families: o Direct effects Parental Socialization: - Socialization: The process through which children acquire the values, standards, skills, knowledge, and behaviours that are regarded as appropriate to their present and future roles in their particular culture - Parents can function as direct instructors of their children’s learning in three main ways: o Parents as direct instructors  Explicitly teaching children what they should and should not do o Parents as indirect socializers  May not be explicitly teaching their children, but through observation, children will learn from their parents and improve relationships this way o Parents as social managers  Facilitating socialization of one’s child(ren) - Parenting styles and outcomes: o Baumrind:  Two dimensions of parenting:  Acceptance and responsiveness: o Supportive, sensitive, willing to provide affection and praise o More likely related to social and emotional development

Demanding and controlling: o Amount of regulation and control which parents undertake o More likely related to academic achievement  Classification of parenting styles:  High amounts of control, low demands are authoritarian o Reasonable demands, consistently enforces, sensitivity to and acceptable of the child o Children are socially and academically successful, most self-reliant and behaved  In many African homes, this parenting is needed to protect children from high risks and dangers, resulting in positive as opposed to negative outcomes  Chinese first-generation Chinese-American families also had less negative consequences  High amounts of control, high demands are authoritative o Parents are demanding and expect a great deal from their children o Children do moderately well in school, few behaviour problems, average to poor social skills, low self-esteem, and high levels of depression  Low demand and high acceptance is permissive o Few rules and demands, children are allowed much freedom by indulgent parents o Children tend t fo poorly in school and misbehave frequently (impulsive and aggressive, self-centered, low in independence), higher self-esteem, and lower levels of depression  Low acceptance/responsiveness and low control/demand is uninvolved o Few rules and demands, parents are uninvolved and insensitive to their children’s needs o Children will likely have attachment problems, poor peer relationships, high in aggression and behaviour disorders, do poorly in school  Control tends to promote academic success and responsiveness tends to foster social and emotional development o Transmission of parenting styles (Jay Belsky):  To some extent, parenting styles are often transmitted  Factors that may help prevent the transmission of poor parenting from generation to generation:  Therapeutic experiences can aid in this, including a good marriage  Unwillingness to pass on bad experiences which were experienced by the parents, onto their children 

The mature, autonomous thing to do is reflecting on parents’ parenting styles and decide upon what one does and does not want to do with their own child, as opposed to doing the complete opposite or acting the exact same way Child’s influence on parenting: o There are other factors, including SES; financial situation; etc. o Children seem to have the greatest influence on parents, though! o Degree of physical attractiveness:  Attractive children are infant illicit more positive responses from adults, including their parents  Children who are not so attractive to their parents illicit fewer positive responses  Parents usually do not realize this o Differences in children’s behaviour:  Temperament – easy vs. difficult parenting o Child’s interpretations:  Bi-directionality  How the child interprets their parents reflects how they treat their parents (and how the parents will treat them) Child maltreatment: o There is a range of child maltreatment, from mild to severe o Child abuse:  Extreme maltreatment of children  Physical, sexual, psychological, or neglect  Distancing from child, refraining from affections or support, acting unloving, etc.  There are about one million abuse cases reported in the U.S. every year  This is, unfortunately, still an underestimate, as not every abuse case is discovered  The rate is lower in Canada  Who abuses?  Abusers come from all races, ethnic groups, and social classes  Common characteristics o Alcohol or drug problems (20-40%) o Suffered abuse themselves as children (30%) o A link with unhappy marriage and emotional insecurity (which can result in a misinterpretation of child(ren)’s behaviour o Most likely to engage in an authoritarian parenting style o Often come from a high-risk neighbourhood or culture, where violence is permitted or relatively accepted  Who is abused? 

-

-

Some children may be at a greater risk for being abused than other children o Emotionally unresponsive o Hyperactive o Irritable o Impulsive, poor self-regulation o Sickly Consequences can be long term  Physical abuse: o Hostility o Aggression o Problematic behaviour o Disordered relationship (from peer relationships in preschool to romantic relationships as an adult)  Lack empathy towards distressed peers  Can even become aggressive towards the individual who is in distress  Neglect (often lacking attention from caregiver): o Lower intellectual and academic abilities o Lower social skills o No close friends from childhood into adulthood o Passivity o Feelings of abandonment, loneliness Solving the problems of abuse:  Identify high-risk families  Interventions addressing: o Material needs o Psychological needs o Educational needs  Less severe can be helped with supportive interventions (i.e., therapy)  More severe abuse must be aided via coercive interventions (i.e., the child being taken away) 





Changes in Families: - Teen parents: o I the U.S., 41.7 births out of 100 are born to females 15-19 years old (>88% of them to unwed mothers) o Factors that reduce the risk:  Living with both biological parents  Involved in school activities and religious organizations o Factors that may increase the risk:  Raised in poverty by a single mother with an older sibling/friends who are sexually active  Having a cold and uninvolved mother



-

Adolescent males who are poor, prone to substance abuse and behavioural problems o Consequences of teen parenting:  Mothers: Less opportunity for education, career development, and normal peer relationships  Children: More likely to exhibit behaviour problems and cognitive delays than children born to older mothers Gay parents: o In the U.S., an estimate of 2 to 6 million children have lesbian or gay parents o Children of gay parents:  Very similar to heterosexual parents in terms of adjustment, personality, and relationships with peers  Similar with regard to their gender-typed behaviour and sexual orientation  Do not appear to be teased more than other children

