Help with disc (2) due in 24 hours

Why do some siblings get along so well? First, children’s sex and temperament matter. Sibling relations are more likely to be warm and harmonious when siblings are the same sex (Dunn & Kendrick, 1981) and when neither sibling is too emotional (Brody et al., 1994). Age also matters: sibling relationships generally improve as the younger child approaches adolescence because siblings begin to perceive one another as equals (Kim et al., 2006; McHale et al., 2013).

Think About It

Liam, age 8, and his younger sister, Ella, argue over just about everything and constantly compete for their parents’ attention. Teenage sisters Aubrey and Natalie love doing everything together and enjoy sharing clothes and secrets about their teen romances. Why might Liam and Ella get along so poorly while Aubrey and Natalie get along so well?

The indirect influence of parents on sibling relationships stems from the quality of the parents’ relationship with each other: a warm, harmonious relationship between parents fosters positive sibling relationships (Milevsky, 2021). Conflict between parents is associated with conflict between siblings, although intense marital conflict sometimes leads siblings to become closer, as they support each other emotionally (McHale et al., 2012).

Many of the features associated with high-quality sibling relationships, such as the sex of the siblings, are common across different ethnic groups. But some unique features also emerge. For example, in a study of African American families, sibling relations were more positive when children had a stronger ethnic identity (McHale et al., 2007). And a study of Mexican American families found that siblings feel closer and spend more time together when siblings have a strong commitment to their family—that is, they felt obligated to their family and viewed it as an important source of support (Updegraff et al., 2005).

In the pursuit of family harmony, parents can influence some of the factors affecting sibling relationships but not others. Parents can help reduce friction between siblings by being equally affectionate and responsive to all of their children and by caring for one another. At the same time, some dissension is natural in families, especially those with young children. Children’s different interests lead to conflicts that youngsters cannot resolve because their social skills are limited.

Adopted Children

The U.S. government doesn’t keep official statistics on the number of adopted children, but the best estimate is that 2 to 4% of U.S. children are adopted. The most common form of adoption is for a foster parent or relative to adopt young children who are in foster care. Also common is for children to be adopted through private agencies, most often because young parents believe they cannot provide adequately for the child. Finally, infants and preschool children are often adopted (Grotevant & McDermott, 2014).

Adopted children often experience adversity before being adopted. For example, children adopted from foster care have often experienced maltreatment that led them to be placed in foster care; many children adopted internationally were abandoned and lived in institutions prior to adoption. These circumstances aren’t optimal for children’s development, so it’s not surprising that adopted children are at risk for many problems, including antisocial and aggressive behavior, depression and anxiety, and learning problems (Grotevant & McDermott, 2014). However, outcomes are varied. Most adopted children develop within the typical range. Problems are most likely when children are adopted after infancy and when they were institutionalized or lived in several foster homes before they were adopted (Kreppner et al., 2007). However, these children often fare well when they receive excellent care after adoption (Grotevant & McDermott, 2014).

In recent years, adopted children (and their adoptive families) are more likely to communicate with the children’s birth family, an arrangement known as an open adoption . Open adoptions come in many forms. Contact can be face-to-face or via social media and can be occasional or frequent. Open adoption can benefit adoptees, adoptive parents, and birth parents, but adoptive and birth parents must be committed to it. They must be honest, flexible, communicate effectively, and understand that the child’s needs and wishes may change (Grotevant, 2020).

Impact of Birth Order

Contrary to folklore, only children are often smarter and more mature than children with siblings.

Hill Street Studios/DigitalVision/Getty Images

The different approaches that parents use with their first- and later-born children help explain differences that are commonly observed between these children. First-born children generally have higher scores on intelligence tests, are more likely to go to college, and are more conscientious. They are also more willing to conform to parents’ and adults’ requests. In contrast, perhaps because later-born children are less concerned about pleasing parents and adults, they are more outgoing, more popular with their peers, more innovative, and more likely to task risks (Beck et al., 2006; Bjerkedal et al., 2007; Sulloway & Zweigenhaft, 2010).

What about only children? According to conventional wisdom, parents dote on “onlies,” who therefore become selfish and egotistical. Is the folklore correct? No. Only children are more likely to succeed in school than are other children and to have higher levels of intelligence and self-esteem but don’t differ in popularity, adjustment, and personality (Falbo, 2012; Falbo & Polit, 1986).

