Infant and Toddler Parent Handout week 3

CHAPTER7EMOTIONALANDSOCIALDEVELOPMENTININFANCYANDTODDLERHOOD.docx

Home >Education homework help >Infant and Toddler Parent Handout week 3

CHAPTER 7 EMOTIONAL AND SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN INFANCY AND TODDLERHOOD

Motherhood

Camona Angelico, 13 years, Mexico

A mutual embrace reflects the strong, affectionate bond between this mother and child. Chapter 7 considers the importance of parental love and sensitivity for infants’ and toddlers’ feelings of security and competence.

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

WHAT’S AHEAD IN CHAPTER 7

7.1 Emotional Development

Basic Emotions • Understanding and Responding to the Emotions of Others • Emergence of Self-Conscious Emotions • Beginnings of Emotional Self-Regulation

7.2 Temperament and Development

The Structure of Temperament • Measuring Temperament • Stability of Temperament • Genetic and Environmental Influences • Temperament and Child Rearing: The Goodness-of-Fit Model

■ Biology and Environment: Development of Shyness and Sociability

7.3 Development of Attachment

Bowlby’s Ethological Theory • Measuring the Security of Attachment • Stability of Attachment • Cultural Variations • Factors That Affect Attachment Security • Multiple Attachments • From Attachment to Peer Sociability • Attachment and Later Development

■ Social Issues: Health: Does Child Care in Infancy Threaten Attachment Security and Later Adjustment?

■ Cultural Influences: The Role of Fathers’ Involvement in Children’s Development

7.4 Self-Development

Self-Awareness • Categorizing the Self • Self-Control

When Caitlin reached 8 months of age, her parents, Carolyn and David, noticed that she had become more fearful. One evening, as they were about to leave her with a babysitter, she wailed as they headed for the door—an experience she had accepted easily a few weeks earlier. Caitlin’s caregiver Ginette had also noticed an increasing wariness of strangers in Caitlin and also in Timmy, Vanessa’s 10-month-old son. At the mail carrier’s knock at the door, they clung to Ginette’s legs, reaching out to be picked up.

At the same time, each baby seemed more willful. When 10-month-old Timmy managed to reach a table knife that Vanessa quickly took from him, he burst into angry screams and could not be easily consoled or distracted.

All Monica and Kevin knew about Grace’s first year in Cambodia was that she had been deeply loved by her destitute, homeless mother, who had tearfully given her up for adoption. Separation from her, followed by the long journey to her new U.S. home, had left Grace in shock. At first she was extremely sad, turning away when Monica or Kevin picked her up. But as Grace’s adoptive parents held her close, spoke gently, and satisfied her craving for food, Grace returned their affection. Two weeks after her arrival, her despondency gave way to a sunny, easygoing disposition. She burst into a wide grin at the sight of Monica and Kevin and laughed at her older brother Eli’s funny faces. Among her first English words were the names of family members—”Eli,” “Mama,” and “Dada.” As her second birthday approached, she pointed to herself, exclaiming “Gwace!” and laid claim to treasured possessions: “Gwace’s teddy bear!”

Taken together, the children’s reactions reflect two related aspects of personality that develop during the first two years: close ties to others and a sense of self. In this chapter, we begin by tracing the course of early emotional development. As we do so, we will discover why fear and anger became more apparent in Caitlin’s and Timmy’s range of emotions by the end of the first year. Our attention then turns to the foundation of personality: temperament. We will examine genetic and environmental contributions to individual differences in temperament and the consequences of those differences for future development.

Next, we take up attachment to the caregiver, the child’s first affectionate tie. We will see how the feelings of security that grow out of this important bond support the child’s exploration, sense of independence, and expanding social relationships.

Finally, we focus on early self-development. By the end of toddlerhood, Grace recognized herself in mirrors and photographs, labeled herself with her own name, and showed the beginnings of self-control. “Don’t touch!” she instructed herself one day as she resisted the desire to pull a lamp cord out of its socket. Cognitive advances combine with social experiences to produce these changes during the second year. ■

7.1 EMOTIONAL DEVELOPMENT

7.1a Describe the development of basic emotions over the first year, noting the adaptive function of each.

