Socioemotional Development in Middle Childhood



Socioemotional Development in Middle Childhood

Chapter 7

Family Relationships

Family as a system (ecological view)

Parents children

Directly & indirectly

Subtle influences abound

Father’s treatment of mother impacts mother/daughter

Interacts with larger social systems

Neighborhood, school, work, extended family

Parenting Dimensions

2 key dimensions: Warmth, control

Warmth

Warm, affectionate, responsive, time spent v.uninvolved & hostile

Warmth = happy, secure, well behaved children

Hostile = anxious, unhappy, low self-esteem

Parenting Dimensions

Control

Overcontrol, demanding, run kids life

Undercontrol, few demands, kids free to do X, parents don’t care

Both problematic: no internal socialization

Balance best: adequate control/standards consistently enforced + allowing kids to make some decisions

Communication key

Parental Style (Warmth x Control)

Authoritarian: High control + low warmth

Harsh rules, no discussion allowed

Hard work, absolute obedience expected

Authoritative: High control + high warmth

Lots of consistent rules/standards that are explained

Lots of warmth, affection

Parental Style (Warmth x Control)

Indulgent-permissive: Low control + high warmth

Acceptance of children w/ little punishment

Indifferent-uninvolved: Low control + low warmth

Basic needs provided but not much else

Get away from me kid you’re bothering me

Parental Style (Warmth x Control)

Authoritative best for children

Responsible, self-reliant,friendly

Authoritarian: low self-esteem, poor social skills

Indulgent: impulsive, easily frustrated

Indifferent: low self-esteem, impulsive, aggressive, moody

Parental Behavior

Direct instruction

Can coach children

Explain how behavior impacts emotions

Enhances social skills

Modeling & feedback

Children learn by observing

Rewards & punishers

Rapid, consistent, explained, best with high warmth

Adoption

2%-4% of US children are adopted

Adopted child syndrome myth

Similar temperament, attachment, cognitive development

More prone to adjustment problems, conduct disorders (aggressive)

More likely to obtain help + linked to poor prior treatment & age at adoption

Birth Order

First born

Higher IQ, more likely to go to college, less rebellious,

Later born

More socially popular, innovative

Only children

Higher IQ, leadership, maturity, not spoiled

Divorce

Most children live with mother (15% don’t)

Virginia Study of Divorce

Initially less affection/control from mother

Children regressed

Eventually mother-daughter relationship improved but son-mother relationship got worse

Father uninvolved

Impacts of Divorce

Negatively impacts:

School achievement

Conduct

Adjustment

Self-concept

Parent-child relations

Persists into adulthood

Less if live w/ same-sex parent, parents cooperate

Impacts of Divorce

Worse for:

Younger children

Emotionally unstable children

Negative attributional style

Children who fail to actively cope

Child Abuse

Abusers similar to controls on diagnosable mental health

3 key risk factors for abuse

Cultural/social values

Corporal punishment acceptable

Poverty

Social isolation

Child Abuse

Parents

History of abuse themselves

Ineffective parenting

Poor spousal relations

Children

Illness, conduct disorder increase risk

Child Abuse

Negatively impacts:

Social skills/peer relations

Cognitive development

Academic performance

Behavior problems

Emotional life (depression, anxiety, suicide ideation, abusers)

Less impactful with good father relationship + supportive peer groups

Preventing Child Abuse

Cultural attitudes in US about corporal punishment

Poverty reduced

Social support/aid

Parental counseling

Parenting, coping skills

Friendship Development

Sullivan: friendship develops in stages

4-8 years: short-lived, superficial playmates, companions

> 8: characterized by intimacy, reciprocity, trust, caring, loyalty

Adolescence (>13-14): Friends become strong source of support

Friendship: Who?

Childhood friends are alike on key demographics

Age, sex, race

Children w/ only opposite sex friends have poor social skills

Attitudes about school, family, etc

Consequences of Friends

Children with good friends:

Have high self-esteem

Less lonely, depressed

More prosocial behavior

Cope better with stress

Less likely to be victimized by other children

Greater self-worth as adults

Friends key resource facilitating effective psychological functioning

Groups in Adolescence

Peer groups = focus of social life

Cliques/crowd common

Jocks, nerds, druggies, etc.

Self-esteem linked to one’s ‘crowd’

High-status groups > lower status groups

Organized around dominance hierarchy

Boys: physical power determines status

Girls: traits key for group function

Groups & Peer Pressure

Groups define social reality

Establish norms for behavior

Exert pressure on non-conforming members

Pressure to uniformity

Can be antisocial & prosocial

Most power for domains w/o clear standards

Groups in Adolescence

Parental style linked to group membership

Achievement emphasis -> popular, jock, normal

Parental monitoring -> brain, less druggie

Authoritative -> groups w/ adult behavioral norms

Indulgent/indifferent -> conduct problems

Popularity & Rejection

Popularity is linked to:

Intelligence

Physical attractiveness

Social skills & emotional regulation

Rejection is linked to:

Aggression

Poor social skills

Low self-worth

Causes of Rejection

Ineffective parenting -> social skills

Modeling aggressive or antisocial behavior

Combative, hostile, belligerent

Violence, intimidation

Inconsistent discipline

The Impacts of Television

Viewing aggressive content linked with aggressive, criminal behavior as adults

Correlational and direct of effect unclear

Temperamentally aggressive kids select aggressive content more often?

Experimental evidence confirms results

Exposure to violent content (TV, music, video games) CAUSES increased aggression

The Impacts of Television

Television is linked to a stereotypical view of the world

Men, women, the elderly, ethnic minorities

Kimball (1986) introduction of TV enhanced stereotypes

Children who view lots of TV may develop an unrealistic view of the world

The Impacts of Television

Prosocial behavior

Exposure to prosocial models on TV does enhance this behavior in children

Stronger effect than violent content

Cognitive development

Educational TV enhance cognitive skills

Critics of TV

TV shortens attention span, concentration

No! (depends on content)

TV reduces creativity

~No! (depends on content)

Describing Others

Cognitive development drives other descriptions

< 7 years: Focus on appearance, general information, possessions

Concrete

8-14: Increasing emphasis personality traits

Conceptually

Understanding others

Selman’s (1980) theory of perspective taking

Undifferentiated (3-6)

Knows others have different thoughts but confuses them with their own

Social-informational (4-9)

Knows perspectives differ due to access to different information

Understanding others

Self-reflective (7-12)

Can view themselves as others do

Third-person (10-15)

Can view situation as uninvolved 3rd party

Societal (> 14)

Know that 3rd person perspective impacted by personal, cultural and social factors

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download