The possibility that only children are selfish has been a concern in China, where only children are common because of governmental efforts to limit population growth. However, many studies have compared only and non-only children in China and most find no differences. One of the few differences is that Chinese only children, like Western only children, are more successful in school (Falbo, 2012; Liu et al., 2010). Thus, contrary to the popular stereotype, only children are much like children who grow up with siblings.

Siblings

Most children—about 85% in the United States—grow up with brothers and sisters. Sibling relationships are complicated from the beginning. Expectant parents typically are excited by the prospect of another child, and their enthusiasm is contagious: their children, too, eagerly await the arrival of the newest family member. However, the baby’s arrival prompts varied responses: some children are distressed, sad, and less responsive to parents, responses that are more common with younger children (Volling, 2012). Parents can minimize their older children’s distress by remaining attentive to their needs (Howe & Ross, 1990).

Many older siblings enjoy helping their parents take care of newborns. Older children play with, console, or feed the baby or change the baby’s diapers. In middle-class Western families, such caregiving often occurs in the context of play, with parents nearby. But in many developing nations, children—particularly girls—play an important role in providing care for their younger siblings (Zukow-Goldring, 2002). As the infant grows, interactions between siblings become more frequent and more complicated. For example, toddlers tend to talk more to parents than to older siblings. But by the time the younger sibling is 4 years old, the situation is reversed: now young siblings talk more to older siblings than to their mother (Brown & Dunn, 1996). Older siblings become a source of care and comfort for younger siblings when they are distressed or upset and they serve as teachers, teaching younger siblings to play games or to cook simple foods (Gass et al., 2007; Kim et al., 2007; Maynard, 2002).

As time goes by, some siblings grow close, but others argue and compete constantly. The basic pattern of sibling interaction seems to be established during the preschool years and remains fairly stable thereafter (Kramer, 2010). Siblings with high-quality relationships have better relationships with peers and better well-being overall. Unfortunately, the converse is also true: when siblings have low-quality relationships, they often behave aggressively, bully their peers, and are prone to anxiety and depression (Dirks et al., 2015). Apparently, children take the social-interaction skills developed with siblings and apply them with peers, a strategy that’s productive with the effective social skills learned in high-quality sibling relationships but not with the antagonistic, coercive skills learned in low-quality relationships.

In many cultures, older siblings regularly provide care for younger siblings.

The first year after a divorce is often rocky for parents and children alike. But beginning in the second year, most children begin to adjust to their new circumstances, especially when their parents get along (Sweeper, 2012). In joint custody , both parents retain legal custody of the children. Children benefit from joint custody—they have closer relationships with both parents, thy are healthier physically, and they are better adjusted (Nielson, 2018). When joint custody is not an option, mothers have traditionally been awarded custody; when this happens, children benefit when fathers remain involved in parenting, particularly when they get along with their ex-wives (Modecki et al., 2015).

Which Children are Most Affected by Divorce?

Although many children suffer from divorce in the short term, only a few children suffer serious harm in the longer term. Researchers have identified several features that predict how well children adjust in the longer term. Many features concern parents. Children fare best when custodial and noncustodial parents don’t experience psychological problems themselves, when they get along with each other, and when they stay involved with their children and parent effectively (Amato, 2010; Tabor, 2016). In addition, children are less likely to suffer harm from divorce when they are temperamentally easy, are smart, don’t consistently interpret life events negatively, and actively cope with problems brought on by divorce (Lansford, 2009; Weaver & Schofield, 2015).

Parents can reduce divorce-related stress and help children adjust to their new life circumstances. Together, parents should explain to their children what divorce means and what their children can expect to happen. They should reassure children that they will always love them and always be their parents; parents must back up these words with actions by remaining involved in their children’s lives. Finally, parents must expect that their children will sometimes be angry or sad about the divorce, and they should encourage children to discuss these feelings with them.

To help children deal with divorce, parents should not compete with each other for their children’s love and attention. Parents should neither take out their anger with each other on their children nor criticize their ex-spouse in front of them. Finally, parents should not ask children to mediate disputes; parents should work out problems without putting children in the middle.

Following all these rules consistently is difficult, but effective programs are available to help parents and children adjust to life following divorce (Vé lez et al., 2014). These programs improve children’s behavioral and social skills and allow children to express feelings related to divorce; parents learn how to improve relationships with their children and how to discipline them.

