Preschool Play

CHAPTER 10 EMOTIONAL AND SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN EARLY CHILDHOOD

My Family

Kyan Swa Lin, 9 years, MyanmarParental warmth, involvement, and playfulness are linked to children’s emotional and social competence. And as this image makes clear, gender typing is well underway during the preschool years. Chapter 10 considers these and other facets of early childhood emotional and social development.

Reprinted with permission from The International Museum of Children’s Art, Oslo, Norway

WHAT’S AHEAD IN CHAPTER 10

10.1 Self-Understanding

Foundations of Self-Concept • Emergence of Self-Esteem

■ Cultural Influences: Cultural Variations in Personal Storytelling: Implications for Early Self-Concept

10.2 Emotional Development

Understanding Emotion • Emotional Self-Regulation • Self-Conscious Emotions • Empathy and Sympathy

10.3 Peer Relations

Advances in Peer Sociability • First Friendships • Peer Relations and School Readiness • Social Problem Solving • Parental Influences on Early Peer Relations

10.4 Foundations of Morality and Aggression

The Psychoanalytic Perspective • Social Learning Theory • The Cognitive-Developmental Perspective • Development of Aggression

■ Cultural Influences: Ethnic Differences in the Consequences of Physical Punishment

10.5 Gender Typing

Gender-Stereotyped Beliefs and Behaviors • Biological Influences on Gender Typing • Environmental Influences on Gender Typing • Gender Identity • Reducing Gender Stereotyping in Young Children

■ Biology and Environment: Transgender Children

10.6 Child Rearing and Emotional and Social Development

Styles of Child Rearing • What Makes Authoritative Child Rearing Effective? • Cultural Variations • Child Maltreatment

As the children in Leslie’s classroom moved through the preschool years, their personalities took on clearer definition. By age 3, they voiced firm likes and dislikes as well as new ideas about themselves. “Stop bothering me,” Sammy said to Mark, who had reached for Sammy’s beanbag as Sammy aimed it toward the mouth of a large clown face. “See, I’m great at this game,” Sammy announced with confidence, an attitude that kept him trying, even though he missed most of the throws.

The children’s conversations also revealed early notions about morality. Often they combined statements about right and wrong with forceful attempts to defend their own desires. “You’re ‘posed to share,” stated Mark, grabbing the beanbag out of Sammy’s hand.

“I was here first! Gimme it back,” demanded Sammy, pushing Mark. The two boys struggled until Leslie intervened, provided an extra set of beanbags, and showed them how they could both play.

As the interaction between Sammy and Mark reveals, preschoolers quickly become complex social beings. Young children argue, grab, and push, but cooperative exchanges are far more frequent. Between ages 2 and 6, first friendships form, in which children converse, act out complementary roles, and learn that their own desires for companionship and toys are best met when they consider others’ needs and interests.

The children’s developing understanding of their social world was especially apparent in their growing attention to the dividing line between male and female. While Priti and Karen cared for a sick baby doll in the housekeeping area, Sammy, Vance, and Mark transformed the block corner into a busy intersection. “Green light, go!” shouted police officer Sammy as Vance and Mark pushed large wooden cars and trucks across the floor. Already, the children preferred peers of their own gender, and their play themes mirrored their culture’s gender stereotypes.

This chapter is devoted to the many facets of early childhood emotional and social development. We begin with children’s concepts of themselves and their changing understanding and expression of emotion. Then we consider their expanding insights into their social and moral worlds, their susceptibility to gender typing, and their increasing ability to manage their emotional and social behaviors. Finally, we discuss the ingredients of effective child rearing, including the complex conditions that support it and those that lead it to break down, contributing to the serious and widespread problems of child abuse and neglect. ■

10.1 SELF-UNDERSTANDING

10.1 Describe the development of self-concept and self-esteem in early childhood.

In Chapter 9, we noted that preschoolers acquire a vocabulary for talking about their inner mental lives and refine their understanding of mental states. As self-awareness strengthens, children focus more intently on qualities that make the self unique. They begin to develop a self-concept, the set of attributes, abilities, attitudes, and values that an individual believes defines who he or she is. This mental representation of the self has profound implications for children’s emotional and social lives, influencing, as Erik Erikson expressed it, their sense of initiative: eagerness to tackle new tasks, capacity to join in activities with peers, and willingness to discover what they can do with the help of adults.

10.1.1 Foundations of Self-Concept

Ask 3- to 5-year-olds to tell you about themselves, and you are likely to hear descriptions like this: “I’m Dana. I’m 4 years old. I can wash my hair all by myself. I have a new Lego set, and I made this big, big tower.” Preschoolers’ self-concepts largely consist of observable characteristics, such as their name, physical appearance, possessions, and everyday behaviors (Harter, 2012).

By age 3½, children also describe themselves in terms of typical emotions and attitudes (“I’m happy when I play with my friends”; “I don’t like scary TV programs”; “I usually do what Mommy says”), suggesting a beginning understanding of their unique psychological characteristics (Eder & Mangelsdorf, 1997). And by age 5, children’s degree of agreement with a battery of such statements coincides with maternal reports of their personality traits, indicating that older preschoolers have a sense of their own timidity, agreeableness, and positive or negative affect (Brown et al., 2008). As further support for this emerging grasp of personality, when given a trait label (“nice,” “mean”), 4-year-olds can appropriately link it to behavioral descriptions of others. For example, they know that a child who would pull a dog’s tail is mean, and they can predict that a nice child would share toys with a playmate (Chen, Corriveau, & Harris, 2016). But most preschoolers do not yet spontaneously say, “I’m nice” or “I’m shy.” Direct references to personality traits must wait for greater cognitive maturity.

When asked to tell about themselves, preschoolers typically mention observable characteristics—physical appearance, possessions, and everyday behaviors, such as “I can button my jacket.” They also have an emerging grasp of their unique psychological characteristics—for this 4-year-old, determination!

© LAURA DWIGHT PHOTOGRAPHY

A warm, sensitive parent–child relationship fosters a positive, coherent early self-concept. In one study, 4-year-olds with a secure attachment to their mothers were more likely than their insecurely attached agemates to describe themselves in favorable terms at age 5—with statements reflecting agreeableness and positive affect (Goodvin et al., 2008). Also, recall from Chapter 9 that securely attached preschoolers participate in more elaborative parent–child conversations about personally experienced events, which help them understand themselves (see page 327 in Chapter 9). When, in past-event conversations, a child discovers that she finds swimming, getting together with friends, and going to the zoo fun, she can begin to connect these specific experiences into a general understanding of “what I enjoy” (Fivush, 2011). The result is a clearer image of herself.

Elaborative reminiscing that focuses on young children’s internal states—their thoughts, feelings, and subjective experiences—plays an especially important role in early self-concept development. Although preschoolers rarely refer to personality traits, they are more likely to mention traits (“I’m smart,” “I’m really strong!”) and typical emotions (“My brother makes me feel cranky”) if their parents talk to them about causes and consequences of internal states (“Tell mommy why you were crying”) (Wang, Doan, & Song, 2010). Also, when parents reminisce with preschoolers about times they successfully resolved upsetting feelings, 4- and 5-year-olds describe their emotional tendencies more favorably (“I’m not scared, not me!”) (Goodvin & Romdall, 2013). By emphasizing the personal meaning of past events, conversations about internal states facilitate development of self-knowledge.

As early as age 2, parents use narratives of past events to impart rules, standards for behavior, and evaluative information about the child: “You added the milk when we made the mashed potatoes. That’s a very important job!” (Nelson, 2003). As the Cultural Influences box on the following page reveals, these self-evaluative narratives are a major means through which caregivers imbue the young child’s self-concept with cultural values.

As they talk about personally significant events and as their cognitive skills advance, preschoolers gradually come to view themselves as persisting over time—a change evident in their ability to anticipate their own future states and needs, which increases sharply from age 3 to 4 (Atance & Meltzoff, 2005; Povinelli, 2001). By age 5, children better understand that their future preferences are likely to differ from their current ones. Most agree that when they grow up, they will prefer reading newspapers to reading picture books and drinking coffee to drinking grape juice (Bélanger et al., 2014). By the end of the preschool years, children can set aside their current state of mind and take a future perspective.

Cultural InfluencesCultural Variations in Personal Storytelling: Implications for Early Self-Concept

Preschoolers of many cultural backgrounds participate in personal storytelling with their parents. The way parents select and interpret events in these narratives differs strikingly by culture, affecting the way children view themselves.

In one study, researchers spent hundreds of hours over a two-year period studying the storytelling practices of six middle-SES Irish-American families in Chicago and six middle-SES Chinese families in Taiwan. From extensive videotapes of adults’ conversations with the children from age 2½ to 4, the investigators identified personal stories and coded them for content, quality of their endings, and evaluation of the child (Miller, Fung, & Mintz, 1996; Miller et al., 1997; 2012).

Parents in both cultures discussed pleasurable holidays and family excursions in similar ways and with similar frequency. But five times more often than the Irish-American parents, the Chinese parents told long stories about their preschoolers’ previous misdeeds—using impolite language, writing on the wall, or playing in an overly rowdy way. These narratives, often sparked by a current misdeed, were conveyed with warmth and caring, stressed the impact of misbehavior on others (“You made Mama lose face”), and often ended with direct teaching of proper behavior (“Saying dirty words is not good”). By contrast, in the few instances in which Irish-American stories referred to transgressions, parents downplayed their seriousness, attributing them to the child’s spunk and assertiveness.

Early narratives about the child launch preschoolers’ self-concepts on culturally distinct paths (Miller, 2014). Influenced by Confucian traditions of strict discipline and social obligations, Chinese parents integrated these values into their stories, affirming the importance of not disgracing the family and explicitly conveying expectations in the story’s conclusion. By contrast, although Irish-American parents disciplined their children, they rarely dwelt on misdeeds in storytelling. In the few instances in which Irish-American stories referred to transgressions, parents interpreted these acts positively, perhaps to promote self-esteem (Miller, 2014; Miller et al., 1997; 2012).

Whereas most Americans believe that favorable self-esteem is crucial for healthy development, Chinese adults generally see it as unimportant or even negative—as impeding the child’s willingness to listen and be corrected (Miller et al., 2002). Consistent with this view, the Chinese parents did little to cultivate their child’s individuality. Instead, they used storytelling to guide the child toward socially responsible behavior. Hence, by the end of the preschool years, the Chinese child’s self-image emphasizes a sense of belonging and obligations to others (“I belong to the Lee family”; “I like to help my mom wash dishes”), whereas the American child’s is more autonomous, consisting largely of personal descriptions (“I do lots of puzzles”; “I like hockey”) (Wang, 2004; Wang, Doan, & Song, 2010).

A Chinese mother speaks gently to her child about proper behavior. Chinese parents often use story-telling to point out how their child’s misdeeds affect others. The Chinese child’s self-concept, in turn, emphasizes social obligations.

© RONNIE KAUFMAN/GETTY IMAGES

10.1.2 Emergence of Self-Esteem

Another aspect of self-concept emerges in early childhood: self-esteem, the judgments we make about our own worth and the feelings associated with those judgments. Make a list of your own self-judgments. Notice that, besides a global appraisal of your worth as a person, you have a variety of separate self-evaluations concerning different activities. These evaluations are among the most important aspects of self-development because they affect our emotional experiences, future behavior, and long-term psychological adjustment.

This preschooler confidently prepares to slide down the pole of a playground jungle gym. Her high self-esteem contributes greatly to her initiative in mastering new skills.

© LAURA DWIGHT PHOTOGRAPHY

By age 4, preschoolers have several self-judgments—for example, about learning things well in school, making friends, getting along with parents, and treating others kindly (Marsh, Ellis, & Craven, 2002). But young children lack the cognitive maturity necessary to develop a global sense of self-esteem. They are not yet able to integrate the judgments of other people, and they cannot combine information about their competencies in different domains. Thus, their self-appraisals are fragmented. Also, because they have difficulty distinguishing between their desired and their actual competence, they usually rate their own ability as extremely high and often underestimate task difficulty, as Sammy did when he asserted, despite his many misses, that he was great at beanbag throwing (Harter, 2012).

High self-esteem contributes greatly to preschoolers’ initiative during a period in which they must master many new skills. By age 3, children whose parents patiently encourage while offering information about how to succeed are enthusiastic and highly motivated. In contrast, children whose parents criticize their worth and performance give up easily when faced with challenges and express shame and despondency after failing (Kelley, Brownell, & Campbell, 2000). Adults can avoid promoting these self-defeating reactions by adjusting their expectations to children’s capacities, scaffolding children’s attempts at difficult tasks, and pointing out effort and improvement in children’s work or behavior.

10.2 EMOTIONAL DEVELOPMENT

10.2 Identify changes in understanding and expressing emotion during early childhood, citing factors that influence those changes.

Gains in representation, language, and self-concept support emotional development in early childhood. Between ages 2 and 6, children make strides in the emotional abilities that, collectively, researchers refer to as emotional competence (Denham et al., 2011). First, preschoolers gain in emotional understanding, becoming better able to talk about feelings and to respond appropriately to others’ emotional signals. Second, they become better at emotional self-regulation—in particular, at coping with intense negative emotion. Finally, preschoolers more often experience self-conscious emotions and empathy, which contribute to their developing sense of morality.

Parenting strongly influences preschoolers’ emotional competence. Emotional competence, in turn, is vital for successful peer relationships and overall mental health.

10.2.1 Understanding Emotion

Preschoolers’ vocabulary for talking about emotion expands rapidly, and they use it skillfully to reflect on their own and others’ behavior. Here are some excerpts from conversations in which 2-year-olds and 6-year-olds commented on emotionally charged experiences:

Two-year-old: [After father shouted at child, she became angry, shouting back.] “I’m mad at you, Daddy. I’m going away. Good-bye.”

Two-year-old: [Commenting on another child who refused to nap and cried.] “Mom, Annie cry. Annie sad.”

Six-year-old: [In response to mother’s comment, “It’s hard to hear the baby crying.”] “Well, it’s not as hard for me as it is for you.” [When mother asked why] “Well, you like Johnny better than I do! I like him a little, and you like him a lot, so I think it’s harder for you to hear him cry.”

Six-year-old: [Trying to comfort a small boy in church whose mother had gone up to communion.] “Aw, that’s all right. She’ll be right back. Don’t be afraid. I’m here.” (Bretherton et al., 1986, pp. 536, 540, 541)

Cognitive Development and Emotional Understanding

As these examples show, young preschoolers refer to causes, consequences, and behavioral signs of emotion, and over time their understanding becomes more accurate and complex (Thompson, Winer, & Goodvin, 2011). By age 4 to 5, emotion labeling differentiates: Children use happy, sad, angry, afraid, and surprised accurately (Widen, 2013). Older preschoolers also correctly judge the causes of diverse basic emotions (“He’s surprised because his mom’s hair is pink,” “He’s sad because his goldfish died”). Their explanations tend to emphasize external factors over internal states, a balance that changes with age (Rieffe, Terwogt, & Cowan, 2005). In Chapter 9, we saw that after age 4, children appreciate that both desires and beliefs motivate behavior. Once these understandings are secure, children’s grasp of how internal factors can trigger emotion expands.

Three- to 5-year-olds are good at inferring how others are feeling based on their behavior. For example, they can tell that a child who jumps up and down and claps his hands is probably happy, and that a child who is tearful and withdrawn is sad (Widen & Russell, 2011). They also realize that thinking and feeling are interconnected—that focusing on negative thoughts (“I broke my arm, so now I have to wear this itchy cast that makes it hard to play”) is likely to make a person feel worse, but thinking positively (“Now I have a cool cast my friends can write their names on!”) can help a person feel better (Bamford & Lagattuta, 2012). And they are aware that being reminded of a past experience or anticipating a future experience can influence one’s current emotions, an understanding that strengthens with age (Lagattuta, 2014). Furthermore, preschoolers come up with effective ways to relieve others’ negative emotions, such as hugging to reduce sadness (Fabes et al., 1988). Overall, they have an impressive ability to interpret, predict, and change others’ feelings.

At the same time, preschoolers have difficulty interpreting situations that offer conflicting cues about how a person is feeling. When shown a picture of a happy-faced child with a broken bicycle, 4- and 5-year-olds tended to rely only on the emotional expression: “He’s happy because he likes to ride his bike.” Older children more often reconciled the two cues: “He’s happy because his father promised to help fix his broken bike” (Gnepp, 1983; Hoffner & Badzinski, 1989). As in their approach to Piagetian tasks, young children focus on the most obvious aspect of a complex emotional situation to the neglect of other relevant information.

Social Experience and Emotional Understanding

The more parents label emotions, explain them, and express warmth and enthusiasm when conversing with preschoolers, the more “emotion words” children use and the better developed their emotional understanding (Fivush & Haden, 2005; Laible & Song, 2006). Discussions focusing on negative experiences or involving disagreements are particularly helpful.

In one study, mothers engaged in more detailed dialogues about causes of emotion and more often validated their preschoolers’ feelings when discussing negative (as opposed to positive) topics. And the more elaborative the discussions, the higher the children scored in emotional understanding (Laible, 2011). In another study, when mothers explained feelings, negotiated, and compromised during conflicts with their 2½-year-olds, their children, at age 3, were advanced in emotional understanding and used similar strategies to resolve disagreements (Laible & Thompson, 2002). Such dialogues seem to help children reflect on the causes and consequences of emotion while also modeling mature communication skills. Furthermore, preschoolers who are securely attached better understand emotion (Cooke et al., 2016). A secure attachment relationship allows for open parent–child communication about feelings along with sensitive responsiveness to the child’s range of emotional expressions. And as we have seen, attachment security is related to more elaborative parent–child narratives, including discussions that highlight the emotional significance of past events.

Warm, elaborative conversations in which parents label and explain emotions enhance preschoolers’ emotional understanding.

Michael Hevesy/Getty Images

Knowledge about emotion helps children in their efforts to get along with others. As early as 3, it is related to friendly, considerate behavior (such as sharing, helping), constructive responses to disputes with agemates, and perspective-taking ability (Hughes & Ensor, 2010; O’Brien et al., 2011; Sette, Spinrad, & Baumgartner, 2017). As children learn about emotion from interacting with adults, they engage in more emotion talk with siblings and friends (Hughes & Dunn, 1998). Referring to feelings and exchanging positive emotion when interacting with playmates, in turn, predicts better liking by peers (Fabes et al., 2001; Lindsey, 2017). Children seem to recognize that acknowledging others’ emotions and explaining their own enhance the quality of relationships.

10.2.2 Emotional Self-Regulation

Language, along with preschoolers’ growing understanding of emotion, contributes to gains in emotional self-regulation, or ability to manage the experience and expression of emotion (Blankson et al., 2013; Thompson, 2015). By age 3 to 4, children verbalize a variety of strategies for alleviating negative emotion that they tailor to specific situations (Davis et al., 2010; Dennis & Kelemen, 2009). For example, they know they can restrict sensory input (cover their eyes or ears to block out a scary sight or sound), talk to themselves (“Mommy said she’ll be back soon”), change their goals (decide that they don’t want to play anyway after being excluded from a game), or repair a relationship (“stop fighting and share” to resolve a conflict with a peer). The effectiveness of preschoolers’ suggested strategies improves with age.

By covering their ears to protect themselves from the noise of an imaginary explosion, these 4-year-olds reveal their awareness of a strategy for coping with scary sounds.

© LAURA DWIGHT PHOTOGRAPHY

As children use these strategies, emotional outbursts decline. Gains in executive function—in particular, inhibition and flexible shifting of attention—contribute greatly to managing negative emotion. Preschoolers who can distract themselves when upset and focus on how to handle their feelings tend to become cooperative kindergartners with few problem behaviors, yielding benefits for academic as well as social competence. And their effective management of emotion predicts further gains in emotion understanding (Denham et al., 2012; von Salisch, Haenel, & Denham, 2015). Over time, emotional self-regulation and understanding of emotion seem to mutually support each other.

By age 3, skill at emotional self-regulation predicts children’s ability to portray an emotion they do not feel—for example, reacting cheerfully after receiving an undesirable gift (Kieras et al., 2005). These emotional “masks” are largely limited to the positive feelings of happiness and surprise. Children of all ages (and adults as well) find it harder to act sad, angry, or disgusted than pleased (Denham, 1998). To promote good social relations, most cultures teach children to communicate positive feelings and inhibit unpleasant ones.

Temperament affects the development of emotional self-regulation. Children who experience negative emotion intensely find it harder to inhibit feelings and shift attention away from disturbing events. They are more likely to be anxious and fearful, respond with irritation to others’ distress, react angrily or aggressively when frustrated, and get along poorly with teachers and peers (Eisenberg, Smith, & Spinrad, 2011; Raikes et al., 2007).

To avoid social difficulties, emotionally reactive children must develop effective emotion-regulation strategies. By watching parents manage their feelings, children learn strategies for regulating their own. Parents who are in tune with their own emotional experiences tend to be supportive and patient with their preschoolers, offering suggestions and explanations of emotion-regulation strategies that strengthen children’s capacity to handle stress (Meyer et al., 2014; Morris et al., 2011).