7.1b Summarize changes during the first two years in understanding of others’ emotions, expression of self-conscious emotions, and emotional self-regulation.

Observe several infants and toddlers, noting the emotions each displays, the cues you rely on to interpret the baby’s emotional state, and how caregivers respond. Researchers have conducted many such observations to find out how babies convey their emotions and interpret those of others. They have discovered that emotions play powerful roles in organizing key developmental attainments of the first two years: formation of first social relationships, exploration of the environment, and discovery of the self (Saarni et al., 2006).

Think back to the dynamic systems perspective introduced in Chapters 1 and 5. As you read about early emotional development in the sections that follow, notice how emotions are an integral part of young children’s dynamic systems of action. Emotions energize development. At the same time, they are an aspect of the system that develops, becoming more varied and complex as children reorganize their behavior to attain new goals (Campos, Frankel, & Camras, 2004; Camras, 2011).

Compare the uncertain expression of a startled 3-month-old (left) to the unmistakable expression of surprise of a startled 5-month-old (right). Only gradually do infants’ expressions of emotion become clear, well-organized signals.

Because infants cannot describe their feelings, determining exactly which emotions they are experiencing is a challenge. Although vocalizations and body movements provide some information, facial expressions offer the most reliable cues. Cross-cultural evidence reveals that people around the world associate photographs of different facial expressions with emotions in the same way (Ekman & Friesen, 1972; Ekman & Matsumoto, 2011). These findings inspired researchers to analyze infants’ facial patterns to determine the range of emotions they display at different ages.

Nevertheless, assuming a close correspondence between a pattern of behavior and an underlying emotional state can lead to error. Infants, children, and adults use diverse responses to express a particular emotion. For example, babies placed on the visual cliff (see page 187 in Chapter 5) generally do not display a fearful facial expression, though they do show signs of avoidance—drawing back and refusing to crawl over the deep side. And the emotional expressions of blind babies, who cannot make eye contact, are muted, prompting parents to withdraw. When therapists show parents how blind infants express emotions through finger movements, parents become more interactive (Fraiberg, 1971; Saarni et al., 2006). Furthermore, the same general response can express several emotions. Depending on the situation, a smile might convey joy, embarrassment, contempt, or a social greeting.

In line with the dynamic systems view, emotional expressions vary with the individual’s developing capacities, goals, and contexts. To infer babies’ emotions as accurately as possible, researchers must attend to multiple interacting expressive cues—vocal, facial, and gestural—and see how they vary across situations believed to elicit different emotions (Camras & Shuster, 2013). With these ideas in mind, let’s chart the course of early emotional development.

7.1.1 Basic Emotions

Basic emotions—happiness, interest, surprise, fear, anger, sadness, and disgust—are universal in humans and other primates and have a long evolutionary history of promoting survival. Do infants come into the world with the ability to express basic emotions? Although signs of some emotions are present, babies’ earliest emotional life consists of little more than two global arousal states: attraction to pleasant stimulation and withdrawal from unpleasant stimulation (Camras et al., 2003). Only gradually do emotions become clear, well-organized signals.

The dynamic systems perspective helps us understand how this happens: Children coordinate separate skills into more effective, emotionally expressive systems as the central nervous system develops and the child’s goals and experiences change (Camras & Shuster, 2013; Camras & Shutter, 2010). Videotaping the facial expressions of her daughter from 6 to 14 weeks, Linda Camras (1992) found that in the early weeks, the baby displayed a fleeting angry face as she was about to cry and a sad face as her crying waned. At first, these expressions appeared on the way to or from full-blown distress and were not clearly linked to the baby’s experiences and desires. With age, she was better able to sustain an angry signal when she encountered a blocked goal and a sad signal when she could not overcome an obstacle.