Blended Families

Following divorce, parents eventually may remarry (Raley & Sweeney, 2020). The resulting unit, consisting of a biological parent, a stepparent, and children, is known as a blended family . (Other terms for this family configuration are “remarried family” and “reconstituted family.”) The most common form of blended family is a mother, her children, and a stepfather. Children can thrive in a blended family: those who report being close to their mother and their stepfather are well-adjusted (Amato et al., 2016).

The best strategy for stepfathers is to be interested in their new stepchildren but to avoid encroaching on established relationships. Newly remarried mothers must be careful that their enthusiasm for their new spouse does not come at the expense of spending time with and showing affection for their children. Both parents and children need to have realistic expectations. The blended family can be successful, but it takes effort because of the complicated relationships, conflicting loyalties, and jealousies that usually exist (Sweeney, 2010; White & Gilbreth, 2001).

Following divorce, most men and women remarry, creating a blended family.

iStockPhoto/Kali9

Sadly, cases like Noah occur far too often. Maltreatment comes in many forms. The two that often come to mind first are physical abuse involving assault that leads to injuries and sexual abuse involving fondling, intercourse, or other sexual behaviors. And children can also be harmed by psychological abuse—ridicule, rejection, and humiliation. But the most common form of maltreatment—representing about 75% of all cases—is neglect: these children do not receive adequate food, clothing, or medical care (USDHHS, 2016; Wicks-Nelson & Israel, 2015).

Who Are the Abusing Parents?

Why would a parent abuse a child? Most abusing parents do not suffer from any specific mental or psychological disorder. Instead, a host of factors put some children at risk for abuse and protect others; the number and combination of factors determine whether the child is a likely target for abuse (Cicchetti & Toth, 2006). Let’s look at the three most important factors: those associated with the cultural context, those associated with parents, and those associated with children themselves.

The most general contributing factors deal with cultural values and the social conditions in which parents rear their children. Many countries in Europe and Asia have strong cultural prohibitions against physical punishment. In many countries (e.g., Austria, Croatia, Germany, Israel), spanking is against the law. Nevertheless, in the United States, physical punishment is common. Condoning physical punishment in this manner opens the door for child maltreatment.

Child abuse is more common in societies that condone physical punishment such as spanking.

PhotoAlto/Sandro Di Carlo Darsa/Brand X Pictures/Getty Images

What social conditions seem to foster maltreatment? Poverty is one. Maltreatment is more common among children living in poverty, in part because lack of money increases the stress of daily life, and this means that parents are more likely to punish their children physically instead of making the extra effort to reason with them. For example, during the COVID-19 pandemic, maltreatment was more common when parents lost their jobs (Lawson et al., 2020). Social isolation is a second force. Abuse is more likely when families are socially isolated from other relatives or neighbors because living in isolation deprives children of adults who could protect them and deprives parents of social support that would help them better deal with life’s stresses (Coulton et al., 2007).

Cultural factors and social conditions contribute to child abuse, but we need to look for additional factors because, for example, maltreatment does not occur in most families who live in poverty.

To place the last pieces in the puzzle, we must look at the abused children themselves. Children may inadvertently, through their behavior, contribute to their own abuse. In fact, infants and preschoolers are more often abused than older children are, probably because they are less able to regulate aversive behaviors that may elicit abuse (Miller-Perin & Perrin, 2013). You may have heard stories about a parent who shakes a baby to death because the baby wouldn’t stop crying. Because younger children are more likely to cry or whine excessively—behaviors that irritate all parents sooner or later—they are more likely to be the targets of abuse.

For much the same reason, children who are frequently ill or who are disabled are more often abused (Jones et al., 2012). When children are sick or disabled, they often need extra attention and special care (which means additional expense), conditions that increase stress in a family and put children at risk for maltreatment. And, just as Cinderella’s stepmother doted on her biological children but abused Cinderella, stepchildren are more prone to abuse and neglect than biological children (Debowska et al., 2021).

Think About It

Kevin has never physically abused his 10-year-old son, Mason, but he constantly torments Mason emotionally. For example, when Mason got an F on a spelling test, Kevin screamed, “I skipped Monday Night Football just to help you, but you still flunked. You’re such a dummy.” When Mason began to cry, Kevin taunted, “Look at Mason, crying like a baby.” These interactions occur nearly every day. What are the likely effects of such repeated episodes of emotional abuse?

Thus, cultural, parental, and child factors all contribute to child maltreatment. Any single factor usually will not result in abuse, but maltreatment becomes more likely when these risk factors accumulate.