In contrast, when parents rarely express positive emotion, dismiss children’s feelings as unimportant, and fail to control their own anger, children’s emotion management and psychological adjustment suffer (Hill et al., 2006; Thompson & Goodman, 2010). And because emotionally reactive children become increasingly difficult to rear, they are often targets of ineffective parenting, which compounds their poor self-regulation. Children in economically disadvantaged families with an accumulation of risks—low parental education, unemployment, single parenting, frequent moves, crowded households—are especially susceptible to emotional self-regulation difficulties (Cadima et al, 2016; Sturge-Apple et al., 2017).

Conversations in which adults prepare children for difficult experiences by discussing what to expect and ways to handle negative feelings contribute to children’s effective emotional self-regulation (Thompson & Goodman, 2010). Nevertheless, preschoolers’ vivid imaginations and incomplete grasp of the distinction between fantasy and reality make fears common in early childhood. Consult Applying What We Know on the following page for ways adults can help young children manage fears.

10.2.3 Self-Conscious Emotions

One morning in Leslie’s classroom, a group of children crowded around for a bread-baking activity. Leslie asked them to wait patiently while she got a baking pan. But Sammy reached over to feel the dough, and the bowl tumbled off the table. When Leslie returned, Sammy looked at her, then covered his eyes with his hands, and said, “I did something bad.” He felt ashamed and guilty.

Applying What We Know

Helping Children Manage Common Fears of Early Childhood

Fear

Suggestion

Monsters, ghosts, and darkness

Reduce exposure to frightening stories and TV programs until the child is better able to understand that fantastical beings are not real. “Search” the child’s room for monsters, showing him that none are there. Use a night-light, sit by the child’s bed until the child falls asleep, and tuck in a favorite toy for protection.

Preschool or child care

If the child resists going to preschool but seems content once there, the fear is probably separation. Provide a sense of warmth and caring while gently encouraging independence. If the child fears being at preschool, find out why—the teacher, the children, or a crowded, noisy environment. Provide support by accompanying the child and gradually lessening the amount of time you stay.

Animals

Do not force the child to approach a dog, cat, or other animal that arouses fear. Let the child move at her or his own pace. Demonstrate how to hold and pet the animal, showing that when treated gently, the animal is friendly. If the child is larger than the animal, emphasize this: “You’re so big. That kitty is probably afraid of you!”

Intense fears

If a child’s fear is intense, persists for a long time, interferes with daily activities, and cannot be reduced in any of the ways just suggested, it has reached the level of a phobia. Some phobias are linked to family problems and require counseling. Other phobias diminish without treatment as the child’s emotional self-regulation improves.

As their self-concepts develop, preschoolers become increasingly sensitive to praise and blame or (as Sammy did) to the possibility of such feedback. As a result, they more often experience self-conscious emotions—feelings that involve injury to or enhancement of their sense of self (see Chapter 7). Around age 3, self-conscious emotions become clearly linked to self-evaluation (Lagattuta & Thompson, 2007; Lewis, 1995). But because preschoolers are still developing standards of excellence and conduct, they depend on messages from parents, teachers, and others who matter to them to know when to feel proud, ashamed, or guilty (“That block tower is so tall. You’re a great tower builder!” “Don’t grab crayons from Adrian. If you want that color, you need to wait for a turn.”) (Thompson, Meyer, & McGinley, 2006).

Furthermore, it takes time before children recognize self-conscious emotions in themselves and others. For example, when 3- to 6-year-olds were shown photos of a happy, sad, surprised, and proud child after building a block tower taller than that of an adult and labeled as the fastest tower-builder in the world, not until age 5 to 6 did most select the photo depicting pride as the emotion they felt. And whereas many 4-year-olds can point to a photo of an unfamiliar peer that conveys pride when asked to do so, nearly all 5- and 6-year-olds can do so (Garcia, Janis, & Flom, 2015; Tracy, Robins, & Lagatutta, 2005). Children seem to identify a photo expressing another’s pride before they recognize the emotion in themselves.

When parents repeatedly comment on the worth of the child and her performance (“That’s a bad job! I thought you were a good girl”), children experience self-conscious emotions intensely—more shame after failure, more pride after success. In contrast, when parents focus on how to improve performance (“You did it this way; now try doing it that way”), they induce moderate, more adaptive levels of shame and pride and greater persistence on difficult tasks (Kelley, Brownell, & Campbell, 2000; Lewis, 1998).

Among Western children, intense shame is associated with feelings of personal inadequacy (“I’m stupid”; “I’m a terrible person”) and with maladjustment—withdrawal and depression as well as intense anger and aggression toward those who shamed them (Muris & Meesters, 2014). In contrast, guilt—when it occurs in appropriate circumstances and is neither excessive nor accompanied by shame—is related to good adjustment. Guilt helps children resist harmful impulses, and as early as age 2½ it motivates a misbehaving child to confess, repair the damage, and behave kindly and helpfully toward others in the future (Drummond et al., 2017; Mascolo & Fischer, 2007). But overwhelming guilt—involving such high emotional distress that the child cannot make amends—is linked to depressive symptoms as early as age 3 (Luby et al., 2009).

Finally, the consequences of shame for children’s adjustment may vary across cultures. As illustrated in the Cultural Influences box on page 357, people in Asian societies, who tend to define themselves in relation to their social group, view shame as an adaptive reminder of an interdependent self and of the importance of others’ judgments (Friedlmeier, Corapci, & Cole, 2011).

10.2.4 Empathy and Sympathy

Empathy is another emotional capacity that becomes more common in early childhood. It serves as a motivator of prosocial behavior—actions aimed at benefitting others (Eisenberg, Spinrad, & Knafo-Noam, 2015). Compared with toddlers, preschoolers rely more on words to communicate empathic feelings, a change that indicates a more reflective level of empathy. When a 4-year-old received a Christmas gift that she hadn’t included on her list for Santa, she assumed it belonged to another little girl and pleaded with her parents, “We’ve got to give it back—Santa’s made a big mistake. I think the girl’s crying ‘cause she didn’t get her present!”

Preschoolers’ growing understanding of the causes of others’ distress influences their empathic responsiveness. As early as age 3, they are more likely to display empathic concern when another’s upset emotional reaction is clearly justified—appropriate to the harm experienced rather than an overreaction to a minor inconvenience or without any apparent cause (Hepbach, Vaish, & Tomasello, 2013). As the ability to take the perspective of others improves with age, empathic responding increases.

Yet for some children, empathizing—feeling with an upset adult or peer and responding emotionally in a similar way—does not yield acts of kindness and helpfulness but, instead, escalates into personal distress. In trying to reduce their negative feelings, these children focus on their own anxiety rather than on the person in need. As a result, empathy does not lead to sympathy—feelings of concern or sorrow for another’s plight.

Temperament plays a role in whether empathy prompts sympathetic, prosocial behavior or a personally distressed, self-focused response. Children who are sociable, assertive, and good at regulating emotion are more likely to help, share, and comfort others in distress. But poor emotion regulators less often display sympathetic concern and prosocial behavior (Eisenberg, Spinrad, & Knafo-Noam, 2015; Valiente et al., 2004). When faced with someone in need, they react with behavioral and physiological distress—frowning, lip biting, thumb sucking, comfort seeking, a rise in heart rate, and a sharp increase in electroencephalogram (EEG) brain-wave activity in the right cerebral hemisphere, which houses negative emotion—indications that they are overwhelmed by their feelings (Liew et al., 2010; Pickens, Field, & Nawrocki, 2001).

As children’s language skills and capacity to take the perspective of others improve, empathy also increases, motivating prosocial behavior.

© LAURA DWIGHT PHOTOGRAPHY

Preschoolers’ empathic concern strengthens in the context of a secure parent–child attachment relationship (Murphy & Laible, 2013). When parents are warm, show sensitive, empathic concern for their preschoolers’ feelings, and promote effective emotion-regulation strategies, children are more likely to react with concern to others’ distress—a response that persists into adolescence and early adulthood (Michalik et al., 2007; Newton et al., 2014; Taylor et al., 2013). In addition, parents can teach children the importance of kindness and can intervene when they display inappropriate emotion—practices that predict high levels of sympathetic responding (Eisenberg, 2003).

In contrast, angry, punitive parenting can disrupt the development of empathy and sympathy at an early age—particularly among children who are poor emotion regulators and who therefore respond to parental hostility with especially high personal distress (Knafo & Plomin, 2006; Valiente et al., 2004). Physically abused preschoolers, who experience negative parenting to an extreme, rarely express concern at a peer’s unhappiness but, rather, are likely to withdraw or react with verbal and physical attacks (Anthonysamy & Zimmer-Gembeck, 2007). Their behavior resembles their parents’ insensitive responding to the suffering of others.

Ask Yourself

Connect ■ Cite ways that parenting contributes to preschoolers’ self-concept, self-esteem, emotional understanding, emotional self-regulation, self-conscious emotions, and empathy and sympathy. Do you see any patterns? Explain.

Apply ■ On a hike with his family, 5-year-old Ryan became frightened when he reached a steep section of the trail. His father gently helped him climb up while saying, “Can you be brave? Being brave is when you feel scared but you do it anyway.” What aspect of emotional development is Ryan’s father trying to promote, and why is his intervention likely to help Ryan?

Reflect ■ When you were a child, did your parents actively promote your self-esteem? How did their efforts reflect your family’s cultural background? Explain.

10.3 PEER RELATIONS

10.3 Describe peer sociability, friendship, and social problem solving in early childhood, along with cultural and parental influences on early peer relations.

As children become increasingly self-aware and better at communicating and understanding the thoughts and feelings of others, their skill at interacting with peers improves rapidly. Peers provide young children with learning experiences they can get in no other way. Because peers interact on an equal footing, they must keep a conversation going, cooperate, and set goals in play. With peers, children form friendships—special relationships marked by attachment and common interests. Let’s look at how peer interaction changes over the preschool years.

10.3.1 Advances in Peer Sociability

Mildred Parten (1932), one of the first to study peer sociability among 2- to 5-year-olds, noticed a dramatic rise with age in joint, interactive play. She concluded that social development proceeds in a three-step sequence. It begins with nonsocial activity—unoccupied, onlooker behavior and solitary play. Then it shifts to parallel play, a limited form of social participation in which a child plays near other children with similar materials but does not try to influence their behavior. At the highest level are two forms of true social interaction—associative play and cooperative play. In associative play, children engage in separate activities but exchange toys and comment on one another’s behavior. In cooperative play, a more advanced type of interaction, children orient toward a common goal, such as acting out a make-believe theme.

Four-year-olds (left) engage in parallel play. Cooperative play (right) develops later than parallel play, but preschoolers continue to move back and forth between the two types of sociability. They often use parallel play as a respite from the complex demands of cooperation.

© LAURA DWIGHT PHOTOGRAPHY

© LAURA DWIGHT PHOTOGRAPHY

Follow-Up Research on Peer Sociability

Longitudinal evidence indicates that these play forms emerge in the order Parten suggested but that later-appearing ones do not replace earlier ones in a developmental sequence (Rubin, Bukowski, & Parker, 2006). Rather, all types coexist in early childhood.

During classroom free-play periods, preschoolers often transition from onlooker to parallel to cooperative play and back again (Robinson et al., 2003). They seem to use parallel play as a way station. To successfully join the ongoing play of peers, they often first engage in parallel play nearby, easing into the group’s activities—a strategy that increases the likelihood of being accepted. Later, they may return to parallel play as a respite from the high demands of complex social interaction and as a crossroad to new activities.

Look and Listen

Observe several 3- to 5-year-olds during a free-play period in a preschool or child-care program. How much time does each child devote to nonsocial activity, parallel play, and socially interactive play? Do children seem to use parallel play as a way station between activities?

Although nonsocial activity declines with age, it is still the most frequent form among 3- to 4-year-olds. Even among kindergartners, it continues to occupy about one-third of children’s free-play time. Both solitary and parallel play remain fairly stable from 3 to 6 years of age, accounting for as much of the young child’s play as highly social, cooperative interaction (Rubin, Fein, & Vandenberg, 1983).

We now understand it is the type, not the amount, of solitary and parallel play that changes during early childhood. In studies of preschoolers’ play in Taiwan and the United States, researchers rated the cognitive maturity of nonsocial, parallel, and cooperative play, using the categories shown in Table 10.1. Within each of Parten’s play types, older children displayed more cognitively mature behavior than younger children (Pan, 1994; Rubin, Watson, & Jambor, 1978).

Often parents wonder whether a preschooler who spends large amounts of time playing alone is developing normally. But only certain types of nonsocial activity—aimless wandering, hovering near peers but not joining in, and functional play involving immature, repetitive motor action—are cause for concern. Children who behave reticently, by watching peers without playing, are usually temperamentally shy and inhibited—high in social anxiety (Coplan & Ooi, 2014). Their parents tend to overprotect them, criticize their social awkwardness, and unnecessarily control their play activities instead of patiently encouraging them to approach other children and helping them form at least one rewarding friendship, which protects against persisting adjustment problems (Guimond et al., 2012; Rubin, Bukowski, & Parker, 2006; Rubin, Burgess, & Hastings, 2002). And preschoolers who engage in solitary, repetitive behavior (banging blocks, making a doll jump up and down) tend to be immature, impulsive children who find it difficult to regulate anger and aggression (Coplan et al., 2001). In the classroom, both reticent and impulsive children experience peer ostracism, with boys at greater risk for rejection than girls (Coplan & Arbeau, 2008).

Other preschoolers with low rates of peer interaction do not display socially anxious or impulsive behavior. Most simply prefer to play alone, and their solitary activities are positive and constructive. When they do play with peers, such children, at least when studied in North America, show socially skilled behavior and form positive friendships (Coplan, Ooi, & Nocita, 2015). Also, Chinese-American preschoolers with shy dispositions whose immigrant mothers promote culturally valued modesty seem to develop social skills that protect them from peer rejection (Balkaya et al., 2018). In avoiding attention for themselves and politely complying with playmates’ wishes, these children seem to regulate their social anxiety by behaving in an unassuming, agreeable, peer-supportive manner.

Table 10.1 Developmental Sequence of Cognitive Play Categories

Play Category

Description

Examples

Functional play

Simple, repetitive motor movements with or without objects, especially common during the first 2 years

Running around a room, rolling a car back and forth, kneading clay with no intent to make something

Constructive play

Creating or constructing something, especially common between 3 and 6 years

Making a house out of toy blocks, drawing a picture, putting together a puzzle

Make-believe play

Acting out everyday and imaginary roles, especially common between 2 and 6 years

Playing house, school, or police officer; acting out storybook or television characters

Source: Rubin, Fein, & Vandenberg, 1983.

Still, a few North American preschoolers who engage in age-appropriate solitary play—again, more often boys—are rebuffed by peers (Coplan et al., 2001, 2004). Perhaps because quiet play is inconsistent with the “masculine” gender role, boys who engage in it are at risk for negative reactions from their male classmates.

As noted in Chapter 9, sociodramatic play—an advanced form of cooperative play—becomes especially common over the preschool years. In joint make-believe, preschoolers act out and respond to one another’s pretend feelings. They also explore and gain control of fear-arousing experiences when they play doctor or pretend to search for monsters in a magical forest. As a result, they can better understand others’ feelings and regulate their own (Meyers & Berk, 2014). Finally, preschoolers spend much time negotiating roles and rules in sociodramatic play. To create and manage complex plots, they must resolve disputes through discussion and compromise.

When researchers observed free-play periods in preschools, they found that girls participated more in sociodramatic play, whereas boys participated more in friendly, vigorous interactions called rough-and-tumble play. Each type of play was associated with expressions of positive emotion and predicted children’s emotional understanding and self-regulation one year later (Lindsey & Colwell, 2013). Both sociodramatic play and rough-and-tumble play require children to exercise self-control and respond to peers’ verbal and nonverbal emotional cues. We will return to the topic of rough-and-tumble play in Chapter 11.

Cultural Variations

Peer sociability takes different forms, depending on the relative importance cultures place on group harmony as opposed to individual autonomy (Chen, 2012). For example, children in India generally play in large groups. Much of their behavior is imitative, occurs in unison, and involves close physical contact—a play style requiring high levels of cooperation (Roopnarine et al., 1994). In a game called Bhatto Bhatto, children act out a script about a trip to the market, touching one another’s elbows and hands as they pretend to cut and share a tasty vegetable.

The group-oriented play reflected in this example, which is characteristic of non-Western cultures that highly value interdependence, may make the unsociability of children who prefer to play alone unacceptable. Consistent with this idea, preference for solitary activities in school-age children is associated with poor academic and social adjustment in China, where it seems to be viewed as self-focused and impolite (Chen, 2010; Liu et al., 2015). In Western cultures, solitary play is better accepted, perhaps because it is often regarded as an expression of independence, or personal choice.

Cultural beliefs about the importance of play also affect early peer associations. Caregivers who view play as mere entertainment are less likely to provide props or to encourage pretend than those who value its cognitive and social benefits (Gaskins, 2014). Recall the description of children’s daily lives in village and tribal cultures, described on page 322 in Chapter 9. Mayan parents, for example, do not promote children’s play—yet Mayan children are socially competent. When Mayan children do pretend, their play themes are interpretive of daily life—involving a limited number of scripts that reflect everyday roles and experiences. Children in industrialized, urban contexts more often engage in inventive play, generating make-believe scenarios unconstrained by actual experience (Gaskins, 2013, 2015). Perhaps Western-style sociodramatic play, with its elaborate materials and wide-ranging imaginative themes, is particularly important for social development in societies where the worlds of adults and children are distinct. It may be less crucial in village cultures where children participate in adult activities from an early age.

Masai children of Kenya cooperatively construct a model of a village dwelling using twigs and mud. Group-oriented play is characteristic of non-Western cultures that value interdependence and harmony over individual autonomy.

© Images of Africa Photobank/Alamy Stock Photo

10.3.2 First Friendships

As preschoolers interact, first friendships form that serve as important contexts for emotional and social development. To adults, friendship is a mutual relationship involving companionship, sharing, understanding of thoughts and feelings, and caring for and comforting each other in times of need. In addition, mature friendships endure over time and survive occasional conflicts.

Preschoolers understand something about the uniqueness of friendship. They say that a friend is someone “who likes you” and with whom you spend a lot of time playing. Yet their ideas about friendship are far from mature. Four- to 7-year-olds regard friendship as pleasurable play and sharing of toys. But friendship does not yet have a long-term, enduring quality based on mutual trust (Damon, 1988; Hartup, 2006). “Mark’s my best friend,” Sammy would declare on days when they got along well. But when a dispute arose, he would reverse himself: “Mark, you’re not my friend!” Nevertheless, preschool friendships can be remarkably stable across early childhood, as long as peers remain in the same social group. In one study, 40 percent mentioned the same best friends—the children they like to play with most—a year later (Dunn, 2004; Eivers et al., 2012).

Already, interactions between preschoolers who mutually name each other as friends are especially positive, reflecting greater support and intimacy than do other peer relationships (Furman & Rose, 2015; Hartup, 2006). Preschoolers give far more reinforcement—greetings, praise, and compliance—to their friends, and they also receive more from them. Friends also play together in more complex ways and are more cooperative and emotionally expressive—talking, laughing, and looking at each other more often than nonfriends do.

As early as the preschool years, children with a mutual friendship are better adjusted and more socially competent (Shin et al., 2014). Furthermore, children entering kindergarten who have friends in their class or who readily make new friends adjust to school more favorably (Ladd, Birch, & Buhs, 1999; Proulx & Poulin, 2013). Perhaps the company of friends serves as a secure base from which to develop new relationships, enhancing children’s feelings of comfort in the new classroom.

10.3.3 Peer Relations and School Readiness

The ease with which children make new friends and are accepted by classmates predicts cooperative participation in classroom activities, task persistence, and academic skills in preschool, which carry over to better academic performance in kindergarten and the early school grades (Bell et al., 2016; Walker & Henderson, 2012; Ziv, 2013). Of course, kindergartners with friendly, prosocial behavioral styles make new friends easily, whereas those with weak emotional self-regulation skills and argumentative, aggressive, or peer-avoidant styles establish poor-quality relationships and make few friends.

In Chapter 7, we indicated that certain genetically influenced temperamental traits—negative mood, emotional reactivity, and weak effortful control—place children at risk for adjustment problems, including peer difficulties (Boivin et al., 2013). But recall, also, that environment—in particular, parenting quality—contributes profoundly to outcomes for these children. Early childhood classroom contexts also make a difference. In research in which identical-twin pair members’ kindergarten experiences differed, those encountering peer rejection or conflict-ridden teacher relationships performed less well academically in first grade than their twin counterparts with more favorable classroom social experiences (Vitaro et al., 2012).

In evaluating readiness for school, children’s capacity for friendly, cooperative interaction is just as important as their academic skills.

Ingram Publishing/Getty Images

The capacity to form mutually rewarding friendships, cooperate with peers, and build positive ties with teachers enables young children to integrate themselves into classroom environments in ways that foster both academic and social competence. Socially competent preschoolers are more motivated and persistent, consistently exceeding their less socially skilled peers in language, literacy, and math scores in the early school grades (Walker & Henderson, 2012; Ziv, 2013). Because social maturity in early childhood contributes to academic performance, readiness for kindergarten must be assessed in terms of not only academic skills but also social skills.