According to one view, sensitive, contingent caregiver communication, in which parents selectively mirror aspects of the baby’s diffuse emotional behavior, helps infants construct emotional expressions that more closely resemble those of adults (Gergely & Watson, 1999). With age, the face, gaze, voice, and posture combine into organized patterns that vary meaningfully with environmental events. For example, 8-month-old Caitlin typically responded to her parents’ playful interaction with a joyful face, pleasant babbling, and a relaxed posture, as if to say, “This is fun!” In contrast, an unresponsive parent often evokes a sad face, fussy sounds, and a drooping body (sending the message, “I’m despondent”) or an angry face, crying, and “pick-me-up” gestures (as if to say, “Change this unpleasant event!”) (Mesman, van IJzendoorn, & Bakermans-Kranenburg, 2009; Vieites & Reeb-Sutherland, 2017). Gradually, emotional expressions become well-organized and specific—and therefore provide more precise information about the infant’s internal state.

Four basic emotions—happiness, anger, sadness, and fear—have received the most research attention. Let’s see how they develop.

Happiness

Happiness—expressed first in blissful smiles, later through exuberant laughter—contributes to many aspects of development. When infants achieve new skills, they smile and laugh, displaying delight in motor and cognitive mastery. The baby’s smile encourages caregivers to smile responsively and to be affectionate and stimulating, and then the baby smiles even more (Bigelow & Power, 2014). Happiness binds parent and baby into a warm, supportive relationship that fosters the infant’s motor, cognitive, and social competencies.

During the early weeks, newborn babies smile when full, during REM sleep, and in response to gentle touches and sounds, such as stroking of the skin, rocking, and a parent’s soft, high-pitched voice. By the end of the first month, infants smile at dynamic, eye-catching sights, such as a bright object jumping suddenly across their field of vision. As infants and parents engage in face-to-face mutual gazing while the parent talks and smiles, babies knit their brows, open their mouths, and move their arms and legs excitedly, gradually becoming more emotionally positive until, between 6 and 10 weeks, the parent’s communication evokes a broad grin called the social smile (Lavelli & Fogel, 2005; Super & Harkness, 2010). These changes parallel the development of infant perceptual capacities—in particular, sensitivity to visual patterns, including the human face (see Chapter 5). And social smiling becomes better-organized and stable as babies learn to use it to evoke and sustain pleasurable face-to-face interaction with the parent.

Development of the social smile, however, varies substantially with culture. The Nso people, a rural farming society of Cameroon, highly value infant calmness, so Nso caregivers discourage emotional expressiveness of all kinds and, instead, emphasize soothing behaviors, such as holding, stroking, and patting (Keller & Otto, 2009). In contrast, Western middle-SES parents, who value self-expression, enthusiastically promote active social engagement in their babies. In line with these differences, observations of Nso and urban German mother–infant pairs between 6 and 12 weeks revealed that the Nso mothers participated in far fewer face-to-face imitative exchanges, including smiling. As a result, frequency of Nso infant smiling lagged behind that of German infants with age (see Figure 7.1) (Wörmann et al., 2012, 2014). The smiling of Nso babies was also muted—vastly shorter in duration.

Figure 7.1 Development of the social smile in German and Nso infants. At 6 weeks, frequency of social smiling among Nso and German infants was similar. Among Nso infants, who experienced far fewer face-to-face imitative exchanges with their mothers, social smiling lagged behind that of German infants, whose smiling rose sharply with age. (Based on Wörmann et al., 2014.)

Laughter, which typically appears around 3 to 4 months, reflects faster processing of information than smiling. But as with smiling, first laughs occur in response to very active stimuli, such as the parent saying playfully, “I’m gonna get you!” and kissing the baby’s tummy. As infants understand more about their world, they laugh at events with subtler elements of surprise, such as a silent game of peekaboo. Soon they pick up on parents’ facial and vocal cues to humor, laughing in the presence of those cues at absurd events, such as an adult wearing a ball as a clown’s nose. From 5 months on, infants laugh at absurd events in the absence of parental cues (Mireault et al., 2015, 2017). This suggests that they can independently appraise such events as funny on the basis of their cognitive features.