Effects of Abuse on Children

The prognosis for youngsters like Noah is not very good. Some, of course, suffer permanent physical damage. Even when there is no lasting physical damage, children’s social and emotional development is often disrupted. They tend to have poor relationships with peers, either because they withdraw from interactions or because they are too aggressive (Cicchetti, 2016). Their cognitive development and academic performance are also disturbed. Abused youngsters often don’t do well in school, they don’t regulate their emotions well, they don’t recognize others’ emotions accurately, and they are at risk for depression (Cyr & Alink, 2017; Spiedel et al., 2020). As adults, children who were abused are at risk for psychiatric disorders (Rehan et al., 2017). In short, when children are maltreated, the effects are usually widespread and long-lasting.

Resilience

Linking Research to Life

Preventing Child Maltreatment

Because maltreatment is more apt to occur when several contributing factors are present, eradicating child maltreatment requires many approaches. As one approach, American attitudes toward “acceptable” levels of punishment and poverty would have to change. American children will be abused as long as physical punishment is considered acceptable and effective and as long as poverty-stricken families live in chronic stress from simply trying to provide food and shelter. Parents also need counseling and training in parenting skills. Abuse will continue as long as parents remain ignorant of effective methods of parenting and discipline.

It would be naive to expect these changes to occur overnight. However, by focusing on some of the more manageable factors, we can reduce the risk of maltreatment. Social supports help.

When parents know they can turn to helpful adults for advice and reassurance, they better manage the stresses of childrearing that might otherwise lead to abuse. Families can also be taught more effective ways of coping with situations that might otherwise trigger abuse (Wicks-Nelson & Israel, 2015). Through role-playing sessions, parents can learn the benefits of authoritative parenting and effective ways of using feedback and modeling to regulate children’s behavior.

Providing social supports and teaching effective parenting skills are typically done when maltreatment and abuse have already occurred. Of course, preventing maltreatment in the first place is more desirable and more cost-effective. For prevention, one useful tool is familiar: early childhood intervention programs. Maltreatment and abuse can be reduced when children participate in preschool programs like Head Start (Zhai et al., 2013). When children attend these programs, their parents become more committed to their children’s education. This leads their children to be more successful in school, reducing a source of stress and enhancing parents’ confidence in their child-rearing skills, thereby reducing the risks of maltreatment.

Another successful approach focuses specifically on parenting skills in families where children are at risk for maltreatment (van IJzendoorn et al., 2020). In such programs, parents learn how to have reasonable expectations for the children and how to discipline more effectively. When parents participate in programs like these, abuse is less likely (van IJzendoorn et al., 2020).

Test Yourself 7.1

Remember and Understand

· Answer1.

According to the systems approach, the family consists of interacting elements that influence each other, and the family itself is embedded in other social systems, such as neighborhoods.

· Answer2.

A(n) authoritarian parental style combines high control with low involvement.

· Answer3.

Most children seem to benefit when parents rely on a(n) authoritative style.

· Answer4.

Parental behaviors that influence children include direct instruction, modeling (learning through observation), and feedback (reward and punishment).

· Answer5.

Some parents do not make a good team: they don’t work together, they compete with each other for their children’s attention, and they limit each other’s access to the child.

· Answer6.

Compared with first-born children, later-born children are more outgoing, popular, innovative, and are more likely to take risks.

· Answer7.

Following divorce, children often adjust better behaviorally and socially when they spend approximately equal time with both parents.

· Answer8.

Children are harmed less from divorce when they are temperamentally easy, are smart, don’t interpret life events negatively, and actively cope with problems brought on by divorce.

· Answer9.

Children are more likely to be abused when they are younger, when they are stepchildren, and when they are often ill.

Apply

Who Are Friends?

Most friends are alike in age, gender, and race (Hamm, 2000; Mehta & Strough, 2009). Because friends are supposed to treat each other as equals, friendships are rare between an older, more experienced child and a younger, less experienced child. Because children typically play with same-sex peers, boys and girls rarely become friends.

Friends tend to be alike in age, race, and sex.

Muhammad Subky Latef Ayob/123RF

Friendships are more common between children and adolescents from the same race or ethnic group than between those from different groups, reflecting segregation in American society. Friendships among children of different groups are more common in schools when a child’s school is ethnically diverse. Such friendships are valuable: children from majority groups typically form more positive attitudes toward a minority group following a friendship with a youth from that group (Turner & Cameron, 2016). And children in cross-group friendships are less often targets of relational aggression (Kawabata & Crick, 2011).