Young children’s positive peer interactions occur most often within child-controlled, playful pursuits, making it important for early childhood programs to provide space, time, materials, and adult scaffolding to support free-play and guided-play activities (Booren, Downer, & Vitiello, 2012; Shearer et al., 2016). Warm, responsive teacher–child interaction is also vital, especially for shy children and for impulsive, emotionally negative, and aggressive children, who are at high risk for social difficulties (Brendgen et al., 2011; Vitaro et al., 2012). Recall from Chapter 9 that by strengthening teacher training, REDI-C, a supplementary preschool intervention, enhances both academic and social skills of children enrolled in Head Start (see page 341 in Chapter 9). Along with excellent teacher preparation, other indicators of program quality—small group sizes, generous teacher–child ratios, and developmentally appropriate daily activities—create classroom conditions that make positive teacher and peer relationships more likely.

10.3.4 Social Problem Solving

As noted earlier, children, even those who are best friends, come into conflict—events that provide invaluable learning experiences in resolving disputes constructively. Preschoolers’ disagreements only rarely result in hostile encounters. Although friends argue more than other peers do, they are also more likely to work out their differences through negotiation and to continue interacting (Laursen & Adams, 2018).

At your next opportunity, observe preschoolers’ play, noting disputes over objects (“That’s mine!” “I had it first!”), entry into and control over play activities (“I’m on your team, Jerry.” “No, you’re not!”), and disagreements over facts, ideas, and beliefs (“I’m taller than he is.” “No, you aren’t!”). These social conflicts, which children take quite seriously, provide repeated occasions for social problem solving—generating and applying strategies that prevent or resolve disagreements, resulting in outcomes that are both acceptable to others and beneficial to the self. To engage in social problem solving, children must bring together diverse social understandings.

The Social Problem-Solving Process

The most influential model of the social problem-solving process organizes it into the circular series of steps shown in Figure 10.1 (Crick & Dodge, 1994). Notice how this flowchart takes an information-processing approach, clarifying exactly what a child must do to grapple with and solve a social problem. It enables identification of processing deficits, so intervention can be tailored to meet individual needs.

Figure 10.1 An information-processing model of social problem solving. The model is circular because children often engage in several information-processing activities at once—for example, interpreting information as they notice it and continuing to consider the meaning of another’s behavior while they generate and evaluate problem-solving strategies. The model also takes into account the impact of mental state on social information processing—in particular, children’s knowledge of social rules, their representations of past social experiences, and their expectations for future experiences. Peer evaluations and responses to enacted strategies are also important factors in social problem solving. (Adapted from N. R. Crick & K. A. Dodge, 1994, “A Review and Reformulation of Social Information-Processing Mechanisms in Children’s Social Adjustment,” Psychological Bulletin, 115, 74–101, Figure 2 [adapted], p. 76. Copyright © 1994 by the American Psychological Association. Reprinted with permission of the American Psychological Association.)

Social problem solving profoundly affects peer relations. Children who get along well with agemates interpret social cues accurately, formulate goals (helping or cooperating with peers) that enhance relationships, and have a repertoire of effective problem-solving strategies—for example, politely asking to play, requesting an explanation when they do not understand a peer’s behavior, and working out a compromise when faced with peer disagreement. In contrast, children with peer difficulties often hold biased social expectations. They attend selectively to social cues (such as hostile acts) and misinterpret others’ behavior (view an unintentional jostle as hostile). Their social goals (satisfying an impulse, getting even with or avoiding a peer) frequently lead to strategies that damage relationships (Dodge, Coie, & Lynam, 2006; Meece & Mize, 2011). They might barge into a play group without asking, use threats and physical force, or fearfully hover around peers’ activities.

Children improve greatly in social problem solving over the preschool and early school years. With age, they increasingly negotiate with peers through persuasion and compromise, think of alternative strategies when an initial one does not work, and resolve disagreements without adult intervention (Mayeux & Cillessen, 2003; Walker et al., 2013). By kindergarten, the accuracy and effectiveness of each component of social problem solving are related to socially competent behavior (Dodge et al., 1986).

Enhancing Social Problem Solving

Interventions in preschool programs aimed at equipping children with the knowledge, attitudes and skills depicted in Figure 10.1 yield consistent gains in children’s social competence and reductions in externalizing behavior problems (anger and aggression). Because of their increased risk for social adjustment difficulties, most of these efforts focus on economically disadvantaged children (Barnes, Wang, & O’Brien, 2017). But preschoolers from financially secure homes also benefit.

In one intervention—the Promoting Alternative Thinking Strategies (PATHS) curriculum for preschool children—teachers use stories, puppet characters, discussion, and role-play demonstrations to teach such skills as detecting others’ feelings, planning sequences of action, generating effective strategies, and anticipating probable outcomes. In evaluations of PATHS, children in Head Start classrooms and other preschool programs who completed weekly lessons over an academic year scored higher than no-intervention controls in accurately “reading” others’ emotions, inferring how others are likely to feel based on situational cues, selecting competent solutions to social conflicts, and cooperating and communicating with peers (Bierman et al., 2008; Bilir Seyhan et al., 2019; Domitrovich, Cortes, & Greenberg, 2007).

10.3.5 Parental Influences on Early Peer Relations

Children first acquire skills for interacting with peers within the family. Preschoolers whose parents frequently arrange informal peer play activities tend to have larger peer networks and to be more socially skilled (Ladd, LeSieur, & Profilet, 1993). In providing play opportunities, parents show children how to initiate peer contacts. And parents’ guidance on how to act toward others, such as suggestions for entering a play group and managing conflict, are associated with preschoolers’ social competence and peer acceptance (Mize & Pettit, 2010; Parke et al., 2004).

Many parenting behaviors not directly aimed at promoting peer sociability nevertheless influence it. For example, secure attachments to parents are linked to more responsive, harmonious peer interaction, larger peer networks, and warmer, more supportive friendships during the preschool and school years (Laible, 2007; Lucas-Thompson & Clarke-Stewart, 2007; Seibert & Kerns, 2015). The sensitive, emotionally expressive communication that contributes to attachment security is likely responsible.

Parents’ play with children, especially same-sex children, contributes to social competence. By playing with his father as he would a peer, this child acquires social skills that facilitate peer interaction.

© LAURA DWIGHT PHOTOGRAPHY

Warm, collaborative parent–child play seems particularly effective for promoting peer interaction skills. During play, parents interact with their child on a “level playing field,” much as peers do. And perhaps because parents play more with children of their own sex, mothers’ play is more strongly linked to daughters’ competence, fathers’ play to sons’ competence (Lindsey & Mize, 2000; Pettit et al., 1998).

As we have seen, some preschoolers already have great difficulty with peer relations. In Leslie’s classroom, Robbie was one of them. Wherever he happened to be, comments like “Robbie ruined our block tower” and “Robbie hit me for no reason” could be heard. As we take up moral development in the next section, you will learn more about how parenting contributed to Robbie’s peer problems.

Ask Yourself

Connect ■ How does emotional self-regulation affect the development of empathy and sympathy? Why are these emotional capacities vital for positive peer relations?

Apply ■ Three-year-old Ben lives in the country, with no other preschoolers nearby. His parents wonder whether it is worth driving Ben into town once a week to participate in a peer play group. What advice would you give Ben’s parents, and why?

Reflect ■ What forms of play do you recall engaging in as a young child? In what ways might those early experiences reflect your gender, culture, and family background?

10.4 FOUNDATIONS OF MORALITY AND AGGRESSION

10.4a Identify the central features of psychoanalytic, social learning, and cognitive-developmental approaches to moral development.

10.4b Describe the development of aggression in early childhood, including family and media influences and effective approaches to reducing aggressive behavior.

Young children’s behavior provides many examples of their budding moral sense. In Chapter 4, we noted that newborn (and older) infants often cry in response to the cries of other babies, a possible precursor of empathy. And after watching scenes in which one puppet helps another by returning a dropped ball while a second puppet takes the ball away, babies as young as 3 months overwhelmingly preferred (looked longer at) the helpful character over the hinderer. And 6-month-olds expressed a similar preference for the “nice” guy over the “mean” guy by reaching more often for the helper than the hinderer (Hamlin, 2013; Hamlin & Wynn, 2011). They seemed implicitly drawn to prosocial over antisocial behavior.

Morally relevant inclinations and behaviors appear so early that some researchers have proposed the existence of an innate moral sense that serves as the springboard for development of more complex moral cognitions and emotions (Wynn & Bloom, 2014). Other investigators caution that more evidence is needed to be certain that young infants are responding to moral (rather than irrelevant) properties of scenes in the research just described (Buon, Habib, & Frey, 2017). And still others point to social experiences that offer early, relevant learning opportunities.

Of course, the possibility of a built-in moral sense does not preclude social experiences and cognitive factors from strongly influencing moral development. As we saw in Chapter 7, moral acts are evident by the middle of the second year: Toddlers willingly divide attractive play materials, often giving another player in a game an equal share. They also expect others to behave fairly, by dividing resources and rewards equally among recipients (see page 273 in Chapter 7). As children reach age 2, they often use language to evaluate their own and others’ actions: “I naughty. I wrote on the wall” or (after being hit by another child) “Connie not nice.” And we have seen that children of this age help, share, and cooperate with others—early indicators of considerate, responsible, prosocial attitudes.

Adults everywhere take note of this developing capacity to distinguish right from wrong and to accommodate the needs of others. Some cultures have special terms for it. The Utku Indians of Hudson Bay say the child develops ihuma (reason). The Fijians believe that vakayalo (sense) appears. In response, parents hold children more responsible for their actions (Dunn, 2005). By the end of early childhood, children can state many moral rules: “Don’t take someone’s things without asking.” “Tell the truth!” In addition, they argue over matters of justice: “You sat there last time, so it’s my turn.” “It’s not fair. He got more!”

All theories of moral development recognize that conscience begins to take shape in early childhood. And most agree that at first, the child’s morality is externally controlled by adults. Gradually, it becomes regulated by inner standards. Truly moral individuals do not do the right thing just to conform to others’ expectations. Rather, they have developed compassionate concerns and principles of good conduct, which they follow in many situations.

Each major perspective on moral development emphasizes a different aspect of morality. The psychoanalytic perspective stresses the emotional side of conscience development—in particular, identification and guilt as motivators of good conduct. Social learning theory focuses on how moral behavior is learned through reinforcement and modeling. And the cognitive-developmental perspective emphasizes thinking—children’s ability to reason about justice and fairness.

10.4.1 The Psychoanalytic Perspective

Recall that according to Freud, young children form a superego, or conscience, by identifying with the same-sex parent, whose moral standards they adopt. Children obey the superego to avoid guilt, a painful emotion that arises each time they are tempted to misbehave. Moral development, Freud believed, is largely complete by 5 to 6 years of age.

Today, most researchers disagree with Freud’s view of conscience development. In his theory (see page 15 in Chapter 1), fear of punishment and loss of parental love motivate conscience formation and moral behavior. Yet children whose parents frequently use threats, commands, or physical force tend to violate standards often and feel little guilt, whereas parental warmth and responsiveness predict greater guilt following transgressions (Kochanska et al., 2005, 2008). And if a parent withdraws love after misbehavior—for example, refuses to speak to or states a dislike for the child—children often respond with high levels of self-blame, thinking “I’m no good” or “Nobody loves me.” Eventually, to protect themselves from overwhelming guilt, these children may deny the emotion and, as a result, also develop a weak conscience (Kochanska, 1991; Rudy et al., 2014).

This teacher uses inductive discipline to explain to a distressed child how his misbehavior affects others. She indicates how the child should behave, encouraging empathy and sympathetic concern.

© LAURA DWIGHT PHOTOGRAPHY

Inductive Discipline

In contrast, conscience formation is promoted by a type of discipline called induction, in which an adult helps make the child aware of feelings by pointing out the effects of the child’s misbehavior on others, especially noting their distress and making clear that the child caused it. For example, a parent might say, “If you keep pushing him, he’ll fall down and cry” or “She’s crying because you won’t give back her doll” (Hoffman, 2000). When generally warm parents provide explanations that match the child’s capacity to understand, while firmly insisting that the child listen and comply, induction is effective as early as age 2. Preschoolers whose parents use it are more likely to refrain from wrongdoing, confess and repair damages after misdeeds, and display prosocial behavior (Choe, Olson, & Sameroff, 2013; Volling, Mahoney, & Rauer, 2009).

The success of induction may lie in its power to motivate children’s active commitment to moral standards, in the following ways:

Induction gives children information about how to behave that they can use in future situations.

By emphasizing the impact of the child’s actions on others, induction encourages empathy and sympathetic concern, which motivate prosocial behavior.

Giving children reasons for changing their behavior encourages them to adopt moral standards because those standards make sense.

Children who consistently experience induction may form a script for the negative emotional consequences of harming others: Child causes harm, inductive message points out harm, child feels empathy for victim, child makes amends (Hoffman, 2000). The script deters future transgressions.

In contrast, discipline that relies too heavily on threats of punishment or withdrawal of love makes children so anxious and frightened that they cannot think clearly enough to figure out what they should do. As a result, these practices do not get children to internalize moral rules and—as noted earlier—also interfere with empathy and prosocial responding (Eisenberg, Spinrad, & Knafo-Noam, 2015). Nevertheless, warnings, disapproval, and commands are occasionally necessary to get an unruly child to listen to an inductive message.

The Child’s Contribution

Although good discipline is crucial, children’s characteristics affect the success of parenting techniques. Twin studies suggest a moderate to strong genetic contribution to empathy (Knafo et al., 2009; Knafo-Noam et al., 2015). More empathic children evoke less power assertion and are more responsive to induction.

Temperament is also influential. Mild, patient tactics—requests, suggestions, and explanations—are sufficient to prompt guilt reactions and conscience development in anxious, inhibited preschoolers (Kochanska et al., 2002). But with fearless, impulsive children, gentle discipline has little impact. As a result, parents of preschoolers with these attributes seldom use induction, relying instead on power assertive methods including physical punishment. But power assertion also works poorly. It undermines the child’s capacity for emotional self-regulation, which strongly predicts good conduct, empathy, sympathy, and prosocial behavior (Kochanska & Aksan, 2006). Parents of impulsive children can foster conscience development by ensuring a warm, harmonious relationship and combining firm correction of misbehavior with induction (Kim et al., 2014; Kochanska & Kim, 2014). When children are so low in anxiety that parental disapproval causes them little discomfort, a close parent–child bond provides an alternative foundation for morality. It motivates children to listen to parents as a means of preserving an affectionate, supportive relationship.

In sum, to foster early moral development, parents must tailor their disciplinary strategies to their child’s personality. Does this remind you of goodness of fit, discussed in Chapter 7? Return to page 255 to review this idea.

The Role of Guilt

Although little support exists for Freudian ideas about conscience development, Freud was correct that guilt motivates moral action. Preschoolers’ assertions reveal that they anticipate feeling guilty when they consider violating parental standards and have internalized the parent’s moral voice: “Didn’t you hear my mommy? We’d better not play with these toys.”

Inducing empathy-based guilt (expressions of personal responsibility and regret, such as “I’m sorry I hurt him”) by explaining that the child is harming someone and has disappointed the parent is a particularly effective means of influencing children without using coercion. Empathy-based guilt reactions are associated with stopping harmful actions, repairing damage caused by misdeeds, and engaging in future prosocial behavior (Eisenberg, Eggum, & Edwards, 2010).

But contrary to what Freud believed, guilt is not the only force that compels us to act morally. Nor is moral development complete by the end of early childhood. Rather, it is a gradual process that extends into adulthood.

10.4.2 Social Learning Theory

According to social learning theory, morality does not have a unique course of development. Rather, moral behavior is acquired through modeling and reinforcement.

Importance of Modeling

Many prosocial acts—sharing, helping, comforting an unhappy playmate—occur so rarely at first that reinforcement, in the form of approval, affection, and other rewards, cannot explain their rapid development in early childhood. Rather, social learning theorists believe that children learn to behave morally largely through modeling—by observing and imitating people who demonstrate appropriate behavior. Once children acquire a moral response, such as sharing or telling the truth, reinforcement in the form of praise for the act (“That was a very nice thing to do”) and for the child’s character (“You’re very kind and considerate”) can increase its frequency, and parents say they commonly reinforce their 3- to 5-year-olds in these ways (Bower & Casas, 2016; Mills & Grusec, 1989).

Nevertheless, certain characteristics of models affect children’s willingness to imitate:

Warmth and responsiveness. Preschoolers are more likely to copy prosocial acts of warm, responsive (as opposed to cold, distant) adults (Yarrow, Scott, & Waxler, 1973). Warmth seems to make children more attentive and receptive to the model and is itself an example of a prosocial response.

Competence and power. Children admire and therefore tend to imitate competent, powerful models—especially older peers and adults (Bandura, 1977).

Consistency between assertions and behavior. When models say one thing and do another—for example, announce that “it’s important to help others” but rarely engage in helpful acts—children generally choose the most lenient standard of behavior (Mischel & Liebert, 1966).

Models are most influential in the early years. In one study, toddlers’ eager, willing imitation of their mothers’ behavior predicted moral conduct (not cheating in a game) and guilt following transgressions at age 3 (Forman, Aksan, & Kochanska, 2004). At the end of the preschool years, children who have had consistent exposure to caring adults tend to behave prosocially whether or not a model is present (Mussen & Eisenberg-Berg, 1977). They have internalized prosocial rules from repeated observations of and encouragement by others.

At the same time, reinforcing young children with parental attention or praise appears unnecessary to induce them to help others. Most 2-year-olds will readily help an unfamiliar adult obtain an out-of-reach object, regardless of whether their parent offers encouragement and approval (Warneken & Tomasello, 2013). The most effective reinforcers for prosocial acts appear to be natural outcomes, such as positive emotional experiences, sustained social interactions, and peer acceptance. Furthermore, giving children material rewards for helping undermines their prosocial responding (Henderlong & Lepper, 2002; Warneken & Tomasello, 2009). Material rewards induce children to expect something in return for helping, so they rarely help spontaneously out of kindness to others.

A 3-year-old observes attentively as her teacher comforts a sad classmate. The teacher’s warmth and responsiveness increase the likelihood that the onlooker will imitate this model of prosocial behavior.

© LAURA DWIGHT PHOTOGRAPHY

Effects of Punishment

A sharp reprimand or physical force to restrain or move a child is justified when immediate obedience is necessary—for example, when a 3-year-old is about to harm another or run into the street. In fact, parents are most likely to use forceful methods under these conditions. But to foster long-term goals, such as acting kindly toward others, they tend to rely on warmth and reasoning (Dahl & Chan, 2017; Lansford et al., 2012). And in response to serious transgressions, such as lying and stealing, they often combine power assertion with reasoning (Grusec, 2006).

Frequent harsh punishment promotes immediate compliance but not lasting changes in behavior. For example, Robbie’s parents often punished by shouting, criticizing, hitting, and spanking. But as soon as they stopped punishing and turned away, Robbie—like most children subjected to corporal punishment—misbehaved again (Holden, Williamson, & Holland, 2014). The more harsh threats, angry physical control, and physical punishment children experience, the more likely they are to develop serious, lasting problems. These include weak internalization of moral rules; depression, aggression, antisocial behavior, and poor academic performance in childhood and adolescence; and depression, alcohol abuse, criminality, physical health problems, and family violence (including child maltreatment) in adulthood (Afifi, Ford, & Gershoff, 2017; Bender et al., 2007; Gershoff & Grogan-Kaylor, 2016).

Repeated harsh punishment has undesirable side effects:

Parents often spank in response to children’s aggression. Yet the punishment itself models aggression!

Harshly treated children react with anger, resentment, and a chronic sense of being personally threatened, which prompts a focus on the self’s distress rather than a sympathetic orientation to others’ needs.

Children who are frequently punished develop a conflict-ridden, defiant relationship with the punitive parent, whom they avoid as a means of self-protection (Kim & Kochanska, 2015; Shaw, Lacourse, & Nagin, 2005). Consequently, the parent’s effectiveness at teaching desirable behaviors is substantially reduced.

By stopping children’s misbehavior temporarily, harsh punishment gives adults immediate relief, reinforcing them for using coercive discipline. For this reason, a punitive parent is likely to punish with greater frequency over time, a course of action that can spiral into serious abuse.

Children, adolescents, and adults whose parents used corporal punishment—physical force that inflicts pain but not injury—are more accepting of such discipline (Deater-Deckard et al., 2003; Vitrup & Holden, 2010). In this way, use of physical punishment may transfer to the next generation.

Although corporal punishment spans the SES spectrum, its frequency and harshness are elevated among less educated, economically disadvantaged parents (Giles-Sims, Straus, & Sugarman, 1995; Lansford et al., 2009). And consistently, parents with conflict-ridden marriages and with mental health problems (who are emotionally reactive, depressed, or aggressive) are more likely to be punitive and also to have hard-to-manage children (Berlin et al., 2009; Taylor et al., 2010). But even after controlling for child, parenting, and family characteristics that might otherwise account for the relationship, the link between physical punishment and later child and adolescent aggression remains (Lansford et al., 2011; Lee, Altschul, & Gershoff, 2015; MacKenzie et al., 2013).