Babies just a few months old smile and laugh more often when interacting with familiar people, a preference that strengthens the parent–child bond. Between 8 and 10 months, infants interrupt their play with an interesting toy to relay their delight to an attentive adult (Venezia et al., 2004). And like adults, 10- to 12-month-olds have several smiles, which vary with context—a broad, “cheek-raised” smile in response to a parent’s greeting; a reserved, muted smile for a friendly stranger; and a “mouth-open” smile during stimulating play (Messinger & Fogel, 2007). By the end of the first year, the smile has become a deliberate social signal.

Anger and Sadness

Newborn babies respond with generalized distress to a variety of unpleasant experiences, including hunger, painful medical procedures, changes in body temperature, and too much or too little stimulation (see Chapter 4). From 4 to 6 months into the second year, angry expressions increase in frequency and intensity (Braungart-Rieker, Hill-Soderlund, & Karrass, 2010). Older infants also react with anger in a wider range of situations—when an interesting object or event is removed, their play is interrupted, their arms are restrained, the caregiver leaves for a brief time, or they are put down for a nap (Camras et al., 1992; Sullivan & Lewis, 2003).

Why do angry reactions increase with age? As infants become capable of intentional behavior (see Chapter 6), they want to control their own actions and the effects they produce (Mascolo & Fischer, 2007). Furthermore, older infants are better at identifying who blocked their goals or caused them pain. Their anger is particularly intense when a caregiver from whom they have come to expect warm behavior causes discomfort. And increased parental limit-setting once babies crawl and walk contributes to babies’ angry responses (Roben et al., 2012).

The rise in anger is also adaptive. Infants who at 5 months reacted with greater anger to interruption of their play are more persistent during play with toys at age 2 years (Lewis, Sullivan, & Kim, 2015). Anger seems to motivate them to overcome obstacles. Finally, anger spurs caregivers to relieve infant distress and, in the case of separation, may discourage them from leaving again soon.

Although expressions of sadness also occur in response to pain, removal of an object, and brief separations, they are less frequent than anger. However, sadness occurs often when infants are deprived of a familiar, loving caregiver (as illustrated by Grace’s despondency after separation from her birth mother) and when parent–infant interaction is seriously disrupted. In a widely used procedure, researchers had parents interact with their 2- to 7-month-olds and then, suddenly, assume a still-faced, unreactive pose. The infants tried facial expressions, vocalizations, and body movements to get the parent to respond again. When these efforts failed, they turned away, frowned, and cried (Adamson & Frick, 2003; Provenzi et al, 2015). After parents resumed typical interaction, infants showed a brief carryover effect: partial recovery of positive emotional expressions mixed with negative affect and reduced interaction with the parent (Mesman, van Ijzendoorn, & Bakermans-Kranenburg, 2009; Montirosso et al., 2015).

The still-face reaction is identical among American, Canadian, and Chinese babies, suggesting that it is a built-in sad, withdrawn reaction to caregivers’ lack of communication (Kisilevsky et al., 1998). Return to page 146 in Chapter 4, and note that infants of depressed parents respond this way. When allowed to persist, a sad, vacant outlook heightens infant stress reactivity, as indicated by elevated cortisol levels, and poses risks to all aspects of early development (Provenzi, Giusti, & Montirosso, 2016).

A 12-month-old erupts in anger when frustrated during play. From 4 to 6 months into the second year, angry expressions increase in frequency and intensity.

Fear

Like anger, fear rises during the second half of the first year into the second year (Braungart-Rieker, Hill-Soderlund, & Karrass, 2010; Brooker et al., 2013). Older infants, for example, look wary, hesitating before playing with a new toy. But the most frequent expression of fear is to unfamiliar adults, a response called stranger anxiety. Many infants and toddlers react fearfully to strangers, although not always. Whether or not the reaction occurs depends on several factors: temperament (some babies are generally more fearful), past experiences with strangers, and the current situation. When an unfamiliar adult picks up the infant in a new situation, stranger anxiety is likely. If the adult sits still while the baby moves around and a parent is nearby, infants often show positive and curious behavior (Horner, 1980). The stranger’s style of interaction—expressing warmth, holding out an attractive toy, playing a familiar game, and approaching slowly rather than abruptly—reduces the baby’s fear.