Besides being alike in age, sex, and race, friends also tend to be alike in popularity: highly popular youth befriend popular peers and avoid friendships with less popular peers (Laursen, 2017). In addition, friends have similar attitudes toward school, recreation, and problem behaviors like breaking rules and using drugs. Children and adolescents befriend others who are similar to them and, as time passes, friends become more similar in their attitudes and values (Franken et al., 2016; Shin & Ryan, 2014). Nevertheless, friends are not photocopies of each other; friends are less similar, for example, than spouses or dizygotic twins (Rushton & Bons, 2005).

Quality and Consequences of Friendships

You probably remember some childhood friendships that were long-lasting and satisfying as well as others that rapidly wore thin and soon dissolved. What accounts for these differences in the quality and longevity of friendships? Sometimes friendships are brief because children have the skills to create friendships—they know funny stories, they kid around, they know good gossip—but lack the skills to sustain those friendships—they can’t keep secrets, are too bossy, or are too emotional (Blair et al., 2014; Jiao, 1999; Parker & Seal, 1996). Sometimes friendships end because when conflicts arise, children are more concerned about their own interests and are unwilling to compromise or negotiate (Glick & Rose, 2011; Rose & Asher, 1999). And sometimes friendships end when children discover that their needs and interests aren’t as similar as they initially thought (Gavin & Furman, 1996; Guimond et al., 2019).

Long-lasting friendships are to be treasured. In fact, children benefit from having good friends. Children with good friends have higher self-esteem, are less likely to be lonely and depressed, more often share and cooperate, and better negotiate stressful experiences, such as entering a new school (Bagwell & Bukowski, 2018; Schwartz-Mette et al., 2020). What’s more, children with good friends are less likely to be victimized by peers and, when they are victimized, the outcomes are not as severe (Bagwell & Bukowski, 2018).

When youth have good friends, they’re better able to cope with life’s stresses.

iStockPhoto/SDI Productions

There are other ways in which friendships can be hazardous. For example, when aggressive children are friends, they often encourage each other’s aggressive behavior (Dishion et al., 2001; Piehler & Dishion, 2007). Similarly, when teens engage in risky behavior (e.g., when they drink, smoke, or have sex), they often reinforce each other’s risky behavior (Hiatt et al., 2017).

Thus, friends are one important way in which peers influence children’s development. Peers also influence development through groups, the topic of the next section.

Groups

At the summer camp in the vignette, new campers form groups based on common interests. Groups are just as prevalent in American schools. “Jocks,” “preps,” “burnouts,” “druggies,” “nerds,” and “brains”—you may remember these or similar terms referring to groups of older children and adolescents. During late childhood and early adolescence, the peer group becomes the focal point of social relationships for youth. The starting point is often a clique — a small group of children or adolescents who are friends and tend to be similar in age, sex, race, and attitudes. Members of a clique spend time together and often dress, talk, and act alike. A crowd is a larger mixed-sex group of older children or adolescents who have similar values and attitudes and are known by a common label such as “jocks” or “nerds” (Rubin et al., 2015).

Crowds emerge in the transition from middle school to high school. Crowds have stereotyped identities—brains are smart kids who enjoy school—and younger adolescents gravitate to crowds that match their personal identity. Initially, some crowds have more status than others. For example, jocks are often the most prestigious crowd, while burnouts are the least. However, later in high school, the status of crowds becomes less significant and the boundaries between crowds become fuzzy (Brown, 2014).

Video: Cliques, Crowds, and Conformity

Copyright © Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved.

Group Structure

Groups—be they in school, at a summer camp as in the vignette, or elsewhere—typically have a well-defined structure. Often groups have a dominance hierarchy , which is headed by a leader to whom all other members of the group defer. Other members know their position in the hierarchy. They yield to members who are above them in the hierarchy and assert themselves over members who are below them. A dominance hierarchy is useful in reducing conflict within groups because every member knows their place (Rubin et al., 2015).

Group leaders tend to be those who have skills that are valuable to the group: Girl Scout patrol leaders, for example, tend to be goal-oriented and to have good ideas.

Jeff Siner/KRT/Newscom

Think About It

Most popular children are good students and are socially skilled: they tend to be friendly and helpful with peers.

As for rejected children, many are overly aggressive, hyperactive, socially unskilled, and unable to regulate their emotions. These children are usually more hostile than popular aggressive children and seem to be aggressive for the sheer fun of it, which peers dislike, instead of using aggression as a means toward other ends, which peers may not like but grudgingly respect. Other rejected children are shy, withdrawn, timid, and, not surprisingly, lonely (Rubin et al., 2015).