Nevertheless, children exposed to corporal punishment vary in the extent to which they display externalizing behavior problems, suggesting additional factors play a role in this relationship. The association between physical punishment and aggression is greater when parents are low in warmth and responsiveness and high in angry, critical, rejecting behaviors (Grusec et al., 2017; Kim & Kochanska, 2015; Mendez et al., 2016). Temperament is also influential: In a longitudinal study extending from 15 months to 3 years, early corporal punishment was a stronger predictor of externalizing difficulties in temperamentally difficult than easy children (Mulvaney & Mebert, 2007). Similar findings emerged in a twin study in which physical punishment was most detrimental for children at high genetic risk for behavior problems (Boutwell et al., 2011).

When we consider the evidence as a whole, the widespread use of corporal punishment by American parents is cause for concern. Surveys of nationally representative samples of U.S. households reveal that although corporal punishment typically increases from infancy to age 5 and then declines, it is high at all ages (see Figure 10.2) (Gershoff et al., 2012; Straus & Stewart, 1999; Zolotor et al., 2011). Among U.S. parents who physically punish their children, more than one-fourth report having used a hard object, such as a brush or a belt.

Figure 10.2 Prevalence of corporal punishment in early and middle childhood by year of survey. Five large surveys of U.S. parents show little change in use of corporal punishment over nearly three decades. Estimates are based on the number of parents per 1,000 reporting one or more instances of spanking or slapping their child during the past year. Rates are not shown for infants and toddlers, though other evidence indicates that 50 to 80 percent experience physical punishment. (From A. J. Zolotor, A. D. Theodore, D. K. Runyan, J. J. Chang, & A. L. Laskey, 2011, “Corporal Punishment and Physical Abuse: Population-Based Trends for Three- to 11-Year-Old Children in the United States,” Child Abuse Review, 20, p. 61. Reprinted by permission of John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Cultural InfluencesEthnic Differences in the Consequences of Physical Punishment

In an African-American community, six older adults, who had volunteered to serve as mentors for parents facing child-rearing challenges, met to discuss parenting issues at a social service agency. Their attitudes toward discipline were strikingly different from those of the European-American social workers who had brought them together. Each mentor argued that successful child rearing required appropriate physical discipline. At the same time, they voiced strong disapproval of screaming or cursing at children, calling such out-of-control parenting behavior “abusive.” Ruth, the oldest and most respected member of the group, characterized good parenting as a complex combination of warmth, teaching, talking nicely, and disciplining physically. She related how an older neighbor advised her to handle her own children when she was a young parent:

She said to me says, don’t scream … you talk to them real nice and sweet and when they do something ugly … get a nice little switch and you won’t have any trouble with them and from that day that’s the way I raised ‘em. (Mosby et al., 1999, pp. 511–512)

In several studies, corporal punishment predicted externalizing problems similarly among European-American, African-American, Hispanic, and Asian children (Gershoff et al., 2012; MacKenzie et al., 2013). Yet other studies point to ethnic variations. In one longitudinal investigation, researchers followed several hundred families, collecting information from mothers on disciplinary strategies and from teachers on children’s problem behaviors from kindergarten through fourth grade (Lansford et al., 2012). Regardless of ethnicity, reasoning was the most common approach to discipline, spanking the least common. But predictors and consequences of spanking differed by family ethnicity.

Among European-American families, externalizing behavior in kindergarten predicted parental physical punishment in first through third grades, which in turn led to more externalizing behavior by fourth grade. In contrast, among African-American families, kindergarten externalizing behavior was unrelated to later physical punishment, and physical punishment did not augment externalizing behavior. The investigators concluded that European-American parents more often use physical discipline in reaction to challenging behaviors, causing those behaviors to escalate. African-American parents, in contrast, appear to use physical punishment to prevent child difficulties, thereby reducing its negative consequences.

Consistent with this interpretation, African-American and European-American parents report meting out physical punishment differently. In African-American families, physical discipline is typically culturally approved, mild, delivered in a context of parental warmth, accompanied by verbal teaching, and aimed at helping children become responsible adults. When European-American parents resort to physical punishment, they are often highly agitated and rejecting of the child and view the harshness of their discipline as wrong (Dodge, McLoyd, & Lansford, 2006; LeCuyer et al., 2011; Su et al., 2019).

Consequently, most African-American children may view spanking as a practice carried out with their best interests in mind, whereas European-American children may regard it as an act of aggression. In support of this view, in an investigation of nearly 900 African-American families, spanking predicted depressive symptoms only among a small number of children whose mothers tended to use it when they were highly angry and frustrated (McLoyd et al., 2007).

In African-American families, physical discipline is often culturally approved, generally mild, and delivered in a context of parental warmth. As a result, children may view it as an effort to encourage maturity, not as an act of aggression.

© LAURA DWIGHT PHOTOGRAPHY

These findings are not an endorsement of physical punishment. Other forms of discipline, such as time out, withdrawal of privileges, and the positive parenting strategies listed on the following page are far more effective. In adolescence, ethnic differences in physical punishment fade: It is broadly associated with depression and misconduct among teenagers (Wang & Kenny, 2014). But it is noteworthy that the meaning and impact of physical discipline to children can vary sharply with its intensity level, context of warmth and support, and cultural approval.

Over the past three decades, the percentage of U.S. adults agreeing that “it is sometimes necessary to give a child a good, hard spanking” has declined by 20 percent in women and 8 percent in men. Still, the majority of women (66 percent) and men (76 percent) continue to endorse spanking (Child Trends, 2018a). A prevailing American belief is that corporal punishment, if implemented by caring parents, is harmless, perhaps even beneficial. But as the Cultural Influences box above reveals, this assumption is valid only under conditions of limited use in certain social contexts.

Alternatives to Harsh Punishment

Alternatives to criticism, slaps, and spankings can reduce the side effects of punishment. A technique called time out involves removing children from the immediate setting—for example, by sending them to their rooms—until they are ready to act appropriately. When a child is out of control, a few minutes in time out can be enough to change behavior while also giving angry parents time to cool off (Morawska & Sanders, 2011). Another approach is withdrawal of privileges, such as playing outside or watching a favorite TV program. Like time out, removing privileges allows parents to avoid using harsh techniques that can easily intensify into violence.

Applying What We Know

Positive Parenting

Strategy

Explanation

Use transgressions as opportunities to teach.

When a child engages in harmful or unsafe behavior, intervene firmly, and then use induction, which motivates children to make amends and behave prosocially.

Reduce opportunities for misbehavior.

On long car trips, bring back-seat activities that relieve children’s restlessness. At the supermarket, converse with children and let them help with shopping. Children then learn to occupy themselves constructively when options are limited.

Provide reasons for rules.

When children appreciate that rules are rational, not arbitrary, they are more likely to strive to follow the rules.

Arrange for children to participate in family routines and duties.

By joining with adults in preparing a meal, washing dishes, or raking leaves, children develop a sense of responsible participation in family and community life and acquire many practical skills.

When children are obstinate, try compromising and problem solving.

When a child refuses to obey, express understanding of the child’s feelings (“I know it’s not fun to clean up”), suggest a compromise (“You put those away, I’ll take care of these”), and help the child think of ways to avoid the problem in the future. Responding firmly but kindly and respectfully increases the likelihood of willing cooperation.

Encourage mature behavior.

Express confidence in children’s capacity to learn and appreciation for effort and cooperation, as in “You gave that your best!” “Thanks for cleaning up on your own!” Adult encouragement fosters pride and satisfaction in succeeding, thereby inspiring children to improve further.

Be sensitive to children’s physical and emotional resources.

When children are tired, ill, or bored, they are likely to engage in attention-getting, disorganized, or otherwise improper behavior as a reaction to discomfort. In these instances, meeting the child’s needs makes more sense than disciplining.

Sources: Grogan-Kaylor, Ma, & Graham-Bermann, 2018; Grusec, 2006.

When parents do decide to use punishment, they can increase its effectiveness in three ways:

Consistency. Permitting children to act inappropriately on some occasions but scolding them on others confuses children, and the unacceptable act persists (Acker & O’Leary, 1996).

A warm parent–child relationship. Children of involved, caring parents find the interruption in parental affection that accompanies punishment especially unpleasant. They want to regain parental warmth and approval as quickly as possible.

Explanations. Providing reasons for mild punishment helps children relate the misdeed to expectations for future behavior. This approach leads to far greater reduction in misbehavior than using punishment alone (Larzelere et al., 1996).

Positive Relationships, Positive Parenting

The most effective forms of discipline encourage good conduct—by building a mutually respectful bond with the child, letting the child know ahead of time how to act, and praising mature behavior (“You helped clear the dishes. That was thoughtful”). When sensitivity, cooperation, and shared positive emotion are evident in joint activities between parents and preschoolers, children show firmer conscience development—expressing empathy after transgressions, behaving responsibly, playing fairly in games, and considering others’ welfare (Kochanska et al., 2008; Thompson, 2014). Parent–child closeness leads children to heed parental demands because children feel a sense of commitment to the relationship.

See Applying What We Know above for ways to parent positively. After experiencing a training program in these strategies, parents diverse in SES felt more confident about their ability to handle child-rearing challenges and were less approving of physical punishment (Durrant et al., 2014). When parents focus on promoting children’s cooperation, social problem solving, and consideration for others, they greatly reduce the need for punishment.

10.4.3 The Cognitive-Developmental Perspective

The psychoanalytic and social learning approaches to morality focus on how children acquire ready-made standards of good conduct from adults. In contrast, the cognitive-developmental perspective regards children as active thinkers about social rules. As early as the preschool years, children make moral judgments, deciding what is right or wrong on the basis of concepts they construct about justice and fairness (Gibbs, 2019; Killen & Smetana, 2015).

Preschoolers’ Moral Understanding

Young children have some well-developed ideas about morality. As long as researchers emphasize people’s intentions, 3-year-olds say that a person with bad intentions—someone who deliberately frightens, embarrasses, or otherwise hurts another—is more deserving of punishment than a well-intentioned person. They also protest when they see one person harming another (Helwig, Zelazo, & Wilson, 2001; Vaish, Missana, & Tomasello, 2011). Around age 4, children know that a person who expresses an insincere intention—saying, “I’ll come over and help you rake leaves,” while not intending to do so—is lying (Maas, 2008). And 4-year-olds approve of telling the truth and disapprove of lying, even when a lie remains undetected (Bussey, 1992).

A Laotian preschooler protects her younger sister from harm by helping her navigate the wet front steps of their home. Young children in diverse cultures understand the importance of protecting others’ rights and welfare.

© Keith Levit/Alamy Stock Photo

Furthermore, preschoolers in diverse cultures distinguish moral imperatives, which protect people’s rights and welfare, from two other types of rules and expectations: social conventions, customs determined solely by consensus, such as table manners and politeness rituals (saying “please” and “thank you”); and matters of personal choice, such as choice of friends, hairstyle, and leisure activities, which do not violate rights and are up to the individual (Killen, Margie, & Sinno, 2006; Nucci & Gingo, 2011; Smetana, 2006). Interviews with 3- and 4-year-olds reveal that they consider moral violations (unprovoked hitting, stealing an apple) as more wrong and deserving of punishment than violations of social conventions (eating ice cream with your fingers). They also say that moral violations would still be wrong even if an adult did not see them and no rules existed to prohibit them, because they harm others (Smetana et al., 2012). And preschoolers’ concern with personal choice, conveyed through statements like “I’m gonna wear this shirt,” serves as the springboard for moral concepts of individual rights, which will expand greatly in middle childhood and adolescence.

Preschoolers’ moral reasoning tends to be rigid, emphasizing salient features and consequences while neglecting other important information. For example, they have difficulty distinguishing between accidental and intentional transgressions (Killen et al., 2011). And they are more likely than older children to claim that stealing and lying are always wrong, even when a person has a morally sound reason for engaging in these acts (Lourenço, 2003; Poplinger, Talwar, & Crossman, 2011). Furthermore, their explanations for why hitting others is wrong are simplistic and centered on physical harm: “When you get hit, it hurts, and you start to cry” (Nucci, 2009).

Children’s commitment to the wrongness of moral transgressions builds on their early concern for others’ welfare. When they see a peer cause another harm, preschoolers as young as age 3 often tattle to a caregiver, a behavior generally viewed as undesirable and discouraged by adults. Yet children do not tattle because they believe that they themselves might be wrongly blamed for the transgression. Even when they know they cannot be blamed, they tattle nonetheless (Yucel & Vaish, 2018). Their tattling indicates that they care enough about moral imperatives to try to ensure that others also follow them.

With language and cognitive development—especially in theory of mind and understanding of emotion—older preschoolers begin to reason morally by referring to others’ perspectives and feelings. In several studies, understanding of false belief was associated with 4- and 5-year-olds’ moral justifications that focused on the harmed individual’s emotional distress and diminished well-being (Dunn, Cutting, & Demetriou, 2000; Lane et al., 2010). But advances in theory of mind, though influencing preschoolers’ explanations, are not sufficient to account for gains in moral understanding.

Social Experiences and Moral Understanding

Morally relevant social experiences are vital for moral progress in early childhood, contributing to gains in both theory of mind and moral understanding and to their integration (Killen & Smetana, 2015). Disputes with siblings and peers over rights, possessions, and property allow preschoolers to express emotions and perspectives, negotiate, compromise, and work out their first ideas about justice and fairness. Children also learn from warm, sensitive parental communication and from observing how adults respond to children’s rule violations. And they benefit greatly from adult–child discussions of moral issues (Killen & Dahl, 2018). Children who are advanced in moral thinking tend to have parents who adapt their communications about fighting, honesty, and ownership to what their children can understand, tell stories with moral implications, point out injustices, encourage prosocial behavior, and gently stimulate the child to think further, without being hostile or critical (Dunn, 2014; Janssens & Deković, 1997).

Preschoolers and school-age children who verbally and physically assault others, often with little or no provocation, are delayed in moral reasoning (Ciu et al., 2016; Helwig & Turiel, 2004). Without special help, such children show long-term disruptions in moral development, deficits in self-control, and ultimately an antisocial lifestyle.

10.4.4 Development of Aggression

Beginning in late infancy, all children display aggression from time to time, and as opportunities to interact with siblings and peers increase, aggressive outbursts occur more often (Nærde et al., 2014). By the second year, aggressive acts with two distinct purposes emerge. Initially, the most common is proactive (or instrumental) aggression, in which children act to fulfill a need or desire—to obtain an object, privilege, space, or social reward, such as adult or peer attention—and unemotionally attack a person to achieve their goal. The other type, reactive (or hostile) aggression, is an angry, defensive response to provocation or a blocked goal and is meant to hurt another person (Eisner & Malti, 2015; Vitaro & Brendgen, 2012).

Proactive and reactive aggression come in three forms, which are the focus of most research:

Physical aggression harms others through physical injury—pushing, hitting, kicking, or punching others, or destroying another’s property.

Verbal aggression harms others through threats of physical aggression, name-calling, or hostile teasing.

Relational aggression damages another’s peer relationships through social exclusion, malicious gossip, or friendship manipulation.

Although verbal aggression is always direct, physical and relational aggression can be either direct or indirect. For example, hitting injures a person directly, whereas destroying property indirectly inflicts physical harm. Similarly, saying, “Do what I say, or I won’t be your friend,” conveys relational aggression directly, while spreading rumors, refusing to talk to a peer, or manipulating friendship by saying behind someone’s back, “Don’t play with her; she’s a nerd,” does so indirectly.

Physical aggression emerges by the end of the first year as infants become capable of pushing, pulling, hitting, kicking, or otherwise forcefully striking others. It rises sharply between ages 1 and 3 and then diminishes as verbal aggression replaces it (Hay, 2017; Tremblay, 2015). Proactive aggression also declines as preschoolers’ improved capacity to delay gratification enables them to resist grabbing others’ possessions. But reactive aggression in verbal and relational forms tends to rise over early and middle childhood (Côté et al., 2007; Tremblay, 2000). Older children are better able to recognize malicious intentions and, as a result, more often retaliate in hostile ways.

These preschoolers display proactive aggression, pushing and grabbing as they argue over a game. Proactive aggression declines with age as children’s capacity to delay gratification improves.

© BOB EBBESEN/ALAMY STOCK PHOTO

By age 17 months, boys are more physically aggressive than girls—a difference found throughout childhood in many cultures (Baillargeon et al., 2007; Björkqvist, 2018; Lussier, Corrado, & Tzoumakis, 2012). The sex difference is due in part to biology—in particular, to male sex hormones (androgens) and temperamental traits (activity level, irritability, impulsivity) on which boys score higher (Book, Starzyk, & Quinsey, 2001). Parental gender-role attitudes are also important. In a longitudinal study carried out in the Netherlands, fathers with strong gender-stereotyped attitudes responded with more physical coercion (restraining, pushing, yanking the child’s arm) to their preschool sons’ than daughters’ disobedience—forceful parenting practices associated with elevated aggressive behavior in boys a year later (Endendijk et al., 2017). In contrast, fathers with gender-equitable attitudes engaged in more physical coercion with their daughters, which subsequently predicted greater aggression in girls than boys.

Although girls have a reputation for being both verbally and relationally more aggressive than boys, the sex difference is small (Crick, Ostrov, & Werner, 2006; Crick et al., 2006). Beginning in the preschool years, girls concentrate most of their aggressive acts in the relational category. Boys inflict harm in more variable ways. Physically and verbally aggressive boys also tend to be relationally aggressive (Card et al., 2008). Therefore, boys display overall rates of aggression that are much higher than girls’.

At the same time, girls more often use indirect relational tactics that—in disrupting intimate bonds especially important to girls—can be particularly mean. Whereas physical attacks are usually brief, acts of indirect relational aggression may extend for hours, weeks, or even months (Nelson, Robinson, & Hart, 2005; Underwood, 2003). In one instance, a 6-year-old girl formed a “pretty-girls club” and—for nearly an entire school year—convinced its members to exclude several classmates by saying they were “dirty and smelly.”

An occasional aggressive exchange between preschoolers is normal. Children sometimes assert their sense of self through these encounters, which become important learning experiences as adults intervene and teach social problem solving. But preschoolers who are emotionally negative, impulsive, and defiant and who score low in cognitive abilities—especially, language and executive function skills necessary for self-regulation—are at risk for early, high rates of physical or relational aggression (or both) that can persist. Persistent aggression, in turn, predicts later internalizing and externalizing difficulties and social skills deficits, including loneliness, anxiety, depression, peer relationship problems, and antisocial activity in middle childhood and adolescence (Eisner & Malti, 2015; Hay, 2017; Tremblay, 2015).

The Family as Training Ground for Aggressive Behavior

“I can’t control him; he’s impossible,” Robbie’s mother, Nadine, complained to Leslie one day. When Leslie asked if Robbie might be troubled by something happening at home, she discovered that his parents fought constantly and resorted to harsh, inconsistent discipline. The same child-rearing practices that undermine moral internalization—love withdrawal, power assertion, physical punishment, negative comments and emotions, and inconsistency—are linked to aggression from early childhood through adolescence, in children of both sexes and in many cultures, with most of these practices predicting both physical and relational forms (Côté et al., 2007; Gershoff et al., 2010; Kuppens et al., 2013; Nelson et al., 2013; Olson et al., 2011).

In families like Robbie’s, anger and punitiveness quickly create a conflict-ridden family atmosphere and an “out-of-control” child. The pattern begins with forceful discipline, which occurs more often with stressful life experiences (such as economic hardship or an unhappy marriage), a parent with an unstable personality, or a temperamentally difficult child (Baydar & Akcinar, 2018; Eisner & Malti, 2015). Typically, the parent threatens, criticizes, and punishes, and the child angrily resists until the parent “gives in.” At the end of each exchange, both parent and child get relief from stopping the unpleasant behavior of the other, so the behaviors repeat and escalate.

As these cycles become more frequent, they generate anxiety and irritability among other family members, who soon join in the hostile interactions. Compared with siblings in typical families, those with critical, punitive parents are more aggressive toward one another (Dickson et al., 2015). Physically, verbally, and relationally destructive sibling conflict, in turn, quickly spreads to peer relationships, contributing to poor impulse control and antisocial behavior by the early school years (Garcia et al., 2000; Miller et al., 2012; Ostrov, Crick, & Stauffacher, 2006).

Overall, boys are more likely than girls to be targets of harsh, inconsistent discipline because they are more active and impulsive and therefore harder to control. In longitudinal research, boys with a gene predisposing them to weak regulation of emotion and behavior were far more likely to display childhood aggression and engage in violent acts once they reached adolescence and adulthood if they had a history severe family adversity, such as child abuse, domestic violence, or parental mental illness (Enoch et al., 2010; Fergusson et al., 2011). These boys seemed especially susceptible to the negative effects of harsh, inept parenting. When frustrated, angry, or disappointed, they lashed out at others.