Stranger anxiety appears in many infants after 6 months of age. This baby, though safe in his mother’s arms, observes his doctor with cautious curiosity.

Bjarki Reyr / Alamy Stock Photo

Cross-cultural research reveals that infant-rearing practices can modify stranger anxiety. Among the Aka of the Central African Republic and the Nso of Cameroon, infants experience a collective caregiving system in which many adults are responsible for their safety and well-being. Aka and Nso babies’ interaction with diverse caregivers—up to 20 each day—influences their response to unfamiliar people: They show little stranger anxiety (Meehan & Hawks, 2014b; Otto & Keller, 2015). In contrast, the Bedouins of southern Israel, who live in makeshift tents and shacks in impoverished villages without public services, frequently experience the destruction of their homes by Israeli soldiers. Bedouin mothers largely care for their own babies, keeping them physically close to protect them from danger, and by the end of the first year, most Bedouin infants display stranger anxiety (Marey-Sarwan, Keller, & Otto, 2016).

The overall rise in fear after age 6 months keeps newly mobile babies’ enthusiasm for exploration in check. Once wariness develops, infants use the familiar caregiver as a secure base, or point from which to explore, venturing into the environment and then returning for emotional support. As part of this adaptive system, encounters with unfamiliar objects and people lead to two conflicting tendencies: approach (indicated by interest) and avoidance (indicated by fear). The infant’s behavior is a blend of the two.

As cognitive development permits toddlers to discriminate more effectively between threatening and nonthreatening situations, stranger anxiety and other fears of the first two years decline. Fear also wanes as children acquire a wider array of strategies for coping with it, as we will see when we discuss emotional self-regulation.

Look and Listen

While observing an 8- to 18-month-old with his or her parent, gently approach the baby, offering a toy. Does the baby respond with stranger anxiety? To better understand the baby’s behavior, ask the parent to describe his or her temperament and past experiences with strangers.

7.1.2 Understanding and Responding to the Emotions of Others

Infants’ emotional expressions are closely tied to their ability to interpret the emotional cues of others. We have seen that in the first few months, babies match the feeling tone of the caregiver in face-to-face communication. Around 2 to 3 months, infants become sensitive to the structure and timing of face-to-face interactions (see page 232 in Chapter 6). When they gaze, smile, or vocalize, they now expect their social partner to respond in kind, and they reply with positive vocal and emotional reactions (Bigelow & Power, 2014; Lavelli & Fogel, 2013). Within these exchanges, babies become increasingly aware of the range of emotional expressions (Montague & Walker-Andrews, 2001).

By 4 to 5 months, infants distinguish positive from negative emotion in voices and, soon after, in facial expressions, gradually discriminating a wider range of emotions (see Chapter 5). At about the same time, they match specific facial and vocal displays of emotion. Infants look longer at an appropriate face–voice pairing (such as a happy face with a happy voice) than at an inappropriate one (a happy face with an angry voice) (de Haan & Matheson, 2009; Vaillant-Molina, Bahrick, & Flom, 2013).

In responding to emotional expressions as organized wholes, babies indicate that these signals are becoming meaningful to them. From 7 months on, event-related potentials (ERPs) recorded while infants attend to facial expressions reveal reorganized brain-wave patterns resembling those of adults, suggesting enhanced processing of emotional cues (Grossmann, Striano, & Friederici, 2007). By 8 months, infants use body expressions of emotion as aids to processing corresponding facial expressions (Rajhans et al., 2016). And as skill at establishing joint attention improves (see Chapter 6), infants realize that an emotional expression not only has meaning but is also a meaningful reaction to a specific object or event.

Once these understandings are in place, 8- to 10-month-olds start to engage in social referencing—actively seeking emotional information from a trusted person in an uncertain situation (Mumme et al., 2007). Many studies show that a caregiver’s emotional expression (happy, angry, or fearful) influences whether a 1-year-old will be wary of strangers, play with an unfamiliar toy, or cross the deep side of the visual cliff (de Rosnay et al., 2006; Mireault et al., 2014; Stenberg, 2017; Striano & Rochat, 2000). The adult’s voice—either alone or combined with a facial expression—is more effective than a facial expression alone (Kim, Walden, & Knieps, 2010; Vaish & Striano, 2004). The voice conveys both emotional and verbal information, so the baby can focus on evaluating a novel event without the need to turn toward the adult.