Think About It

Effective parents and popular children have many characteristics in common. What are they?

Causes and Consequences of Rejection

No one enjoys being rejected. Not surprisingly, peer rejection is a major obstacle in children’s development. Over time, rejected youngsters become less involved in classroom activities; they end up feeling lonely and disliking school. Repeated peer rejection in childhood can lead youth to drop out of school, commit juvenile offenses, and suffer from psychopathology (Rubin et al., 2015).

Peer rejection can be traced, in part, to direct and indirect influences of parents. The direct influence is via disciplinary practices. Harsh discipline and inconsistent discipline are associated with antisocial, aggressive behavior, paving the way for rejection (Kawabata & Crick, 2016). The indirect influence is via modeling: when parents typically respond to interpersonal conflict with intimidation or aggression, their children may imitate them, hampering the development of their social skills and making them less popular (Cummings et al., 2016).

Thus, the origins of rejection are clear: socially awkward, aggressive children are often rejected because they rely on an aggressive interpersonal style, which can be traced to parenting. The implication is that by teaching youngsters (and their parents) more effective ways of interacting with others, we can make rejection less likely. With improved social skills, rejected children would not need to resort to antisocial behaviors that peers deplore. Training of this sort does work. Rejected children can learn skills that lead to peer acceptance and thereby avoid the long-term harm associated with being rejected (Lochman et al., 2014).

Aggressive Children and Their Victims

Test Yourself 7.2

Remember and Understand

· Answer1.

Friends are usually similar in age, sex, race, popularity, and attitudes.

· Answer2.

Children with friends have higher self-esteem, are less likely to be lonely, and more often act prosocially (sharing and cooperating) than children without friends.

· Answer3.

As a group forms, a dominance hierarchy typically emerges, with the leader at the top.

· Answer4.

Peer pressure is most powerful when standards for appropriate behavior are vague.

· Answer5.

Popular children are socially skilled; they communicate more effectively and better integrate themselves into ongoing conversations.

· Answer6.

Rejected youngsters are more likely to drop out of school, to commit juvenile offenses, and to suffer from psychopathology.

· Answer7.

Some children who are chronic victims of aggression overreact and are easily irritated; other chronic victims are unwilling or unable to defend themselves.

Apply

· On page 248, you met Logan, who is the least popular child in his class. Logan’s mom is worried about her son’s lack of popularity and wants to know what she can do to help him. Logan’s dad thinks that Logan’s mom is upset over nothing—he argues that, like fame, popularity is fleeting and that Logan will turn out okay in the end. What advice would you give to Logan’s parents?

Create

When children play violent video games, they often become more aggressive.

CIOT/BSIP/AGE Fotostock

In contrast, many popular games such as Manhunt and Grand Theft Auto are violent, with players killing game characters in extraordinarily gruesome ways. Just as exposure to televised violence can make children behave more aggressively, playing violent video games can make children more aggressive, less empathic, and desensitize them to violence (Calvert et al., 2017).

Finally, a minority—roughly 10%—of youth get “hooked” on video games (Gentile, 2009). They show many of the same symptoms associated with pathological gambling: playing video games comes to dominate their lives, it provides a “high,” and it leads to conflict with others. Not surprisingly, extreme video-game playing is associated with less success in school, apparently because youth spend time playing games instead of studying (Weis & Cerankosky, 2010). Finally, over time adolescent extreme gamers are prone to depression, anxiety, and shyness (Coyne et al., 2020).

So, Roberto’s father (from the vignette) is wrong. Excessive game playing is harmful to youth especially when it involves playing violent games.

Social Media

Children don’t spend much time on social media—only 10 minutes a day—but adolescents spend more than an hour daily using social media (Rideout & Robb, 2019). Teens use social media to stay in touch with friends. Such communication leads many teens to feel more connected with their friends (Dredge & Schreurs, 2020). One explanation of this result is that adolescents are more likely to reveal intimate thoughts and feelings to friends over social media. Such self-disclosure promotes high-quality friendships—revealing something personal creates a bond with the other person and encourages that person to reveal in turn (Valkenburg & Peter, 2011).

Using social media helps adolescents form new friends face-to-face. In one study (Koutamanis et al., 2013), teens who messaged often were, a year later, more confident in their friendship skills. One idea is that social media provide a forum where adolescents can practice these friendship-related social skills, a forum where the costs of failure—someone rejects your invitations—are less painful.