Social Information-Processing Deficits

Children subjected to these family processes acquire a distorted view of the social world. Those who are high in reactive aggression often see hostile intent where it does not exist—in situations where peers’ intentions are unclear, where harm is accidental, and even where peers are trying to be helpful. As a result, they make many unprovoked attacks, which trigger aggressive retaliations (Healy et al., 2015; Orbio de Castro et al., 2002).

Children high in proactive aggression have different social information-processing deficits. Compared with agemates, they believe that there are more benefits and fewer costs for engaging in destructive acts (Arsenio, 2010). They are also delayed in moral understanding. As preschoolers, they show a reduced capacity to differentiate moral imperatives from social conventions—a distinction that serves as an early foundation for appreciating fairness and justice (Jambon & Smetana, 2018). Some, who conclude that aggression “works” to access rewards and control others, callously use it to advance their own goals and are relatively unconcerned about causing suffering in others—an aggressive style associated with later, more severe conduct problems, violent behavior, and delinquency (Marsee & Frick, 2010).

Return to the information-processing model of social problem solving in Figure 10.1 on page 367. Notice how reactive aggression is linked to deficiencies in recognizing and interpreting social cues. In contrast, proactive aggression is associated with deficiencies in formulating social goals (caring more about satisfying one’s own needs than getting along with others) and in generating and evaluating strategies (engaging in aggression and evaluating it favorably) (Arsenio, 2010). A substantial number of aggressive children engage in both reactive and proactive acts, while others largely display one type (Fite et al., 2008).

Highly aggressive children tend to be rejected by peers, to fail in school, and (by adolescence) to seek out deviant peers. Together, these factors contribute to the long-term stability of aggression.

Media Violence and Aggression

In the United States, an estimated 60 percent of television programs contain violent scenes, often portraying repeated aggressive acts that go unpunished. TV victims of violence are rarely shown experiencing serious harm, and few programs condemn violence or depict other ways of solving problems (Calvert, 2015). Violent content is 10 percent above average in children’s TV and video programs, with cartoons being the most violent. And over the past several decades, violent video games have become increasingly realistic (Hartmann, Möller, & Krause, 2015). Many portray extreme, graphic violence.

Violent screen media of all kinds, video games included, increase the likelihood of hostile thoughts and emotions and aggressive behavior.

© ALEX SEGRE /ALAMY Stock Photo

Assessing the findings of thousands of studies using a wide variety of designs and methods, the overwhelming majority of researchers have concluded that violent screen media—including TV and video programs, movies, and video games—increase the likelihood of hostile thoughts and emotions and of verbally, physically, and relationally aggressive behavior (Anderson et al., 2015; Anderson & Bushman, 2018; Bushman, Gollwitzer, & Cruz, 2015; Krahé, 2016). The link between violent media and aggression is remarkably consistent across different countries. Although young people of all ages are susceptible, preschool and young school-age children may be especially likely to imitate screen media violence because they believe that much of it is real and accept what they see uncritically.

In addition to creating short-term difficulties in parent and peer relations, violent media can have lasting negative consequences. In several longitudinal studies, exposure to violent media in childhood and adolescence predicted aggressive behavior in early adulthood, after other factors linked to viewing (such as prior child and parent aggression, IQ, parent education, family income, and neighborhood crime) were controlled (Graber et al., 2006; Huesmann et al., 2003; Johnson et al., 2002). And in a longitudinal investigation of over 3,000 children and adolescents, violent video game play led to an increase in aggressive thoughts a year later, which in turn predicted a rise in aggressive behavior the following year (Gentile et al., 2014).

Aggressive children and adolescents have a greater appetite for violent media fare. And boys devote more time to violent media than girls, in part because of male-oriented themes of conquest and adventure and use of males as lead characters. But even in nonaggressive children, media violence sparks hostile thoughts and behavior (Anderson et al., 2015). Its impact is simply less intense.

Furthermore, media violence “hardens” children to aggression, making them more willing to tolerate it in others (Anderson & Bushman, 2018; Anderson et al., 2010). Viewers quickly habituate, responding with reduced arousal to the pain and suffering of victims and with greater acceptance of violence when exposed to real-world instances.

Preschoolers, as we saw in Chapter 9, spend much time watching educational programs for young children. Although beneficial for cognitive and academic progress, high exposure to educational programs is associated with a rise in relational aggression in young children (Ostrov, Gentile, & Mullins, 2013). The likely reason is that these programs often present social-conflict scenes, in a well-intentioned effort to model social problem solving. But preschoolers have difficulty connecting characters’ conflicts to their eventual favorable resolutions, so they readily imitate the relationally aggressive acts they see.

Look and Listen

Watch a half-hour of children’s cartoons and a prime-time movie on TV, and tally the number of violent acts, including those that go unpunished. How often did violence, especially without consequences, occur in each type of program?

As a result, parents bear most responsibility for regulating their children’s exposure to media violence and other inappropriate content. In the United States, TV programs are rated for violent and sexual content, and since 2000 new TV sets have been required to contain the V-chip, which allows parents to block undesired material. And parents can control children’s Internet access by using filters or programs that monitor website visits.

Although surveys of U.S. parents indicate that nearly 80 percent are “somewhat or very concerned” about their children’s exposure to media violence, 20 to 30 percent of preschoolers and about half of school-age children experience no limits on TV, computer, or tablet use at home. Some children begin visiting websites without parental supervision as early as age 4 (Rideout, 2018; Rideout & Hamel, 2006; Varnhagen, 2007). And parents often model excessive, inappropriate screen media use. In observations of adults with children in fast-food restaurants, almost one-third of the adults spent the entire meal absorbed with mobile devices rather than engaged with the children in their care (Radesky et al., 2014).

To help parents improve their preschoolers’ “media diet,” one group of researchers devised a year-long intervention in which they guided parents in replacing violent programs with age-appropriate educational and prosocial programs. Compared to a control group, children in intervention families displayed lower rates of externalizing behavior and improved social competence (Christakis et al., 2013). Applying What We Know on the following page lists strategies parents can use to regulate children’s screen media use.

Helping Children and Parents Control Aggression

Treatment for aggressive children is best begun early, before their antisocial behavior becomes well-practiced and difficult to change. Breaking the cycle of hostilities between family members and promoting effective ways of relating to others are crucial. The coercive cycles of punitive parents and aggressive children are so persistent that these children often are punished even when they do behave appropriately!

Leslie suggested that Robbie’s parents enroll in a training program aimed at improving the parenting of children at risk for or showing conduct problems. Many such programs based on social learning theory are highly effective with preschool and elementary school children (Piquero et al., 2016; Vlahovicova et al., 2017).

In one approach called Incredible Years, parents complete 18 weekly group sessions facilitated by two professionals, who teach positive parenting techniques for promoting children’s academic, emotional, and social skills and for managing disruptive behaviors. Sessions include coaching, modeling, and practicing effective parenting behaviors—experiences aimed at interrupting parent–child destructive interaction while promoting positive relationships and competencies (Webster-Stratton & Reid, 2010). For example, Robbie’s parents learned to impose clear limits on his unacceptable behaviors rather than giving in to him, to pair commands with reasons, and to replace verbal insults and spankings with more effective punishments, such as time out and withdrawal of privileges. A special focus is positive parenting, including warmth, attention, encouragement, and praise for prosocial behaviors.

Applying What We Know

Regulating Screen Media Use

Strategy

Explanation

Limit TV, computer, and tablet use.

Parents should provide clear rules limiting children’s TV, computer, and tablet use and stick to the rules. The American Academy of Pediatrics (2016a) recommends no more than 1 hour per day of high-quality programming for 2- to 5-year-olds. Screen media should not be used as a babysitter. Placing a TV, computer, or tablet in a child’s bedroom substantially increases use and makes the child’s activity hard to monitor.

Avoid using screen media as a reward.

When media access is used as a reward or withheld as punishment, children become increasingly attracted to it.

Watch programs and other screen media content with children, helping them understand what they see.

By raising questions about realism in media depictions, expressing disapproval of on-screen behavior, and encouraging discussion, adults help children understand and critically evaluate screen media content.

Link screen media content to everyday learning experiences.

Parents can extend screen media learning in ways that encourage children to engage actively with their surroundings. For example, a program on animals might spark a trip to the zoo, a visit to the library for books about animals, or new ways of observing and caring for the family pet.

Model good media practices.

Parents’ media behavior influences children’s behavior. Parents should avoid excessive media use, limit their own exposure to harmful content, and limit mobile device use during family interactions.

Use a warm, rational approach to child rearing.

Children of warm parents who make reasonable demands for mature behavior prefer media experiences with educational and prosocial content and are less attracted to violent programming.

Numerous evaluations in which families with aggressive children were randomly assigned to either Incredible Years or control groups reveal that the program increases use of effective parenting practices, reduces child behavior problems, and promotes prosocial behaviors (Leijten et al., 2018; Menting, Orobio de Castro, & Mathys, 2013). Children with high levels of hostile, unruly behavior tend to benefit most. And in one long-term follow-up, positive outcomes endured: Among 3- to 8-year-olds with serious conduct problems whose parents participated in Incredible Years, 75 percent appeared well-adjusted as teenagers (Webster-Stratton, Rinaldi, & Reid, 2011).

At preschool, Leslie began teaching Robbie more successful ways of relating to peers, had him practice these skills, and praised him for using them. As opportunities arose, she encouraged Robbie to talk about playmates’ feelings and to express his own. As he increasingly took the perspective of others, empathized, and felt sympathetic concern, his lashing out at peers declined (Izard et al., 2008). Robbie also participated in a social problem-solving intervention (return to page 368 to review).

Finally, relieving stressors that stem from poverty and neighborhood disorganization and providing families with social supports help prevent childhood aggression (Bugental, Corpuz, & Schwartz, 2012). When parents better cope with difficulties in their own lives, interventions aimed at reducing children’s aggression are even more effective.

Ask Yourself

Connect ■ What must parents do to foster conscience development in fearless, impulsive children? How does this illustrate the concept of goodness of fit (see page 255 in Chapter 7)?

Apply ■ Alice and Wayne want their two young children to become morally mature, caring individuals. List some parenting practices they should use and some they should avoid.

Reflect ■ Which types of punishment for a misbehaving preschooler do you endorse, and which types do you reject? Why?

10.5 GENDER TYPING

10.5a Discuss biological and environmental influences on preschoolers’ gender-stereotyped beliefs and behavior.

10.5b Describe and evaluate major theories that explain the emergence of gender identity.

Gender typing refers to any association of objects, activities, roles, or traits with one sex or the other in ways that conform to cultural stereotypes (Blakemore, Berenbaum, & Liben, 2009). In Leslie’s classroom, girls tended to spend more time in the housekeeping, art, and reading corners, while boys gathered more often in spaces devoted to blocks, woodworking, and active play. Already, the children had acquired many gender-linked beliefs and preferences and more often played with peers of their own sex.

Two theoretical perspectives—social learning theory, with its emphasis on modeling and reinforcement, and cognitive-developmental theory, with its focus on children as active thinkers about their social world—offer insights into the early development of gender typing. But neither perspective by itself provides a sufficient account. A third perspective has gained favor: gender schema theory, which combines elements of both social learning and cognitive-developmental theory. And as we will also see, a growing body of evidence confirms that biological influences, especially prenatal exposure to sex hormones, contribute as well.

10.5.1 Gender-Stereotyped Beliefs and Behaviors

Even before children can label their own sex, they have begun to acquire subtle associations with gender that most of us hold. An investigation of infants’ play patterns showed that gender-stereotyped toy preferences are evident as early as 12½ months: In a play session in which dolls and trucks were available, girls more often chose the dolls and boys more often chose the trucks (Boe & Woods, 2018). The types of toys in the infants’ homes predicted these preferences, suggesting that toy familiarity contributes to these early gender-typed choices.

By the middle of the second year, toddlers display the glimmerings of gender-stereotyped attitudes. In another study, 18-month-olds’ looking behaviors revealed that they linked rough and sharp items (such as a fir tree and hammer) with males, although they had not yet learned to associate round and soft items (heart shape and dress) with females (Eichstedt et al., 2002). Recall from Chapter 7 that around age 2, children use such words as boy, girl, lady, and man appropriately. As soon as children become consciously aware of gender categories, gender-stereotyping of activities and behaviors accelerates.

Most preschoolers explicitly associate particular toys, types of clothing, tools, household items, games, occupations, colors (pink and blue), and behaviors (physical and relational aggression) with one gender or the other (Banse et al., 2010; Giles & Heyman, 2005; Weisgram, Fulcher, & Dinella, 2014). And their actions reflect their beliefs, not only in play preferences but in personality traits as well. As we have seen, boys tend to be more active, impulsive, assertive, and physically aggressive. Girls tend to be more fearful, dependent, emotionally sensitive, compliant, advanced in effortful control, and skilled at understanding self-conscious emotions and at inflicting indirect relational aggression (Else-Quest, 2012).

During early childhood, gender-stereotyped beliefs strengthen—so much so that many children apply them as blanket rules rather than flexible guidelines (Halim, Ruble, & Tamis-LeMonda, 2013). When asked whether gender stereotypes could be violated, half or more of 3- and 4-year-olds answered “no” to clothing, hairstyle, certain play styles (girls playing roughly), and play with certain toys (Barbie dolls and G.I. Joes) (Blakemore, 2003). Furthermore, most 3- to 6-year-olds are firm about not wanting to be friends with a child who violates a gender stereotype (a boy who wears nail polish, a girl who plays with trucks) or to attend a school where such violations are allowed (Ruble et al., 2007).

The rigidity of preschoolers’ gender stereotypes helps us understand some commonly observed everyday behaviors. When Leslie showed her class a picture of a Scottish bagpiper wearing a kilt, the children exclaimed, “Men don’t wear skirts!” And many insisted on wearing gender-stereotypical clothing themselves—dresses and the color pink among girls; sports jerseys, superhero T-shirts, and “not pink” among boys (Halim et al., 2016). During free play, the children frequently asserted that girls can’t be police officers and boys don’t take care of babies.

These one-sided judgments are a joint product of gender stereotyping in young children’s environments and their cognitive limitations—in particular, their difficulty coordinating conflicting sources of information (Halim, 2016; Trautner et al., 2005). Most preschoolers do not yet realize that characteristics associated with one’s sex—activities, toys, occupations, hairstyle, and clothing—do not determine whether a person is male or female. They have trouble understanding that males and females can be different in terms of their bodies but similar in many other ways.

Gender typing is well under way in the preschool years. Girls tend to play with girls and are drawn to toys and activities that emphasize nurturance, cooperation, and physical attractiveness.

© LAURA DWIGHT PHOTOGRAPHY

10.5.2 Biological Influences on Gender Typing

The sex differences in play preferences and personality traits just described appear in many cultures (Dinella & Weisgram, 2018; Halim, 2016; Todd et al., 2017). Certain ones—male activity level and physical aggression, female emotional sensitivity, and preference for same-sex playmates—are widespread among mammalian species (de Waal, 2001). According to an evolutionary perspective, the adult life of our male ancestors was oriented toward competing for mates, and that of our female ancestors toward rearing children. Therefore, males became genetically primed for dominance and females for intimacy, responsiveness, and cooperativeness (Konner, 2010; Maccoby, 2002). Evolutionary theorists claim that family and cultural forces can influence the intensity of genetically based sex differences, leading some individuals to be more gender-typed than others. But experience cannot eradicate aspects of gender typing that served adaptive functions in human history.

Experiments with nonhuman mammals reveal that prenatally administered testosterone (the major androgen hormone in males) increases active play and physical aggression toward unfamiliar animals and suppresses maternal caregiving in females. The larger the dose of testosterone, the greater the impact on behavior (Arnold, 2009). In contrast, removing testosterone from prenatally developing male animals has the reverse effect, reducing “masculine” behaviors and increasing “feminine” behaviors.

Many studies of humans reveal similar patterns. Girls exposed prenatally to high levels of androgens (including testosterone), due to normal variation in hormone levels, a genetic defect, or medically prescribed hormones during pregnancy, show more “masculine” behavior—a preference for trucks and blocks over dolls, for active over quiet play, and for boys as playmates—even when parents encourage them to engage in gender-typical play (Berenbaum & Beltz, 2011; Hines, 2015; Hines & Davis, 2018). Likewise, boys with diminished prenatal androgen exposure, either because production by the testes is reduced or because body cells are androgen insensitive, tend to engage in “feminine” behaviors, including toy choices, play behaviors, and preference for girl playmates (Jürgensen et al., 2007; Lamminmaki et al., 2012).

As with findings in nonhuman mammals, the greater the deviation from typical prenatal hormone exposure in boys and girls, the larger the impact on behavior. Also, girls exposed to markedly elevated levels of prenatal androgens (similar to those of male fetuses) are usually born with masculinized genitals (Hines & Davis, 2018). And boys who are androgen insensitive are born with feminized genitals.

Some researchers argue that biologically based sex differences, which affect children’s play styles, lead children to seek out same-sex playmates whose interests and behaviors are compatible with their own (Maccoby, 1998; Mehta & Strough, 2009). Preschool girls like to play in pairs with other girls because they share a preference for quieter activities involving cooperative roles. Boys prefer larger-group play with other boys, due to a shared desire to run, climb, play-fight, compete, and build up and knock things down (Fabes, Martin, & Hanish, 2003).

Research confirms that preschoolers are drawn to peers who engage in similar levels of gender-typed activities. But they also like to spend time with same-sex peers regardless of type of activity—perhaps because they expect a playmate who is like themselves in so basic a way to be more enjoyable (Martin et al., 2013). At age 4, children spend three times as much time with same-sex as with other-sex playmates. By age 6, this ratio has climbed to 11 to 1 (Martin & Fabes, 2001).

10.5.3 Environmental Influences on Gender Typing

A wealth of evidence reveals that environmental forces—at home, at school, with peers, and in the community—build on biological influences to promote vigorous gender typing in early childhood.

The Family

Beginning at birth, parents have different expectations of sons than of daughters. They tend to describe active behavior, competition, achievement, and control of emotion as appropriate for sons and warmth, polite behavior, and closely supervised activities as important for daughters (Brody, 1999; Endendijk et al., 2013; Turner & Gervai, 1995). Furthermore, parents usually prefer that their children play with gender-stereotyped and gender-neutral toys (Kollmeyer et al., 2018; Weisgram & Bruun, 2018).

Actual parenting practices reflect these beliefs. Parents give their sons toys that stress action and competition (cars, tools, footballs) and their daughters toys that emphasize nurturance, cooperation, and physical attractiveness (dolls, tea sets, jewelry) (Brown & Stone, 2018). Fathers of preschoolers report more physical activities (chasing, playing ball, playing outdoors) with sons, and more literacy activities (singing, reading, storytelling) with daughters (Leavell et al., 2011). And both mothers and fathers tend to react more positively when a son plays with cars and trucks, demands attention, runs and climbs, or tries to take toys from others. When interacting with daughters, they more often direct play activities, provide help, encourage participation in household tasks, make supportive statements (approval, praise, and agreement), and discuss emotions (Aznar & Tenenbaum, 2014; Denham, Bassett, & Wyatt, 2010; Fagot & Hagan, 1991; Leaper, 2000).

Parents also teach children about gender stereotypes through the language they use. In research on picture book reading with toddlers and preschoolers, mothers made many positive comments about story characters engaging in activities consistent with gender stereotypes (“She likes playing with that doll”). And both mothers and fathers frequently expressed generic utterances, which referred to nearly all same-sex individuals as alike, ignoring exceptions (“Boys can be sailors,” “Most girls don’t like trucks”) (Endendijk et al., 2014; Gelman, Taylor, & Nguyen, 2004). Children readily picked up these generic expressions from parental speech, often receiving an affirming response (Child: “Only boys can drive trucks.” Mother: “Okay”).

Of the two sexes, boys are more gender-typed. Fathers, especially, are more insistent that boys conform to gender roles. As Figure 10.3 shows, in a survey of a large, nationally representative sample of U.S. parents, fathers were less likely than mothers to agree that it is “a very or somewhat good thing” for parents to encourage boys/girls to play with toys or participate in activities typically associated with the [other] gender” (Pew Research Center, 2018a). Both parents, though more so fathers, particularly felt this way about boys. Consistent with these trends, research repeatedly indicates that fathers differentiate more than mothers when it comes to children’s “cross-gender” behavior: They are much more concerned when a boy acts like a “sissy” than when a girl acts like a “tomboy” (Blakemore & Hill, 2008; Kollmeyer et al., 2018).

Yet as Figure 10.3 indicates, at least half of fathers express flexible views about boys’ activities. And recognizing the negative effects of other restrictive expectations for males, some fathers want their sons to be comfortable expressing feelings. As one father explained: “I’m more reserved than my wife emotionally. I realize that it is better to have our son be more open emotionally…. So, that’s a challenge. You want him to open up, and you have to do the same thing. I’m not used to doing that” (Parker et al., 2012, p. 61).

Parents who hold nonstereotyped values and who behave accordingly have children who are less gender-typed (Tenenbaum & Leaper, 2002). Children of lesbian parents tend to be less gender-typed than their agemates of heterosexual or gay parents (Goldberg & Garcia, 2016; Goldberg, Kashy, & Smith, 2012). Lesbian mothers, due to their female gender and sexual minority status, may be especially accepting of “cross-gender” behavior in their children.