A 5-month-old reacts to his grandmother’s cheerful voice and broad smile with similar emotion, and he expects her to respond again in kind. Within these face-to-face interactions, infants gradually detect a wider range of emotions.

Look and Listen

Observe a toddler and parent at a playground, park, or shopping mall, noting circumstances that trigger social referencing. How does the parent convey emotional information? How does the toddler respond?

As toddlers start to appreciate that others’ emotional reactions may differ from their own, social referencing allows them to compare their own and others’ assessments of events. In one study, an adult showed 14- and 18-month-olds broccoli and crackers and acted delighted with one food but disgusted with the other (Repacholi & Gopnik, 1997). When asked to share the food, 18-month-olds gave the adult whichever food she appeared to like, regardless of their own preferences.

In sum, in social referencing, toddlers use others’ emotional messages to evaluate the safety and security of their surroundings, to guide their own actions, and to gather information about others’ intentions and preferences. These experiences, along with cognitive and language development, probably help toddlers refine the meanings of emotions of the same valence—for example, happiness versus surprise, anger versus fear—during the second year (Gendler, Witherington, & Edwards, 2008; Ruba et al., 2017).

7.1.3 Emergence of Self-Conscious Emotions

Besides basic emotions, humans are capable of a second, higher-order set of feelings, including guilt, shame, embarrassment, envy, and pride. These are called self-conscious emotions because each involves injury to or enhancement of our sense of self. We feel guilt when we know that we have harmed someone and want to correct the wrongdoing. Envy arises when we desire something that another possesses, so we try to restore our sense of self-worth by securing that possession. When we are ashamed or embarrassed, we have negative feelings about our behavior, and we want to retreat so others will no longer notice our failings. In contrast, pride reflects delight in the self’s achievements, and we are inclined to tell others what we have accomplished and to take on further challenges (Lewis, 2014).

Self-conscious emotions appear in the middle of the second year, as 18- to 24-month-olds become firmly aware of the self as a separate, unique individual. Toddlers show shame and embarrassment by averting their eyes, hanging their heads, and hiding their faces with their hands. They show guiltlike reactions, too. After noticing Grace’s unhappiness, 22-month-old Caitlin returned a toy she had grabbed and patted her upset playmate. Pride and envy also emerge around age 2 (Muris & Meesters, 2014; Lewis, 2014).

Besides self-awareness, self-conscious emotions require an additional ingredient: adult instruction in when to feel proud, ashamed, or guilty. Parents begin this tutoring early when they say, “Look how far you can throw that ball!” or “You should feel ashamed for grabbing that toy!” Self-conscious emotions play important roles in children’s achievement-related and moral behaviors. The situations in which adults encourage these feelings vary from culture to culture. In Western nations, most children are taught to feel pride over personal achievement—throwing a ball the farthest, winning a game, and (later on) getting good grades. In cultures such as China and Japan, which promote an interdependent self, calling attention to individual success evokes embarrassment and self-effacement. And violating cultural standards by failing to show concern for others—especially authority figures, such as a parent or teacher—sparks intense shame (Lewis, 2014).

This 2-year-old’s older sister praises his success at tower building. To experience self-conscious emotions, such as pride, young children need self-awareness as well as instruction in when to feel proud of an accomplishment.

7.1.4 Beginnings of Emotional Self-Regulation

Besides expressing a wider range of emotions, infants and toddlers begin to manage their emotional experiences. Emotional self-regulation refers to the strategies we use to adjust our emotional state to a comfortable level of intensity so we can accomplish our goals (Thompson & Goodvin, 2007). When you remind yourself that an anxiety-provoking event will be over soon, suppress your anger at a friend’s behavior, or decide not to see a scary horror film, you are engaging in emotional self-regulation.