There’s also a dark side to social media. As we saw on page 250, some youth are victims of cyberbullying, which refers to repeated threatening or intimidating communications, communications for which a victim is basically defenseless. Victims of cyberbullying are, at the least, embarrassed, and, at the worst, frightened, angry, lonely, and depressed (Campbell & Bauman, 2018).

Another potentially harmful aspect of social media—the impact on adolescents’ need for social status—is the focus of the Spotlight on Research feature that appears on page 254.

Spotlight on Research

Consequences for Adolescents of Negative Feedback on Social Media

Who were the investigators, and what was the aim of the study? Teenagers are concerned about their status among the peers. They often post personal information (e.g., pictures, stories) on social media and hope to receive their peers’ approval in the form of a “like.” Of course, they’re pleased when peers like their posts, but what are the consequences when they don’t receive as many likes as expected? And might the consequences be greater for teens who had been victimized previously? Answering these questions was the aim of research conducted by Hae Yeon Lee and her colleagues at the Universities of Rochester and Texas.

How did the investigators measure the topic of interest? Before participating in the main experiment, participants complete several questionnaires, including one about experiences being victimized by peers. In the experiment, adolescents were led to believe that they would be interacting online briefly with 11 other teenagers. They selected an avatar and wrote a short paragraph describing themselves. Then they viewed avatars and paragraphs submitted by 11 other (fictitious) peers. Participants could endorse others’ description by clicking on a like button. Participants received either 11 or 2 likes from the fictitious participants. After the interaction, participants reported on feelings of rejection, negative affect, and negative thoughts about themselves.

Who were the participants in the study? The study included 579 ninth graders (average age of 15.3 years) who attended an urban public high school. About 54% were European American; 33% were Hispanic/Latina/o.

What was the design of the study? This study was experimental. The independent variable was the number of likes that each participant received (11 versus 2); the dependent variables were the ratings on the questionnaires administered after the interaction task. The study was not developmental because the researchers tested only 15-year-olds.

Were there ethical concerns with the study? The researchers were concerned about the potential for harm for participants who received only two likes. Consequently, the researchers later explained that the “peers” weren’t real and they made sure that no participants remained distressed.

Real People: Applying Human Development

Tell Me About a Girl You Like a Lot

Every few years Riley was asked to describe a girl she liked a lot. Her descriptions changed, focusing less on behavior and emphasizing psychological properties. Let’s start with the description she gave as a 7-year-old:

Charlotte is short. She has black hair and brown eyes. She uses a wheelchair because she can’t walk. She’s in my class. She has dolls just like mine. She likes to sing and read.

Riley’s description of Charlotte is probably not too different from the way she would have described herself: the emphasis is on concrete characteristics such as Charlotte’s appearance, possessions, and preferences. Contrast this with the following description, which Riley gave as a 10-year-old:

Madelyn lives in my apartment building. She is a very good reader and is good at math and science. She’s nice to everyone in our class. And she’s very funny. Sometimes her jokes make me laugh so-o-o hard! She takes piano lessons and likes to play soccer.

Riley’s account still includes concrete features, such as where Madelyn lives and what she likes to do. However, psychological traits are also evident: Riley describes Madelyn as nice and funny. By age 10, children move beyond the purely concrete and observable in describing others. During adolescence, descriptions become even more complex, as you can see in the following, from Riley as a 16-year-old:

Harper is very understanding. Whenever anyone at school is upset, she’s there to give a helping hand. Yet in private, Harper can be so sarcastic. She can say some really nasty things about people. But I know she’d never say that stuff if she thought people would hear it because she wouldn’t want to hurt their feelings.

This description is more abstract: Riley now focuses on psychological traits like understanding and concern for others’ feelings. It’s also more integrated: Riley tries to explain how Harper can be both understanding and sarcastic.

Each of Riley’s three descriptions is typical. As a 7-year-old, she emphasized concrete characteristics; as a 10-year-old, she began to include psychological traits; and as a 16-year-old, she tried to integrate traits to form a cohesive account.

Research confirms that Riley—the girl in the Real People feature—describes friends like most children her age do: descriptions referring to appearances or possessions become less common as children grow older, as do descriptions giving general information such as the person’s age, gender, religion, or school. In contrast, descriptions of personality traits (e.g., “friendly” or “conceited”) increase between 8 and 14 years of age (Livesley & Bromley, 1973). Thus, children’s descriptions of others begin with the concrete and later become more conceptual.