Other family members may also reduce gender typing. For example, children with older, other-sex siblings have many more opportunities to imitate and participate in “cross-gender” activities. As a result, they are less gender-typed in play preferences, attitudes, and personality traits than their agemates with older, same-sex siblings or no siblings (McHale et al., 2001; Rust et al., 2000).

Figure 10.3 U.S. parents’ views of whether it is “a very or somewhat good thing” to encourage children to participate in other-gender activities. In a survey of a nationally representative sample of several thousand parents, fathers expressed more resistance than mothers to steering children, especially boys, to play with toys and participate in activities typically associated with the other gender. (Based on Pew Research Center, 2018a.)

Teachers

Teachers often act in ways that extend gender-role learning. Several times, Leslie caught herself emphasizing gender distinctions when she called out, “Will the girls line up on one side and the boys on the other?” or pleaded “Boys, I wish you’d quiet down like the girls!” These practices increase preschoolers’ gender-stereotyped beliefs while reducing their liking for and willingness to play with other-sex peers (Hilliard & Liben, 2010).

Like parents, preschool teachers encourage girls to participate in adult-structured activities. Girls frequently cluster around the teacher, following directions, while boys are more attracted to play areas where adults are minimally involved (Campbell, Shirley, & Candy, 2004). As a result, boys and girls engage in different social behaviors. Compliance and bids for help occur more often in adult-structured contexts; assertiveness, leadership, and creative use of materials in unstructured pursuits.

As early as kindergarten, teachers give more overall attention (both positive and negative) to boys than girls—a difference evident in diverse countries, including China, England, and the United States. They praise boys more for their academic knowledge but also use more disapproval and controlling discipline with them (Chen & Rao, 2011; Davies, 2008; Swinson & Harrop, 2009). Teachers seem to expect boys to misbehave more often—a belief based partly on boys’ actual behavior and partly on gender stereotypes.

In this preschool classroom, girls cluster around the teacher while boys play independently. As a result, children practice gender-typed behaviors—compliance and bids for attention by girls, assertiveness and leadership in boys.

© LAURA DWIGHT PHOTOGRAPHY

Peers

Children’s same-sex peer associations make the peer context an especially potent source of gender-role learning. The more preschoolers play with same-sex partners, the more their behavior becomes gender-typed—in toy choices, activity level, aggression, and adult involvement (Martin et al., 2011, 2013).

Children develop different styles of interaction in gender-segregated play. Boys more often use commands and physical force to get their way. Girls, out of greater concern for their playmate’s feelings, rely on polite requests and persuasion.

© ELLEN B. SENISI

© LAURA DWIGHT PHOTOGRAPHY

By age 3, same-sex peers positively reinforce one another for gender-typed play by praising, imitating, or joining in. In contrast, when preschoolers engage in “cross-gender” activities—for example, when boys play with dolls or girls with cars and trucks—peers criticize them. Boys are especially intolerant of cross-gender play in other boys (Thorne, 1993). A boy who frequently crosses gender lines is likely to be ignored by other boys, even when he does engage in “masculine” activities!

Children also develop different styles of social influence in gender-segregated peer groups. To get their way in large-group play, boys often rely on commands, threats, and physical force. Girls’ preference for playing in pairs leads to greater concern with a partner’s needs, evident in girls’ use of polite requests, persuasion, and acceptance. When girls communicate assertively with commands, other girls tend to respond with aggression (Hanish et al., 2012). Girls soon find that gentle tactics succeed with other girls but not with boys, who ignore their courteous overtures (Leaper, 1994; Leaper, Tenenbaum, & Shaffer, 1999). Boys’ unresponsiveness gives girls another reason to stop interacting with them.

Over time, children come to believe in the “correctness” of gender-segregated play and to perceive themselves as more similar to same-sex than other-sex peers, which further strengthens gender segregation and gender-stereotyped activities (Martin et al., 2011). As boys and girls separate, in-group favoritism—more positive evaluations of members of one’s own gender—becomes another factor that sustains the separate social worlds of boys and girls, resulting in “two distinct subcultures” of shared knowledge, beliefs, interests, and behaviors (Maccoby, 2002; Ruble, Martin, & Berenbaum, 2006).

The Broader Social Environment

Although children’s everyday environments have changed to some degree, they continue to present many examples of gender typing—in occupations, leisure activities, and achievements. Screen media powerfully convey gender stereotypes, depicting them in diverse settings and formats. For example, although today’s TV and video programs include more career-oriented women than in the past, female characters continue to be young, physically attractive, caring, emotional, and victimized and to be seen in romantic and family contexts. In contrast, male characters are usually dominant and powerful. Stereotypes are especially prevalent in video games, cartoons, and animated films for children (Calvert, 2015; Leaper, 2013).

Look and Listen

While observing 3- to 5-year-olds during a free-play period in a preschool or child-care program, note the extent of gender segregation and gender-typed play. Did styles of social influence differ in boys’ and girls’ gender-segregated groups? Jot down examples.

These images contribute to young children’s biased beliefs about roles and behaviors suitable for males and females. For example, introducing commercial princess costumes based on Disney animated films (such as Cinderella and Sleeping Beauty) into dramatic play areas in preschool classrooms led the pretend play themes of 3- to 5-year-old girls to emphasize beauty, clothing, accessories, and body movements (twirling, ballroom dancing, and hand posing) that the girls associated with princesses (Golden & Jacoby, 2018). These themes almost never appeared in girls’ play with non-princess costumes. Princess play also intensified girls’ exclusion of boys.

Many children’s toys are explicitly marketed as “for boys” or “for girls” through TV and online advertising, through their gender-typed packaging, and by the stores where they are sold, as the doll and princess aisles and the superhero and vehicle aisles in major toy stores illustrate (Auster & Mansbach, 2012). As we will see next, children do more than imitate the many gender-linked responses they observe. They soon come to view not just their social surroundings but also themselves through a “gender-biased lens”—a perspective that can seriously restrict their interests and learning opportunities.

Many children’s toys are explicitly marketed as “for boys” or “for girls” through gender-typed packaging and store displays—for example, Disney Princess dolls and Star Wars toys in segregated aisles.

© CARLO ALLEGRI/REUTERS

© SIMON EVANS/ALAMY STOCK PHOTO

10.5.4 Gender Identity

As adults, each of us has a gender identity—an image of oneself as relatively masculine or feminine in characteristics. By middle childhood, researchers can measure gender identity by asking children to rate themselves on personality traits. A child or adult with a “masculine” identity scores high on traditionally masculine items (such as ambitious, competitive, and self-sufficient) and low on traditionally feminine items (such as affectionate, cheerful, and soft-spoken). Someone with a “feminine” identity does the reverse. And a substantial minority (especially females) have a gender identity called androgyny, scoring high on both masculine and feminine personality characteristics.

Gender identity is a good predictor of psychological adjustment. “Masculine” and androgynous children and adults have higher self-esteem than “feminine” individuals, perhaps because many typically feminine traits are not highly valued by society (DiDonato & Berenbaum, 2011; Harter, 2012). Also, androgynous individuals are more flexible: They can show either “masculine” independence or “feminine” sensitivity, depending on the requirements of their situation (Huyck, 1996; Taylor & Hall, 1982). The existence of an androgynous identity demonstrates that children can acquire a mixture of positive qualities traditionally associated with each gender and use them adaptively to fit their current circumstances—an orientation that may best help them realize their potential.

Consistent with this idea, new assessments of androgyny ask children age 6 and older about the extent to which they feel similar to both boys and girls in appearance, behaviors, activities, and playmates. Although the majority identify more closely with their own group, about one-third also feel moderately similar to other-sex peers (Martin, Cook, & Andrews, 2017; Martin et al., 2017). These flexible, dual gender-identity children display certain mental health and social advantages. They feel more accepted by agemates of both sexes, are more likely to have other-sex friends, and hold fewer negative biases against children of the other sex.

Yet as with their gender-stereotyped attitudes and behavior, the overwhelming majority of 3- to 5-year-olds are quite unbending in their early sense of gender identity. They typically report that being a girl or a boy is “very important” to them and feel “very happy” with their own gender and gender group (Halim, Bryant, & Zucker, 2016). And for most, this positive regard for their gender strengthens during early childhood.

Emergence of Gender Identity

How do children begin to develop a gender identity? According to social learning theory, behavior comes before self-perceptions. Preschoolers first acquire gender-typed responses through modeling and reinforcement and only later organize these behaviors into gender-linked ideas about themselves. In contrast, cognitive-developmental theory maintains that self-perceptions come before behavior. Over the preschool years, children acquire gender constancy—a full understanding of the biologically based permanence of their gender, including the realization that sex remains the same over time, even if clothing, hairstyle, and play activities change (Kohlberg, 1966). Then children use this knowledge to guide their behavior.

When 3- to 5-year-olds are asked such questions as “When you (a girl) grow up, could you ever be a daddy?” or “Could you be a boy if you wanted to?” they freely answer yes. And children younger than age 6 who watch an adult dressing a doll in “other-gender” clothing typically insist that the doll’s sex has also changed (Chauhan, Shastri, & Mohite, 2005; Fagot, 1985). Indeed, gender identity in early childhood is closely associated with a focus on physical appearance. In an investigation of 3- to 6-year-olds, the more important and positive the children considered their gender to be, the more likely they were to insist on wearing gender-typed clothing (Halim et al., 2014).

Mastery of gender constancy follows a three-step sequence: gender labeling (correct naming of one’s own and others’ sex), gender stability (understanding that gender remains the same over time), and gender consistency (realizing that gender is not altered by superficial changes in clothing or activities). Full attainment of gender constancy is strongly related to ability to pass Piagetian conservation tasks (De Lisi & Gallagher, 1991). Indeed, gender constancy tasks can be considered a type of conservation problem, in that children must conserve a person’s sex despite a superficial change in that person’s outward appearance.

Is cognitive-developmental theory correct that gender constancy is responsible for children’s gender-typed behavior? Evidence for this assumption is weak. Although outcomes are not entirely consistent, some findings suggest that attaining gender constancy actually contributes to the emergence of more flexible gender-role attitudes in the early school years, perhaps because children then realize that engaging in gender-atypical behavior cannot cause their sex to change (Ruble et al., 2007). But overall, the impact of gender constancy on gender typing is not great. As research in the following section reveals, gender-role adoption is more powerfully affected by children’s beliefs about how close the connection must be between their own gender and their behavior.

Gender Schema Theory

Gender schema theory is an information-processing approach to gender typing that combines social learning and cognitive-developmental features. It explains how environmental pressures and children’s cognitions work together to shape gender-role development (Martin & Halverson, 1987; Martin, Ruble, & Szkrybalo, 2002). At an early age, children pick up gender-stereotyped preferences and behaviors from others. At the same time, they organize their experiences into gender schemas, or masculine and feminine categories, that they use to interpret their world. As soon as preschoolers can label their own gender, they select gender schemas consistent with it (“Only boys can be doctors” or “Cooking is a girl’s job”) and apply those categories to themselves. Their self-perceptions then become gender-typed and serve as additional schemas that children use to process information and guide their own behavior.

We have seen that individual differences exist in the extent to which children endorse gender-typed views. Figure 10.4 shows different cognitive pathways for children who often apply gender schemas to their experiences and those who rarely do (Liben & Bigler, 2002). Consider Billy, who encounters a doll. If Billy is a gender-schematic child, his gender-salience filter immediately makes gender highly relevant. Drawing on his prior learning, he asks himself, “Should boys play with dolls?” If he answers “yes” and the toy interests him, he will approach it, explore it, and learn more about it. If he answers “no,” he will avoid the “gender-inappropriate” toy. But if Billy is a gender-aschematic child—one who seldom views the world in gender-linked terms—he simply asks himself, “Do I like this toy?” and responds on the basis of his interests.

Figure 10.4 Cognitive pathways for gender-schematic and gender-aschematic children. In gender-schematic children, the gender-salience filter immediately makes gender highly relevant: Billy sees a doll and thinks, “I’m a boy. Should boys play with dolls?” Drawing on his experiences, he answers “yes” or “no.” If he answers “yes” and the doll interests him, he plays with the doll. If he answers “no,” he avoids the “gender-inappropriate” toy. Gender-aschematic children rarely view the world in gender-linked terms. Billy simply asks, “Do I like this toy?” and responds on the basis of his interests. (Reprinted by permission of Rebecca Bigler.)

To examine the consequences of gender-schematic processing, investigators often present preschoolers with gender-neutral toys, labeling them as either “for boys” or “for girls.” Most children respond with gender-schematic reasoning, preferring toys labeled for their gender, predicting that same-sex peers would also like those toys, and rejecting toys labeled for the other gender (Dinella & Weisgram, 2018).

In one such study conducted in China, some 5- to 7-year-olds were provided with gender labels before playing with a tangram—a Chinese puzzle consisting of a square divided into seven shapes that can be rearranged to make various patterns. Compared to no gender labeling, labeling the task as either “for boys” or “for girls” resulted in boys correctly placing more tangram pieces (see Figure 10.5) (Yeung & Wong, 2018). Even when gender labeled for girls, this task—which relies on spatial skills that children and adults alike often view males as better at—seemed to heighten boys’ awareness of their gender identity (“I’m a boy. I’m good at this kind of puzzle!”). This probably increased boys’ liking for the task, self-confidence and motivation to succeed, and ultimately their performance. The findings illustrate the power of gender schemas to influence children’s gender-role behavior and learning opportunities.

Gender-schematic thinking is so influential that when children see others behaving in “gender-inconsistent” ways, they often distort their memory to make it “gender-consistent.” For example, when shown a picture of a male nurse, they may remember him as a doctor (Martin & Ruble, 2004). And because gender-schematic preschoolers typically conclude, “What I like, children of my own sex will also like,” they often use their own preferences to add to their gender biases (Liben & Bigler, 2002). For example, a girl who dislikes oysters may declare, “Only boys like oysters!” even though she has never actually been given information promoting such a stereotype. At least partly for this reason, young children’s gender schemas contain both culturally standard and nonstandard ideas (Tenenbaum et al., 2010). Not until well into the school years do children’s gender schemas fully resemble those of adults.

Figure 10.5 Influence of gender labeling on Chinese children’s tangram performance. Five- to 7-year-olds were randomly assigned to either a no gender-labeling or a gender-labeling condition. In the no gender-labeling group, girls and boys played with a tangram, performing similarly. In the gender-labeling group, prior to playing with the tangram, an adult provided a gender label—either “for boys” or “for girls.” Gender labeling led to a marked increase in boys’ (but not girls’) performance on this task, which relies on spatial skills. (Based on Yeung & Wong, 2018.)

Biology and EnvironmentTransgender Children

Jacob, who began life as a girl, firmly insisted at age 2, “I am a boy!” in opposition to his parents’ suggestion that he was merely “pretending.” At preschool, he became increasingly angry at being identified as a girl. When his teacher asked him to write his name, he would print M-I-A but then vigorously cross it out. Gradually, his parents sensed the strength of his expressed identity. With guidance from a therapist, they began following his lead, providing boys’ clothes, a short haircut, toy cars, and superhero action figures. At age 4, at his parents’ suggestion, he affirmed that he wanted to change his name to Jacob and go to a different school, where he could start a new public life as a boy (Lemay, 2015). “I want to be a boy always,” Jacob declared. His problematic behavior at home and school quickly subsided.

The number of transgender children, adolescents, and adults in Western nations, though few, has risen recently—perhaps because more stories like Jacob’s are appearing in the media and because seeking treatment has become more acceptable. Individuals dissatisfied with their birth sex who strongly identify as the other gender experience substantial distress—a condition called gender dysphoria. Estimates based on adults in treatment suggest that 1 in 12,000 to 21,000 males and 1 in 30,000 to 48,000 females suffer from gender dysphoria (Zucker & Lawrence, 2009). In the general population, the prevalence of gender dysphoria may be considerably greater—according to one survey, perhaps as high as ½ of 1 percent (Conron et al., 2012). Many do not receive support from their families or from health professionals.

Individuals who change gender in adulthood often trace the emergence of their gender dysphoria to early childhood. Although contributing factors are not well understood, the prenatal hormone environment seems to play a role. For example, genetic females known to have been exposed to high levels of prenatal androgens are more likely than other women to be transgender (Dessens, Slijper, & Drop, 2005). But many females prenatally exposed to high androgen levels, and many males exposed to low levels, do not express discomfort with their birth sex.

Although some studies claim that most cases of childhood gender dysphoria subside in adolescence and adulthood, their samples failed to distinguish between gender-dysphoric children and children who merely display gender-nonconforming behavior. Children who are severely troubled over the mismatch between their birth sex and core gender identity, who insist that they are the other gender, and who also engage in high levels of “other-gender” behavior generally experience persisting dysphoria (Newhook et al., 2018; Ristori & Steensma, 2016). These persisters are likely to transition mostly or entirely—as Jacob did—to their desired gender role.

Transgender preschoolers and school-age children are not pretending, confused, or delayed in gender understanding. When questioned about their peer preferences, gender-typed toy choices, and gender identity, their responses are similar to those of nontransgender agemates who share their expressed gender (Fast & Olson, 2018; Olson, Key, & Eaton, 2015). Understandably, however, transgender preschoolers are less likely than their cisgender agemates to view gender as a stable trait in other people (Fast & Olson, 2018).

During early adolescence, gender dysphoria typically deepens as persisters encounter changes in their bodies and first feelings of sexual attraction (Leibowitz & de Vries, 2016). Some desire, and may be deemed eligible for, psychological and medical sex-change treatment, involving suppression of pubertal sex hormones, cross-sex hormone treatment after age 16, and surgery after age 18. Others go through a period of questioning, including hesitancy over invasive treatments, and take additional time to assess their feelings about transitioning physically (Steensma & Cohen-Kettenis, 2015). A number of these young people find their gender dysphoria so overwhelming that they eventually decide on treatment in their twenties and thirties.

Jacob, who began life as a girl, changed his name and transitioned to living as a boy in early childhood. Transgender children whose parents support their desire to express their identified gender are more content and better-adjusted.

COURTESY OF MIMI LEMAY

Controversy exists over therapies for gender-dysphoric children. One approach is directed at lessening their other-gender identity and behavior and increasing their comfort with their birth sex. These therapies, however, have yielded poor results (Adelson, 2012; Olson, 2016). Gender-dysphoric children react with heightened distress to efforts to suppress or deny their identified gender.

Increasing numbers of health professionals are convinced that therapies must be aimed at permitting children to follow their gender-identity inclinations and helping parents protect their children from the negative reactions of others. They are motivated by the tragic circumstances of many contemporary transgender adults, who experienced family rejection and social ostracism from childhood on and who face high rates of unemployment, poverty, homelessness, depression, and suicide. Current evidence suggests that embracing transgender children’s expressed identity leads to contented, better-adjusted children and adolescents (Durwood, McLaughlin, & Olson, 2017; Edwards-Leeper, Leibowitz, & Sangganjanavanich, 2016; Spivey & Edwards-Leeper, 2019). Follow-up research is needed to assess long-term outcomes in the coming generation of transgender adults.

For most children, development of gender identity involves constructing self-perceptions that accept the sex they were assigned at birth—a compatibility commonly referred to as cisgender. A few children express great discomfort with their birth sex and want to live as the other gender, saying so as early as the preschool years. For research on development of gender identity in these transgender children, refer to the Biology and Environment box above.

Also, recall from our earlier discussion of children exposed to atypical levels of prenatal sex hormones that their genital characteristics may differ from their chromosomally determined genetic sex. And regardless of genetic sex, gender identity may be more or less “masculine,” more or less “feminine,” or an androgynous mixture of both. For all these reasons, child development researchers are increasingly recognizing the importance of inclusive conceptions of biological sex and gender identity that are not dichotomies (male versus female, masculine versus feminine) but rather are characterized as a spectrum.

10.5.5 Reducing Gender Stereotyping in Young Children

How can we help young children avoid rigid gender schemas that restrict their behavior and learning opportunities? No easy recipe exists. Biology clearly affects children’s gender typing, channeling boys, on average, toward active, competitive play and girls toward quieter, more intimate interaction. At the same time, differential expectations and treatment of boys and girls begin in infancy, amplifying biologically based tendencies and promoting many aspects of gender typing that are unrelated to human nature (Hines, 2015).

Because young children’s cognitive limitations lead them to assume that cultural practices determine gender, parents and teachers are wise to delay preschoolers’ exposure to gender-stereotyped messages. Adults can begin by limiting adherence to traditional gender roles in their own behavior and by providing children with counterstereotypic alternatives. For example, parents can take turns making dinner, bathing children, and driving the family car, and they can give sons and daughters both trucks and dolls and both pink and blue clothing. Teachers can ensure that all children spend time in mixed-gender play activities and unstructured pursuits because children’s behavior tends to be less gender-typed in these contexts (Goble et al., 2012).