Emotional self-regulation requires voluntary, effortful management of emotions. It improves rapidly in early childhood, as the result of a dynamic system of influences. These include development of the prefrontal cortex and its network of connections to brain areas involved in emotional reactivity and support from caregivers, who help children manage intense emotion and (as cognitive, language, and motor skills advance) teach them strategies for doing so on their own (Rothbart et al., 2014; Thompson, 2015). Individual differences in control of emotion are already evident in infancy and, by early childhood, play such a vital role in adjustment that—as we will see later—they are viewed as a major dimension of temperament called effortful control. A good start in regulating emotion during the first two years contributes greatly to mastery of cognitive and social skills. Poorly regulated toddlers, by contrast, are at risk for long-lasting adjustment difficulties (Eisenberg et al., 2014).

In the early months, infants have only a limited capacity to regulate their emotional states. When their feelings get too intense, they are easily overwhelmed. They depend on soothing interventions of caregivers—being lifted to the shoulder, rocked, gently stroked, and talked to softly—for distraction and reorienting of attention.

More effective functioning of the prefrontal cortex increases the baby’s tolerance for stimulation. Between 2 and 4 months, caregivers build on this capacity by initiating face-to-face play and attention to objects. In these interactions, parents arouse pleasure in the baby while adjusting the pace of their own behavior so the infant does not become overwhelmed and distressed (Kopp & Neufeld, 2003). As a result, the baby’s tolerance for stimulation increases further.

From 3 months on, the ability to shift attention away from unpleasant events and to engage in self-soothing helps infants control emotion. Beginning around 6 months, infants improve at communicating their need for help in regulating emotion by gesturing and vocalizing to the caregiver (Ekas, Lickenbrock, & Braungart-Rieker, 2013). And crawling and walking, which permit babies to approach or retreat from various situations, foster more effective self-regulation. Also, around the end of the first year, further gains in attention involving greater reliance on the prefrontal cortex enable infants and toddlers to be less diverted by captivating stimuli and to exert more controlled, sustained interest in events and play activities (Posner et al., 2012).

As caregivers help infants regulate their emotional states, they contribute to the child’s style of emotional self-regulation. Infants whose parents are highly involved in caregiving and play and who “read” and respond contingently and sympathetically to their emotional cues tend to be better at self-distraction and self-soothing, to express more pleasurable emotion, and to be more interested in exploration (Braungart-Rieker, Hill-Soderlund, & Karrass, 2010; Crockenberg & Leerkes, 2004; Planalp & Braungart-Rieker, 2015). In contrast, parents who respond impatiently or angrily or who wait to intervene until the infant has become extremely agitated reinforce the baby’s rapid rise to intense distress. This makes it harder for parents to soothe the baby in the future—and for the baby to learn to calm herself. When caregivers fail to regulate stressful experiences for infants who cannot yet regulate them for themselves, brain structures that buffer stress may fail to develop properly, resulting in an anxious, reactive child who has a reduced capacity for managing emotional problems (Blair & Raver, 2012; Frankel et al., 2015).

Caregivers also provide lessons in socially approved ways of expressing feelings. Beginning in the first few months, parents encourage infants to suppress negative emotion by imitating their expressions of interest, happiness, and surprise more often than their expressions of anger and sadness. Boys get more of this training than girls, in part because boys have a harder time regulating negative emotion (Else-Quest et al., 2006; Malatesta et al., 1986). As a result, the well-known sex difference—females as emotionally expressive and males as emotionally controlled—is promoted at a tender age.

Cultures that highly value social harmony place particular emphasis on socially appropriate emotional behavior while discouraging expression of individual feelings. Compared with Western parents, Chinese and Japanese parents, and parents in many non-Western village cultures, discourage the expression of strong emotion in babies. For example, as noted earlier in this chapter, Nso mothers of rural Cameroon spend less time imitating infant social smiling than do German mothers. Nso mothers are also especially quick to quiet infant distress through soothing and breastfeeding. Chinese, Japanese, and Nso babies, in turn, smile, laugh, and cry less than their Western agemates (Friedlmeier, Corapci, & Cole, 2011; Gartstein et al., 2010; Kärtner, Holodynski, & Wörmann, 2013).