More recent research supports the trend to more abstract and richer psychological descriptions of others but also indicates that young children’s understanding of other people is more sophisticated than is suggested by their verbal descriptions of people they know (Heyman, 2009). Indeed, 4- and 5-year-olds have begun to think about other people in terms of psychological traits such as being smart, friendly, helpful, and shy. They can use behavioral examples to infer an underlying trait: told about a child who won’t share cookies or won’t allow another child to play with a toy, 4- and 5-year-olds accurately describe the child as selfish. In addition, given information about a trait, they correctly predict future behavior: told about a child who is shy, they believe that the child will not volunteer to help an adult and will be quiet at a meal with many relatives (Liu et al., 2007).

One idiosyncrasy of young children’s descriptions of others is that they see others “through rose-colored glasses”—that is, until about 10 years of age, children have a bias to look for positive, not negative, traits in others. Young children are willing to believe that someone is smart (or friendly or helpful) based on relatively little evidence (and based on inconsistent evidence), but they require more evidence (and more consistent evidence) to decide that someone is mean or stupid (Boseovski, 2010). And they believe that nice kids will remain nice but mean kids will grow out of their meanness (Kramer at al., 2021).

Understanding What Others Think

One trademark of the preschooler’s thinking is difficulty in seeing the world from another person’s view. Piaget’s term for this is egocentrism, and it is a defining characteristic of his preoperational stage of development. As children move beyond the preschool years, they realize that others see the world differently, both literally and figuratively. For example, in the vignette, Dev knows why his little brother, Samar, is angry: Samar thinks that Dev is being bossy and mean. Dev understands that Samar doesn’t know that there is a good reason he can’t go to the basement.

One effective way to reduce prejudice is for youth from different races to work together toward a common goal, such as completing a class project.

iStockPhoto/Maya

Gender is often the first essentialized social group for children. Others follow but these vary based upon the social categories that are salient in a culture. For example, race is an essentialized social category for children in the United States, religion is an essentialized social category for children in Northern Ireland, and ethnicity is an essentialized social category for children in Israel. In each case, parents and other adults apparently use generics to convey properties about specific groups within their culture, resulting in children’s essentialist beliefs about those groups (Diesendruck, 2020).

Essentialist views of social groups apparently lead children (adults) to have stereotypes about those groups. Because all group members share an underlying essence, they should all act and think similarly. In addition, essentialist views also limit interactions between groups. Children see essentialized groups as fundamentally different, creating a “we versus them” mentality that lead children to interact mainly with members of their own group (Rhodes & Mandalaywala, 2017).

Finally, essentialized views of social groups lead to prejudice. Children quickly identify with their own essentialized groups (e.g., girls identify as girls); thereafter, they typically have an enhanced view of that group. That is, preschool and kindergarten children attribute many positive traits, such as being friendly and smart, and few negative traits, such as being mean, to their own group. Negative views of other groups form more slowly, beginning in the elementary school years (Rhodes & Baron, 2019).

What can parents, teachers, and other adults do to rid children of prejudice? One way is to encourage friendly and constructive contacts between children from different groups (Cameron et al., 2006; Turner & Cameron, 2016). For example, teachers might have children from different groups work on a class project. In sports, it might be mastering a new skill. By working together, Andrew realizes that Farès acts, thinks, and feels as he does simply because he’s Farès, not because he’s a Lebanese American.

Another useful approach is to ask children to play different roles (Davidson & Davidson, 1994; Tynes, 2007). They can be asked to imagine that—because of their race, ethnic background, or gender—they have been insulted verbally or not allowed to participate in special activities. Children might be asked to imagine that they weren’t invited to a party because they’re Hispanic American. Afterward, children reflect on how they felt when prejudice and discrimination was directed at them.

A final strategy against prejudice involves education. In one study (Hughes et al., 2007), European American elementary school children learned about the racism that famous African Americans experienced. For example, they learned that Jackie Robinson played for a team in the old Negro Leagues because the White people in charge of Major League Baseball wouldn’t allow African Americans to play. When children learned about racism directed at African Americans, they had more positive attitudes toward African Americans.

From experiences like these, children and adolescents discover for themselves that essentialist views exaggerate differences between social groups and that a person’s membership in a social group often reveals little about that person. They learn, instead, that each person is a unique mix of experiences, skills, and values.