Finally, adults can avoid language that conveys gender stereotypes and can shield children from media presentations that do the same. In one study, just two minutes of exposure to magazine models of counterstereotypic toy play—pictures of a girl playing with a car and a boy playing with a stuffed animal (pony), with each toy described as the child’s favorite—increased 4- to 7-year-olds’ willingness to endorse an array of gender-stereotyped toys as appropriate for both genders (Spinner, Cameron, & Calogero, 2018). The counterstereotypic magazine images also increased the children’s willingness to choose the other-gender child as their preferred playmate.

Once children notice the vast array of gender stereotypes in their environment, adults can point out exceptions. They can arrange for children to see men and women pursuing nontraditional careers and can explain that interests and skills, not gender, should determine a person’s job—reasoning that reduces children’s gender-biased views of occupations. By middle childhood, children who hold flexible beliefs about what boys and girls can do are more likely to notice instances of gender discrimination (Brown & Bigler, 2004). As we will see in the next section, a rational approach to child rearing promotes healthy, adaptable functioning in many other areas as well.

Parents and teachers can reduce preschoolers’ gender stereotyping by modeling nonstereotyped behaviors and providing nontraditional alternatives. For this boy, making cookies is not “for girls.” It’s an activity he and his mother enjoy together.

© LAURA DWIGHT PHOTOGRAPHY

Ask Yourself

Connect ■ In addition to gender-stereotyped beliefs, what other aspects of preschoolers’ social understanding tend to be rigid and one-sided?

Apply ■ List findings indicating that language and communication—between parents and children, between teachers and children, and between peers—powerfully affect children’s gender typing. What recommendations would you make to counteract these influences?

Reflect ■ Would you describe your own gender identity as “masculine,” “feminine,” or “androgynous”? What biological and social factors might have influenced your gender identity?

10.6 CHILD REARING AND EMOTIONAL AND SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT

10.6a Describe the impact of child-rearing styles on development, and explain why authoritative parenting is effective.

10.6b Discuss the multiple origins of child maltreatment, its consequences for development, and prevention strategies.

In this and previous chapters, we have seen how parents can foster children’s competence—by building a parent–child relationship based on affection and cooperation, by modeling and reinforcing mature behavior, by using reasoning and inductive discipline, and by guiding and encouraging mastery of new skills. Now let’s put these practices together into an overall view of effective parenting.

10.6.1 Styles of Child Rearing

Child-rearing styles are combinations of parenting behaviors that occur over a wide range of situations, creating an enduring child-rearing climate. In a landmark series of studies, Diana Baumrind gathered information on child rearing by watching parents interact with their preschoolers (Baumrind, 1971). Her findings, and those of others who have extended her work, reveal three features that consistently differentiate an effective style from less effective ones: (1) acceptance and involvement, (2) control, and (3) autonomy granting (Gray & Steinberg, 1999; Hart, Newell, & Olsen, 2003). Table 10.2 shows how child-rearing styles differ in these features. Let’s discuss each style in turn.

Authoritative Child Rearing

The authoritative child-rearing style—the most successful approach—involves high acceptance and involvement, adaptive control techniques, and appropriate autonomy granting. Authoritative parents are warm, attentive, and sensitive to their child’s needs. They establish an enjoyable, emotionally fulfilling parent–child relationship that draws the child into close connection. At the same time, authoritative parents exercise firm, reasonable control over children’s behavior: They insist that the child act sensibly and responsibly, give reasons for their expectations, and use disciplinary encounters as “teaching moments” to promote the child’s self-regulation. Finally, authoritative parents engage in gradual, appropriate autonomy granting, allowing the child to make decisions in areas where she is ready to do so (Baumrind, 2013; Kuczynski & Lollis, 2002; Russell, Mize, & Bissaker, 2004).

Table 10.2 Features of Child-Rearing Styles

Child-Rearing Style

Acceptance and Involvement

Control

Autonomy Granting

Authoritative

Is warm, responsive, attentive, and sensitive to the child’s needs

Engages in adaptive behavioral control: Makes reasonable demands for mature behavior and consistently enforces and explains them

Permits the child to make decisions in accord with readiness

Encourages the child to express thoughts, feelings, and desires

If parent and child disagree, engages in joint decision making when possible

Authoritarian

Is cold and rejecting and frequently degrades the child

Engages in coercive behavioral control: Makes excessive demands for mature behavior, uses force and punishment

Often uses psychological control, withdrawing love and manipulating and intruding on the child’s individuality and attachment to parents

Makes decisions for the child

Rarely listens to the child’s point of view

Permissive

Is warm but overindulgent or inattentive

Is lax in behavioral control: Makes few or no demands for mature behavior

Permits the child to make many decisions before the child is ready

Uninvolved

Is emotionally detached and withdrawn

Is lax in behavioral control: Makes few or no demands for mature behavior

Is indifferent to the child’s decision making and point of view

Throughout childhood and adolescence, authoritative parenting is linked to many aspects of competence—an upbeat mood, self-control, task persistence, cooperativeness, positive self-esteem, advanced theory-of-mind understanding, social and moral maturity, and favorable school performance (Amato & Fowler, 2002; Gonzalez & Wolters, 2006; Jaffe, Gullone, & Hughes, 2010; Kuppens & Ceulemans, 2018; Mackey, Arnold, & Pratt, 2001; Milevsky et al., 2007; O’Reilly & Peterson, 2014).

Authoritarian Child Rearing

The authoritarian child-rearing style is low in acceptance and involvement, high in coercive control, and low in autonomy granting. Authoritarian parents appear cold and rejecting. To exert control, they yell, command, criticize, and threaten. “Do it because I said so!” is their attitude. They make decisions for their child and expect their child to accept their word unquestioningly. If the child resists, authoritarian parents resort to force and punishment.

Children of authoritarian parents are more likely to be anxious, unhappy, and low in self-esteem and self-reliance. When frustrated, they tend to react with hostility and, like their parents, use force to get their way. Boys, especially, show high rates of anger and defiance. Although girls also engage in acting-out behavior, they are more likely to be dependent, lacking interest in exploration, and overwhelmed by challenging tasks (Hart, Newell, & Olsen, 2003; Kakihara et al., 2010; Thompson, Hollis, & Richards, 2003). Children and adolescents exposed to the authoritarian style typically do poorly in school. However, because of their parents’ concern with control, they tend to achieve better and to commit fewer antisocial acts than agemates with undemanding parents—that is, those whose parents use one of the two styles we will consider next (Steinberg, Blatt-Eisengart, & Cauffman, 2006).

In addition to unwarranted direct control, authoritarian parents engage in a more subtle type called psychological control, in which they attempt to take advantage of children’s psychological needs by intruding on and manipulating their verbal expressions, individuality, and attachments to parents. These parents frequently interrupt or put down the child’s ideas, decisions, and choice of friends. When they are dissatisfied, they withdraw love, making their affection contingent on the child’s compliance, and often shame the child (“You’re not as good as your sister”). Children subjected to psychological control exhibit adjustment problems involving high stress reactivity (indicated by elevated cortisol levels) and both anxious, withdrawn behavior and defiance and aggression—including the relational form, which (like parental psychological control) damages relationships through manipulation and exclusion (Barber & Xia, 2013; Doan et al., 2017; Kuppens et al., 2013; Nelson et al., 2013).

Permissive Child Rearing

The permissive child-rearing style is warm and accepting but uninvolved. Permissive parents are either overindulgent or inattentive and, thus, engage in little control. Instead of gradually granting autonomy, they allow children to make many of their own decisions at an age when they are not yet capable of doing so. Their children can eat meals and go to bed when they feel like it and watch as much television as they want. They do not have to learn good manners or do any household chores. Although some permissive parents truly believe in this approach, many others simply lack confidence in their ability to influence their child’s behavior (Oyserman et al., 2005).

Children of permissive parents are impulsive, disobedient, and rebellious. They are also overly demanding and dependent on adults, and they show less persistence on tasks, poorer school achievement, and more antisocial behavior. The link between permissive parenting and dependent, nonachieving, rebellious behavior is especially strong for boys (Barber & Olsen, 1997; Steinberg, Blatt-Eisengart, & Cauffman, 2006).

Uninvolved Child Rearing

The uninvolved child-rearing style combines low acceptance and involvement with little control and general indifference to issues of autonomy. Often these parents are emotionally detached and depressed and so overwhelmed by life stress that they have little time and energy for children. At its extreme, uninvolved parenting is a form of child maltreatment called neglect. Especially when it begins early, it disrupts virtually all aspects of development (see page 146 in Chapter 4). Even with less extreme parental disengagement, children and adolescents display many problems—poor emotional self-regulation, school achievement difficulties, depression, and antisocial behavior (Aunola, Stattin, & Nurmi, 2000; Schroeder et al., 2010).

Look and Listen

Ask several parents to explain their style of child rearing, inquiring about acceptance and involvement, control, and autonomy granting. Look, especially, for variations in amount and type of control over children’s behavior along with parents’ rationales.

10.6.2 What Makes Authoritative Child Rearing Effective?

Like other correlational findings, the association between authoritative parenting and children’s competence is open to interpretation. Perhaps parents of well-adjusted children are authoritative because their youngsters have especially cooperative dispositions. Yet combined evidence from many longitudinal studies reveals a bidirectional relationship between children’s attributes and parenting styles: Children who are impulsive, overactive, defiant, or aggressive are more likely to evoke authoritarian parenting, including both coercive and psychological control. At the same time, authoritative parenting is associated with a decline in these externalizing behavior problems, whereas authoritarian and permissive parenting predict that they will worsen (Larzelere, Cox, & Mandara, 2013; Pinquart, 2017). For children with internalizing difficulties (fear and anxiety), parents must suppress their tendency to be overprotective. Rather, inhibited children’s adjustment improves with extra encouragement to be assertive and to express their autonomy (Chronis-Tuscano et al., 2015).

The warmth and caring that authoritative parents accord their children are linked to favorable child functioning in many cultures, suggesting that this feature of child rearing is universally necessary (Khaleque & Rohner, 2002). And a variant of authoritativeness in which parents exert strong control over their child’s behavior—becoming directive but not coercive—yields just as favorable long-term outcomes as a more democratic approach (Baumrind, Larzelere, & Owens, 2010). Indeed, some children, because of their dispositions, require “heavier doses” of certain authoritative features.

In sum, authoritative child rearing seems to create a positive emotional context for parental influence in the following ways:

Warm, involved parents who are secure in the standards they hold for their children model caring concern as well as confident, self-controlled behavior.

Children are far more likely to comply with and internalize control that appears fair and reasonable, not arbitrary.

By adjusting demands and autonomy granting to children’s capacities, authoritative parents convey to children that they are competent and can do things successfully for themselves. In this way, parents foster favorable self-esteem and cognitive and social maturity.

Supportive aspects of the authoritative style, including parental acceptance, involvement, and rational control, are a powerful source of resilience, protecting children from the negative effects of family stress and poverty (Luthar, Crossman, & Small, 2015).

A preschooler searches a shelf in her local library to select a book on her own. By adjusting autonomy granting to children’s capacities, authoritative parents convey to children that they can do things successfully for themselves.

© JIM CRAIGMYLE/GETTY IMAGES

10.6.3 Cultural Variations

Although authoritative parenting is broadly advantageous, ethnic minority parents often have distinct child-rearing beliefs and practices reflecting cultural values. Let’s look at some examples.

Compared with Western parents, Chinese parents describe their parenting as more controlling. In their efforts to foster self-discipline and high achievement, they are more directive in teaching their children and in scheduling their time. Chinese parents may appear less warm than Western parents because they withhold praise, which they believe results in self-satisfied, poorly motivated children (Cheah & Li, 2010; Ng, Pomerantz, & Deng, 2014). High control reflects the Confucian belief in strict discipline, respect for elders, and socially desirable behavior, taught by deeply involved parents.

Chinese parents report expressing affection and concern and using induction and other reasoning-oriented discipline as much as American parents do, but they more often shame a misbehaving child, withdraw love, and use physical punishment (Cheah et al., 2009; Chen, Sun, & Yu, 2017). When these practices become excessive, resulting in an authoritarian style high in coercive or psychological control, Chinese children and adolescents display the same negative outcomes as Western children: poor academic achievement, anxiety, impaired self-regulation, and aggressive behavior (Chan, 2010; Lee et al., 2012; Sorkhabi & Mandara, 2013; Zhang et al., 2017).

In Hispanic families, Asian Pacific Island families, and Caribbean families of African and East Indian origin, firm insistence on respect for parental authority is typically paired with high parental warmth—a combination suited to promoting cognitive, academic, and social competence and family loyalty (Kim et al., 2018; Roopnarine, 2016; Tamis-LeMonda & McFadden, 2010). Hispanic fathers often spend much time with their children and are warm and sensitive (Cabrera & Bradley, 2012). In Caribbean families that immigrated to the United States, fathers’ authoritativeness—but not mothers’—predicted preschoolers’ literacy and math skills, probably because Caribbean fathers take a larger role in guiding their children’s academic progress than Caribbean mothers do (Roopnarine et al., 2006).

In Caribbean families of African or East Indian origins, respect for parental authority is paired with high parental warmth—a combination that promotes competence and family loyalty.

© James Quine/Robertharding

Although wide variation exists, low-SES African-American parents tend to expect immediate obedience. Many believe strict parenting fosters self-control and vigilance in risky surroundings. African-American parents who use controlling strategies tend to have cognitively and socially competent children who view parental control as a sign of love and concern. And among African-American youths, controlling parenting, when combined with warmth and responsiveness, protects against delinquency and disruptive behaviors at school (Pezzella, Thornberry, & Smith, 2016; Roche, Ensminger, & Cherlin, 2007). Recall, also, that a history of mild physical punishment seems to prevent later externalizing problems in African-American children (refer to the Cultural Influences box on page 374). Most African-American parents who practice strict, “no-nonsense” discipline use physical punishment sparingly and combine it with warmth and reasoning.

These cultural variations remind us that child-rearing styles must be viewed in their larger context. As we have seen, many factors contribute to good parenting: personal characteristics of both child and parent, SES, access to extended family and community supports, cultural values and practices, and public policies.

As we turn to the topic of child maltreatment, our discussion will underscore, once again, that effective child rearing is sustained not just by the desire of mothers and fathers to be good parents. Almost all want to be. Unfortunately, when vital supports for parenting break down, children—as well as parents—can suffer terribly.

10.6.4 Child Maltreatment

Child maltreatment is as old as human history, but only in recent decades has the problem been widely acknowledged and studied. Perhaps public concern has increased because child maltreatment is especially common in large industrialized nations. In 2016, nearly 700,000 U.S. children (10 out of every 1,000) were identified as victims (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2018a). Because most cases go unreported, the true figures are much higher.

Child maltreatment takes the following forms:

Physical abuse. Assaults, such as kicking, biting, shaking, punching, or stabbing, that inflict physical injury

Sexual abuse. Fondling, intercourse, exhibitionism, commercial exploitation through prostitution or production of pornography, and other forms of sexual exploitation

Emotional abuse. Acts that could cause serious emotional harm, including social isolation, repeated unreasonable demands, ridicule, humiliation, intimidation, or terrorizing

Neglect. Failure to meet a child’s basic needs for food, clothing, medical attention, education, or supervision

Neglect occurs in about 75 percent of reported cases, physical abuse in 18 percent, emotional abuse in 9 percent, and sexual abuse in 8 percent (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2018a). Many children experience more than one form.

Parents commit 90 percent of abusive incidents. Other relatives account for about 5 percent, and the remainder are perpetrated by parents’ unmarried partners, child-care providers, or other adults. Infants, toddlers, and preschoolers are at greatest risk for neglect, physical abuse, and emotional abuse. Sexual abuse is perpetrated more often against school-age and early adolescent children. But each type occurs among children of every age (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2019). Because many sexual abuse victims are identified in middle childhood, we will pay special attention to this form of maltreatment in Chapter 13.

Origins of Child Maltreatment

Early findings suggested that child maltreatment was rooted in adult psychological disturbance (Kempe et al., 1962). But although child maltreatment is more common among disturbed parents, it soon became clear that a single “abusive personality type” does not exist. Parents who were abused as children do not necessarily become abusers (Jaffee et al., 2013). And sometimes even “normal” parents harm their children!

For help in understanding child maltreatment, researchers turned to ecological systems theory (see Chapters 1 and 2). They discovered that many interacting variables—at the family, community, and cultural levels—contribute. The more risks present, the greater the likelihood that abuse or neglect will occur. Table 10.3 summarizes factors associated with child maltreatment.

The Family

Within the family, children whose characteristics make them more challenging to rear are more likely to become targets of abuse. These include premature or very sick babies and children who are temperamentally difficult, are inattentive and overactive, or have other developmental problems. Child factors, however, only slightly increase the risk of abuse (Jaudes & Mackey-Bilaver, 2008; Sidebotham et al., 2003). Whether such children are maltreated largely depends on parents’ characteristics.

Table 10.3 Factors Related to Child Maltreatment

Factor

Description

Parent characteristics

Psychological disturbance; alcohol and drug abuse; history of abuse as a child; belief in harsh physical discipline; desire to satisfy unmet emotional needs through the child; unreasonable expectations for child behavior; young age (most under 30); low educational level; lack of parenting skills

Child characteristics

Preterm or very sick baby; difficult temperament; inattentiveness and overactivity; other developmental problems

Family characteristics

Low income or poverty; homelessness; marital instability; social isolation; partner abuse; frequent moves; large families with closely spaced children; overcrowded living conditions; presence of nonbiologically related caregivers; disorganized household; lack of steady employment; other signs of high life stress

Community

Characterized by violence and social isolation; few parks, child-care centers, preschool programs, recreation centers, or religious institutions to serve as family supports

Culture

Approval of physical force and violence as ways to solve problems

Sources: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2019; Miyamoto et al., 2017; Whipple, 2006.

Maltreating parents are less skillful than other parents in handling discipline confrontations and getting children to cooperate in working toward common goals. They also suffer from biased thinking about their child. For example, they often attribute their baby’s crying or their child’s misdeeds to a stubborn or bad disposition, evaluate children’s transgressions as worse than they are, and feel powerless in parenting—perspectives that lead them to resort quickly to physical force (Bugental & Happaney, 2004; Crouch et al., 2008).

Most parents have enough self-control not to respond with abuse to their child’s misbehavior or developmental problems. Rather, other factors combine with the child’s characteristics to prompt an extreme response. Unmanageable parental stress is strongly associated with maltreatment. Abusive parents respond to stressful situations with high emotional arousal. And low income, low education (less than a high school diploma), unemployment, alcohol and drug use, partner conflict, overcrowded living conditions, frequent moves, and extreme household disorganization are common in abusive and neglectful homes (Dakil et al., 2012; Wulczyn, 2009). These conditions increase the chances that parents will be too overwhelmed to meet basic child-rearing responsibilities or will vent their frustrations by lashing out at their children.

The Community

The majority of abusive and neglectful parents are isolated from both formal and informal social supports. Because of their life histories, many have learned to mistrust and avoid others and are poorly skilled at establishing and maintaining positive relationships. Also, maltreating parents are more likely to live in unstable, rundown neighborhoods that provide few links between family and community, such as parks, recreation centers, and religious institutions (Guterman et al., 2009; Tomyr, Ouimet, & Ugnat, 2012). They lack “lifelines” to others and have no one to turn to for help during stressful times.

The Larger Culture

Cultural values, laws, and customs profoundly affect the chances that child maltreatment will occur when parents feel overburdened. Societies that view violence as an appropriate way to solve problems set the stage for child abuse.

Although the United States has laws to protect children from maltreatment, support for the use of physical force is widespread (refer back to page 373). Fifty-seven countries in diverse regions of the globe—including Austria, Brazil, Costa Rica, Croatia, Finland, Israel, Kenya, Latvia, Nepal, New Zealand, Spain, and Togo—have outlawed corporal punishment, a measure that reduces both physical discipline and abuse (duRivage et al., 2015; Zolotor & Puzia, 2010). Yet corporal punishment of children by parents remains legal in all 50 U.S. states. Furthermore, all industrialized nations except the United States prohibit corporal punishment in schools. The U.S. Supreme Court has twice upheld the right of school officials to use corporal punishment. Fortunately, 31 U.S. states and the District of Columbia have passed laws that prohibit it in public schools, though just two states extend this ban to private schools.

Consequences of Child Maltreatment

The family circumstances of maltreated children impair the development of attachment security, emotional self-regulation, empathy and sympathy, self-concept, social skills, and academic motivation. Over time, these youngsters show serious adjustment problems—cognitive deficits including impaired executive function, school failure, difficulties in processing emotional and social signals, peer relationship problems, severe depression, aggressive behavior, substance abuse, and violent crime (Cicchetti & Toth, 2015; Nikulina & Widom, 2013; Stronach et al., 2011).

How do these damaging consequences occur? Recall our earlier discussion of hostile cycles of parent–child interaction. For abused children, these are especially severe. Also, a family characteristic strongly associated with child abuse is partner abuse (Graham-Bermann & Howell, 2011). Clearly, the home lives of abused children overflow with adult conduct that leads to profound distress, including emotional insecurity (see page 66 in Chapter 2), and to aggression as a way of solving problems.