Tuesday, November 19th, 2013 Miscellaneous: - Online discussion assignment is due this Sunday by midnight - Exam: o Questions that are answered incorrectly by the majority of students will be taken off of the exam o Non-cumulative

Peer Relationships in Regards to Child Development Development of Friendships: - Peers: People of approximately the same age and social status o i.e., Popular kids stay with the other popular kids - Equality, reciprocity, cooperation, and intimacy in peer relationships o Piaget argues that peer relationships are the foundations for children’s problem-solving abilities, concern for others, etc. - One key concept is friendship o Friendships develops between two or more individuals o Friendship: Interpersonal, reciprocated positive relationships between people  If A does not view B as his or her friend, but B does, it is still not considered a true friendship - Early peer interactions: o Children may have friends by or before the age of two  Especially children who begin daycare earlier on o 12- to 18-month olds see to select and prefer some children over others  Same gender  Same social status  Sociable  Etc. o From ~20 months, children increasingly initiate more interactions with some children than with others  i.e., Will invite certain groups to play with them, but not others  This can lead to friendships later in life o Pretend play helps with life skills - Developmental changes: o At ages 6 to 8, there is a definition of friendship based primarily on actual activities  View friends in terms of rewards and costs  i.e., Sally shares with me and is nice, so she’s my friend o In early school years to adolescence, the experience and definition of friendship centers on terms of mutual liking, closeness, loyalty, etc. o In adolescents, they are more likely to use friendship as a context for selfexploration and working out personal problems

-

-

The role of friends: o Friends provide security and social support  Family problems  Academic problems  Understanding  Research has shown that adolescents value friendship more than parental support  In some cases, friendships can serve as a buffer for unpleasant circumstances (i.e., Parental divorce) o Friends help build social problem solving skills  i.e., Dealing with negotiations o Friendships help prepare for romantic relationships  Based on trust, reciprocity, and loyalty  Foundational characteristics of a romantic relationship in the future How do children choose friends at different stages of development? o For preschoolers:  Proximity is key  i.e., Same street, same daycare, etc.  Similarity is also a major factor  i.e., Same age, same-sex preference, same race (but to a lesser degree) o By age 7:  Tend to like peers similar to themselves in terms of cognitive maturity or play and aggressive behaviour o 4th to 8th grade:  Friends are more similar than non-friends in prosocial behaviours, antisocial behaviour, peer acceptance, and academic motivation  Still, some children will make some decisions that he/she does not believe in due to peer pressure o Adolescence:  Friends tend to have similar interests, attitudes, and behaviours

Social Status in Peer Group(s): - Peer evaluation (Rating Scales): o How much would you like to play with _____?  Respond on a scale of 1 (not at all) to 5 (a lot) - Peer nomination: o Researcher goes into a classroom and asks the child to nominate three other children that they enjoy playing with the most and three other children that they like playing with the least - Sociometric status: The degree to which children are liked or disliked by their peers as a group o Assess two things:  Preference and acceptance  Impact



i.e., If a child is nominated many times by a child, it is evident that the child has made a large impact on the group o Based on this, researchers can sort children into several categories:  Popular:  Skilled at initiating interactions and at maintaining positive relationships  Cooperative, friendly, sociable, and sensitive to others  Are not prone to intense negative emotions and regulate themselves well  Less aggressive than average children  What does it mean to be ‘popular’? o i.e., the ‘popular’ in Mean Girls are not popular when regarding sociometric status  Rejected (Aggressive-Rejected):  Prone to hostile and threatening behaviour, physical aggression, disruptive behaviour, and delinquency  Aggression  rejected by peers  Some develop a network of aggressive friends and become popular  Rejected (Withdrawn-Rejected):  Makes up about 25% of the rejected category  Socially withdrawn, wary, and often timid  Not all socially withdrawn children partaking in negative actions are rejected  Some children display social reticence  Long-term, these children are more likely to develop depression  Most concerning of the sociometric categories  Rejected children, especially those who are aggressive: o Are more likely to display hostile attribution bias  i.e., If someone accidentally bumps into the child, the child will interpret it as aggressive  Hostile attribution bias  Have more difficulty in finding constructive solutions to difficult social situations  Neglected:  Display relatively few behaviours that differ greatly from those of many other children  Do not have many distinctive characteristics o They are too average o Are primarily neglected because they go unnoticed  This status tends to change very quickly, either to popular or to rejected  Controversial:  Liked by many and disliked by many

Tend to have characteristics of both popular and rejected children  Outgoing, but tend to have aggressive behaviours  Some peers view such children as arrogant and snobbish What factors contribute to their sociometric status?  Their own traits  i.e., Personality traits, self-esteem, experience and role playing  Physical attractiveness (Halo Effect)  Athletic ability  Social behaviours (i.e., Friendly, aggressive, etc.)  Cognitions about self and others  Goals when interacting with peers  Status is enclosed within the status of his or her friends’ Likelihood of short-term sociometric stability (weeks or months):  Children who are popular or rejected tend to remain so  Children who are neglected or controversial tend to change their status Likelihood of long-term sociometric stability (childhood to adolescence to adulthood):  Stability for rejected children is generally higher than for other children Peer status as a predictor of risk:  Rejected children (especially aggressive): More likely than peers to have academic difficulties  This effect worsens over time  About 25-30% of rejected child...