Furthermore, the sense of abandonment conveyed by neglectful parenting and the humiliating, terrorizing behaviors of abusive adults result in low self-esteem, high anxiety, self-blame, and efforts to escape from extreme psychological pain—at times severe enough to lead to post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and attempted suicide in adolescence (Nikulina, Widom, & Czaja, 2011; Wolfe, 2005). A cascade of additional forms of victimization increases the chances of these outcomes. At school, maltreated children’s noncompliance, cognitive immaturity, poor academic motivation, and social skills deficits increase their risk for bullying by peers. And in the community, they are four times more likely than their nonmaltreated agemates to experience physical and sexual assault by nonfamilial perpetrators (Hamby et al., 2017).

Finally, chronic abuse is associated with central nervous system damage, including abnormal EEG brain-wave activity; reduced size and impaired functioning of the cerebral cortex, corpus callosum, cerebellum, and hippocampus, as detected with functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI); and atypical production of the stress hormone cortisol—initially too high but, after months of abuse, often too low. Over time, the massive trauma of persistent abuse seems to blunt children’s normal physiological response to stress (Cicchetti & Toth, 2015; Jaffee & Christian, 2014). These neurobiological effects make it more likely that cognitive and emotional problems will endure.

Preventing Child Maltreatment

Because child maltreatment is embedded in families, communities, and society as a whole, efforts to prevent it must be directed at each of these levels. Many approaches have been suggested, from teaching high-risk parents effective child-rearing strategies to developing broad social programs aimed at improving economic conditions and community services.

We have seen that providing social supports to families is effective in easing parental stress. This approach sharply reduces child maltreatment as well. A trusting relationship with another person is the most important factor in preventing mothers with childhood histories of abuse from repeating the cycle with their own children (Egeland, Jacobvitz, & Sroufe, 1988). Parents Anonymous, a U.S. organization with affiliate programs around the world, helps child-abusing parents learn constructive parenting practices, largely through social supports. Its local chapters offer self-help group meetings, daily phone calls, and regular home visits to relieve social isolation and teach responsible child-rearing skills.

Interventions aimed at strengthening both child and parent competencies can improve parenting practices, thereby preventing child maltreatment. Through its intensive parent training sessions that reduce child conduct problems, Incredible Years, discussed on pages 380–381, also prevents child abuse and neglect (Swenson & Logan, 2017).

Some interventions begin at a much earlier age. Healthy Families America, a program that began in Hawaii and has spread to 430 sites across the United States and Canada, identifies families at risk for maltreatment during pregnancy or at birth. Each receives three years of home visitation, in which a trained worker helps parents manage crises, encourages effective child rearing, and puts parents in touch with community services to meet their own and their children’s needs (Healthy Families America, 2011). In evaluations of sites verified to provide high-quality program delivery, parents randomly assigned to Healthy Families home visitation, compared with no-intervention controls, more often engaged their child in developmentally supportive activities and used effective discipline strategies; less often displayed harsh, coercive tactics; and reported less parenting stress—factors that reduce the risk of child maltreatment (Green et al., 2014; LeCroy & Krysik, 2011). Another home-visiting program that prevents child abuse and neglect is the Nurse–Family Partnership, discussed on page 110 in Chapter 3 (Olds et al., 2009).

Each year, fourth to sixth graders across Los Angeles County enter a poster contest to celebrate Child Abuse Prevention Month. This recent winner depicts the profound emotional pain caused by physical abuse. (Ricky Sosa-Alvarez, Ramona Middle School, La Verne, CA. Courtesy ICAN Associates, Los Angeles County InterAgency Council on Child Abuse & Neglect, ican4kids.org.)

Still, many experts believe that child maltreatment cannot be eliminated as long as violence is widespread and harsh physical punishment is regarded as acceptable. In addition, combating poverty and its diverse correlates—family stress and disorganization, inadequate food and medical care, teenage parenthood, low-birth-weight babies, and parental hopelessness—would protect many children.

Although more cases reach the courts than in decades past, child maltreatment is difficult to prove. Usually, the only witnesses are the child victims or other loyal family members. And even when the evidence is strong, judges hesitate to impose the ultimate safeguard against further harm: permanently removing the child from the family. There are several reasons for their reluctance. First, in the United States, government intervention into family life is viewed as a last resort. Second, despite destructive family relationships, maltreated children and their parents usually are attached to one another, and neither desires separation. Finally, the U.S. legal system tends to regard children as parental property rather than as human beings in their own right, and this also has stood in the way of court-ordered protection.

Despite intensive treatment, some adults persist in their abusive acts. An estimated 1,600 to 1,800 U.S. children, most of them infants and preschoolers, die from maltreatment annually. Nearly half suffered from physical abuse, including beatings, drownings, suffocation, or shaken baby syndrome, in which shaking an infant or young child inflicts brain and neck injuries. About 75 percent were severely neglected. The overwhelming majority of cases involve parents acting alone, together, or with other individuals (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2018a). When parents are unlikely to change their behavior, the drastic step of separating parent from child and legally terminating parental rights is the only justifiable course of action.

Child maltreatment is a sad note on which to end our discussion of a period of childhood that is so full of excitement, awakening, and discovery. But there is reason to be optimistic. Great strides have been made over the past several decades in understanding and preventing child maltreatment.

Ask Yourself

Connect ■ Is the concept of authoritative child rearing useful for understanding effective parenting across cultures? Explain.

Apply ■ Chandra heard a news report about 10 severely neglected children, living in squalor in an inner-city tenement. She wondered, “Why would parents so mistreat their children?” How would you answer Chandra?

Reflect ■ How would you classify your parents’ child-rearing styles? What factors might have influenced their approach to parenting?

Summary

10.1 Self-Understanding (p. 355)

10.1 Describe the development of self-concept and self-esteem in early childhood.

As self-awareness strengthens, preschoolers construct a self-concept that consists largely of observable characteristics and typical emotions and attitudes. Older preschoolers add an emerging grasp of their own and others’ personalities.

Secure attachment fosters a positive, coherent self-concept. Elaborative parent–child conversations about past events and internal states contribute to self-understanding.

Preschoolers’ self-esteem consists of several self-judgments. Their typically high self-esteem contributes to initiative during a period in which they must master many new skills.

10.2 Emotional Development (p. 358)

10.2 Identify changes in understanding and expressing emotion during early childhood, citing factors that influence those changes.

Preschoolers’ increasingly accurate understanding of the causes, consequences, and behavioral signs of emotions is supported by cognitive development, secure attachment, and conversations about feelings.

Supported by gains in emotion understanding and executive function, by age 3 to 4 children voice various strategies for regulating negative emotion. Temperament, parental modeling, and parental communication about coping strategies influence preschoolers’ capacity for emotional self-regulation.

As their self-concepts become better developed, preschoolers more often experience self-conscious emotions. However, they depend on parental feedback to know when to feel these emotions. And it takes time before they recognize them in themselves and others.

Empathy also becomes more common in early childhood. The extent to which empathy leads to sympathy and results in prosocial behavior depends on temperament and parenting.

10.3 Peer Relations (p. 363)

10.3 Describe peer sociability, friendship, and social problem solving in early childhood, along with cultural and parental influences on early peer relations.

During early childhood, peer interaction increases as nonsocial activity gives way to parallel play and then associative and cooperative play. Nevertheless, nonsocial and parallel play remain common.

Both sociodramatic and rough-and-tumble play are associated with gains in emotional understanding and self-regulation.

Compared with Western cultures that promote independence, cultures that highly value interdependence may be less accepting of children who engage in solitary play.

Preschoolers view friendship as pleasurable play. Compared to other peer interactions, their interactions with friends are more cooperative and emotionally expressive. Early childhood friendship and peer acceptance contribute to later academic and social competence.

Social conflicts offer occasions for social problem solving, which improves over the preschool and early school years. By kindergarten, each of its information-processing components is related to socially competent behavior.

Parents influence early peer relations both directly, through attempts to influence their children’s interactions with peers, and indirectly, through parent–child communication and play.

10.4 Foundations of Morality and Aggression (p. 369)

10.4a Identify the central features of psychoanalytic, social learning, and cognitive-developmental approaches to moral development.

Controversial evidence of morally relevant inclinations in infants suggests to some the existence of an innate moral sense. All theories of moral development recognize that conscience begins to take shape in early childhood.

The psychoanalytic perspective emphasizes identification and guilt as motivators of good conduct. Guilt is an important motivator of moral action, but contrary to Freud, discipline promoting fear of punishment and loss of parental love does not foster conscience development. Induction is far more effective.

Social learning theory focuses on how children learn moral behavior through reinforcement and modeling. Effective adult models of morality are warm, powerful, and consistent in what they say and do.

Harsh punishment has numerous undesirable side effects, including child and adolescent externalizing behavior problems. Certain social contexts may modify the consequences of physical punishment, as research on African-American children reveals.

When parents use such punishments as time out and withdrawal of privileges, they can increase their effectiveness by being consistent, maintaining a warm parent–child relationship, and offering explanations. The most effective discipline encourages good conduct by building a mutually respectful bond with the child.

The cognitive-developmental perspective views children as active thinkers about social rules. By age 4, children consider intentions in making moral judgments and distinguish truthfulness from lying. Preschoolers also distinguish moral imperatives from social conventions and matters of personal choice.

With gains in language, theory of mind, and understanding of emotion, older preschoolers begin to reason morally by referring to others’ perspectives and feelings. Morally relevant social experiences, including interactions with parents, siblings, and peers, are also influential.

10.4b Describe the development of aggression in early childhood, including family and media influences and effective approaches to reducing aggressive behavior.

During early childhood, proactive aggression declines while reactive aggression increases. Proactive and reactive aggression come in three forms: physical aggression (more common in boys), verbal aggression, and relational aggression. Both biology and parental gender-role attitudes contribute to gender differences in aggression.

Ineffective discipline and a conflict-ridden family atmosphere promote children’s aggression. Children high in reactive aggression see hostility where it does not exist, making many unprovoked attacks. Those high in proactive aggression tend to callously use it to advance their own goals—a style that predicts severe conduct problems. Media violence also triggers aggression.

Teaching parents effective child-rearing practices, intervening to enhance children’s emotional and social skills, relieving family stress through social supports, and shielding children from violent media reduce aggressive behavior.

10.5 Gender Typing (p. 382)

10.5a Discuss biological and environmental influences on preschoolers’ gender-stereotyped beliefs and behavior.

Preschoolers acquire a wide range of gender-typed beliefs, which operate as blanket rules rather than flexible guidelines for behavior.

Prenatal hormones contribute to boys’ higher activity level and rowdier play and to children’s preference for same-sex playmates. But parents, same-sex older siblings, teachers, peers, and the broader social environment encourage many gender-typed responses. Parents, especially fathers, apply more pressure for gender-role conformity to sons.

10.5b Describe and evaluate major theories that explain the emergence of gender identity.

Although most people have a traditional gender identity, some are androgynous, combining both masculine and feminine characteristics. Androgynous children display mental health and social advantages.

According to social learning theory, preschoolers first acquire gender-typed responses through modeling and reinforcement and then organize them into gender-linked ideas about themselves. Cognitive-developmental theory suggests that gender constancy must be mastered before children develop gender-typed behavior, but evidence for this assumption is weak.

Gender schema theory combines features of social learning and cognitive-developmental perspectives. As children acquire gender-stereotyped preferences and behaviors, they form masculine and feminine categories, or gender schemas, that they apply to themselves and their world.

Embracing transgender children’s expressed identity predicts better adjustment.

10.6 Child Rearing and Emotional and Social Development (p. 392)

10.6a Describe the impact of child-rearing styles on development, and explain why authoritative parenting is effective.

Three features distinguish the major child-rearing styles: (1) acceptance and involvement, (2) control, and (3) autonomy granting. Compared with the authoritarian, permissive, and uninvolved styles, the authoritative style promotes cognitive, emotional, and social competence. Warmth, reasonable control rather than coercive control, and gradual autonomy granting account for the effectiveness of the authoritative style. Psychological control is associated with authoritarian parenting and contributes to adjustment problems.

Certain ethnic groups, including Chinese, Hispanic, Asian Pacific Island, and African-American, combine parental warmth with high levels of control. But when control becomes harsh and excessive, it impairs academic and social competence.

10.6b Discuss the multiple origins of child maltreatment, its consequences for development, and prevention strategies.

Child maltreatment is related to factors within the family, community, and larger culture. Maltreating parents use ineffective discipline and hold a negatively biased view of their child.

Unmanageable parental stress, lack of access to social supports, and social approval of force and violence for solving problems all increase the likelihood of abuse and neglect.

Maltreated children are impaired in attachment security, emotional self-regulation, empathy and sympathy, self-concept, social skills, and academic motivation, and are at risk for central nervous system damage. A cascade of additional forms of victimization increases the chances of negative developmental outcomes.

Successful prevention of child maltreatment requires efforts at the family, community, and societal levels.

IMPORTANT TERMS AND CONCEPTS

androgyny (p. 387)

associative play (p. 363)

authoritarian child-rearing style (p. 393)

authoritative child-rearing style (p. 392)

child-rearing styles (p. 392)

cooperative play (p. 363)

gender constancy (p. 388)

gender identity (p. 387)

gender schema theory (p. 388)

gender typing (p. 382)

induction (p. 370)

matters of personal choice (p. 376)

moral imperatives (p. 376)

nonsocial activity (p. 363)

parallel play (p. 363)

permissive child-rearing style (p. 393)

physical aggression (p. 377)

proactive aggression (p. 377)

prosocial behavior (p. 362)

psychological control (p. 393)

reactive aggression (p. 377)

relational aggression (p. 377)

self-concept (p. 355)

self-esteem (p. 357)

social conventions (p. 376)

social problem solving (p. 367)

sympathy (p. 362)

time out (p. 374)

uninvolved child-rearing style (p. 393)

verbal aggression (p. 377)

MilestonesDevelopment in Early Childhood

2 years

Physical

Throughout early childhood, height and weight increase more slowly than in toddlerhood. (281)

Balance improves; walking becomes smooth and rhythmic; running emerges. (296–297)

Jumps, hops, throws, and catches with rigid upper body. (297)

Puts on and removes simple items of clothing. (297–298)

Uses spoon effectively. (297)

First drawings are gestural scribbles. (298)

Cognitive

Increasingly uses language as a flexible symbolic tool, to modify existing mental representations. (307–308)

Make-believe becomes less dependent on realistic objects, less self-centered, and more complex; sociodramatic play increases. (308)

Takes the perspective of others in simplified, familiar situations and in face-to-face communication. (313, 329)

Recognition memory is well developed. (326)

Shows awareness of mental states, such as want, think, remember, and pretend. (329)

Attaches verbal labels to amounts and sizes; begins to count. (334)

Language

Vocabulary increases rapidly. (345)

Uses a coalition of cues—perceptual and, increasingly, social and linguistic—to figure out word meanings. (347)

Speaks in simple sentences that follow basic word order of native language. (347)

Adds grammatical markers. (348)

Displays effective conversational skills. (349)

Emotional/Social

Understands causes, consequences, and behavioral signs of basic emotions. (358)

Begins to develop self-concept and self- esteem. (356–358)

Shows early signs of developing moral sense—verbal evaluations of own and others’ actions and efforts to relieve others’ stress. (369)

May display proactive (instrumental) and reactive (hostile) aggression. (377)

Gender-stereotyped beliefs and behavior increase. (382)

3–4 years

Physical

May no longer need a daytime nap. (287)

Running, jumping, hopping, throwing, and catching become more refined, with flexible upper body. (296–297)

Galloping and one-foot skipping appear. (297)

Pedals and steers tricycle. (297)

Uses scissors. (297)

Uses fork effectively. (297)

Draws first picture of a person, using tadpole image. (299)

Distinguishes writing from nonwriting. (302)

Cognitive

Understands the symbolic function of drawings and of models of real-world spaces. (298, 310)

Grasps conservation, reasons about transformations, and understands cause-and-effect relationships in simplified, familiar situations. (314)

Organizes everyday knowledge into hierarchically organized categories. (314–316)

Grasps dual representation. (310–311, 317)

Uses private speech to guide behavior during challenging tasks. (319)

Gains in executive function, including inhibition, flexible shifting of attention, and working-memory capacity. (323–324)

Uses scripts to recall routine events. (326)

Understands that beliefs can determine behavior. (329)

Knows meaning of numbers up to ten, counts correctly, and grasps cardinality. (334)

Language

Aware of some meaningful features of written language. (333)

Coins new words based on known words; extends language meanings through metaphor. (347)

Masters increasingly complex grammatical structures, occasionally overextending grammatical rules to exceptions. (347–348)

Adjusts speech to fit the age, gender, and social status of listeners. (313, 349)

Emotional/Social

Describes self in terms of observable characteristics and typical emotions and attitudes. (356)

Has several self-esteems, such as learning things in school, making friends, getting along with parents, and treating others kindly. (357)

Emotional self-regulation improves. (359)

Experiences self-conscious emotions more often. (361)

Relies more on language to express empathy. (362)

Engages in associative and cooperative play with peers, in addition to parallel play. (363–364)

Proactive aggression declines, while reactive aggression (verbal and relational) increases. (377)

Forms first friendships, based on pleasurable play and sharing of toys. (365–366)

Distinguishes moral imperatives from social conventions and matters of personal choices. (376)

Preference for same-sex playmates strengthens. (384)

5–6 years

Physical

Starts to lose primary teeth. (283)

Increases running speed, gallops more smoothly, and engages in true skipping. (297)

Displays mature, flexible throwing and catching patterns. (297–298)

Uses knife to cut soft foods. (297, 298)

Ties shoes. (297, 298)

Draws more complex pictures. (299)

Uses an adult pencil grip, writes name, copies some numbers and simple words, and discriminates letters of the alphabet. (297, 301–302)

Cognitive

Magical beliefs decline. (313)

Passes Piaget’s conservation of number, mass, and liquid problems. (312, 314)

Gains further in executive function, including planning. (323–325)

Improves in recognition, recall, scripted memory, and autobiographical memory. (326–327)

Understanding of false belief strengthens. (329)

Language

Understands that letters and sounds are linked in systematic ways. (333)

Uses invented spellings. (333)

By age 6, comprehends about 10,000 words and produces several thousand. (345)

Uses most grammatical constructions competently. (348)

Emotional/Social

Improves in understanding of emotion, including the ability to interpret, predict, and influence others’ emotional reactions. (358–359)

Becomes better at social problem solving. (368)

Has acquired many morally relevant rules and behaviors and can argue over matters of justice. (370)

Gender-stereotyped beliefs and behavior, and preference for same-sex playmates, continue to strengthen. (382–384)

Understands gender constancy. (388)

Note: Numbers in parentheses indicate the page or pages on which each milestone is discussed.

Descriptions of Images and Figures

Back to Figure

The diagram shows children playing together on a playground with the following notes.

Child’s mental state:

Knowledge of social rules

Representations of past social experiences

Social expectations

Around this part of the diagram is a cycle labeled as follows.

1, Notice social cues.

2, Interpret social cues.

3, Formulate social goals.

4, Generate possible problem-solving strategies.

5, Evaluate probable effectiveness of strategies.

6, enact response.

Between 6 and going back to 1, Peer evaluation and response.

Back to Figure

The graph shows the number of parents per 1,000 reporting slapping or spanking by the age of the child for 4 different years. The curve labeled 1975 starts at about 800 at age 3 and remains relatively constant until about age 7, where there is a slight increase, and then a steady decrease to about 600 at age 11. The curve labeled 1985 starts at about 900 at age 3 and after that there is a relatively steady decrease to about 500 at age 11. The curve labeled 1995 starts at about 775 at age 3 and increases slightly through age 5 before starting an almost steady decrease to about 400 at age 11. The curve labeled 2002 starts at about 700 at age 3, remains constant until age 4, then increases to about 900 at age 5, before starting an almost steady decrease to about 525 at age 11. All values are estimated.

Back to Figure

The graph shows the percentage with flexible views about children’s other-gender activities by mothers and fathers and whether they have girls or boys. The data is as follows.

Mothers. Girls: 83. Boys: 72.

Fathers. Girls: 69. Boys: 53.

All values are estimated.

Back to Figure

The diagram starts at a doll. From there, an arrow points to the question “Am I thinking about gender?” This is labeled gender-salience filter. This divides into 2 branches: the first branch is labeled yes. Gender-schematic child, I’m a boy. The second branch is labeled no. Gender-aschematic child, I’m Billy. The Yes branch leads to the question: Should boys play with dolls? This is labeled gender-schema filter. The no branch leads to the question: Do I like this toy? This is labeled interest filter. If the answer to the first question is yes, it points to the second question. If it is no, it points to the final part of the diagram, which shows a boy walking away from the doll, labeled ignore doll. If the answer to the second question is no, it also leads to this final part of the diagram. If the answer is yes, it leads to the final part of the diagram, where the boy plays with the doll.

Back to Figure

The graph shows the mean number of accurately placed tangram pieces by the presence of gender labeling for boys and girls. The data is as follows.

No gender labeling. Boys 26.5. Girls 27.

Gender labeling. Boys 32. Girls 25.5.

All values are estimated.