A mother of the Baka people of the Central African rainforest anticipates her baby’s discomfort, soothing before he begins to cry. Many non-Western cultures that highly value social harmony discourage the expression of strong emotion in infants.

In the second year, growth in representation and language leads to new ways of regulating emotions. A vocabulary for talking about feelings—“happy,” “love,” “surprised,” “scary,” “yucky,” “mad”—develops rapidly after 18 months, but toddlers are not yet good at using language to manage their emotions. Temper tantrums tend to occur because toddlers cannot control the intense anger that often arises when an adult rejects their demands, particularly when they are fatigued or hungry (Mascolo & Fischer, 2007). When parents are emotionally sympathetic but set limits (by not giving in to tantrums), distract the child by offering acceptable alternatives, and later suggest better ways to solve the initial problem, children display more effective anger-regulation strategies and social skills during the preschool years (LeCuyer & Houck, 2006; Scrimgeour, Davis, & Buss, 2016).

Patient, sensitive parents also talk about emotions and encourage toddlers to describe their internal states. Then, when 2-year-olds feel distressed, they can guide caregivers in helping them (Cole, Armstrong, & Pemberton, 2010). For example, while listening to a story about monsters, Grace whimpered, “Mommy, scary.” Monica put the book down and gave Grace a comforting hug.

Ask Yourself

Connect ■ Why do children of depressed parents have difficulty regulating emotion (see page 146 in Chapter 4)? What implications do their weak self-regulatory skills have for their response to cognitive and social challenges?

Apply ■ At age 14 months, Reggie built a block tower and gleefully knocked it down. At age 2, he called to his mother and pointed proudly to his tall block tower. What explains this change in Reggie’s emotional behavior?

Reflect ■ How do you typically manage negative emotion? How might your early experiences, gender, and cultural background have influenced your style of emotional self-regulation?

7.2 TEMPERAMENT AND DEVELOPMENT

7.2a Explain the meaning of temperament and how it is measured.

7.2b Discuss the roles of heredity and environment in the stability of temperament, including the goodness-of-fit model.

From early infancy, Caitlin’s sociability was unmistakable. She smiled and laughed while interacting with adults and, in her second year, readily approached other children. Meanwhile, Monica marveled at Grace’s calm, relaxed disposition. At 19 months, she sat contentedly in a highchair through a two-hour family celebration at a restaurant. In contrast, Timmy was active and distractible. Vanessa found herself chasing him as he dropped one toy, moved on to the next, and climbed on chairs and tables.

When we describe one person as cheerful and upbeat, another as active and energetic, and still others as calm, cautious, or prone to angry outbursts, we are referring to temperament—early-appearing, stable individual differences in reactivity and self-regulation. Reactivity refers to quickness and intensity of emotional arousal, attention, and motor activity. Self-regulation, as we have seen, refers to strategies that modify that reactivity (Chen & Schmidt, 2015; Rothbart, 2011; Rothbart, Sheese, & Posner, 2014). The psychological traits that make up temperament are believed to form the cornerstone of the adult personality.

In 1956, Alexander Thomas and Stella Chess initiated the New York Longitudinal Study, a groundbreaking investigation of the development of temperament that followed 141 children from early infancy well into adulthood. Results showed that temperament can increase a child’s chances of experiencing psychological problems or, alternatively, protect a child from the negative effects of a highly stressful home life. At the same time, Thomas and Chess (1977) discovered that parenting practices can modify temperament considerably.

These findings stimulated a growing body of research on temperament, including its stability, biological roots, and interaction with child-rearing experiences. Let’s begin to explore these issues by looking at the structure, or makeup, of temperament and how it is measured.

7.2.1 The Structure of Temperament

Thomas and Chess’s model of temperament inspired all others that followed. When detailed descriptions of infants’ and children’s behavior obtained from parental interviews were rated on nine dimensions of temperament, certain characteristics clustered together, yielding three types of children:

The easy child (40 percent of the sample) quickly establishes regular routines in infancy, is generally cheerful, and adapts easily to new experiences.

The difficult child (10 percent of the sample) is irregular in daily routines, is slow to accept new experiences, and tends to react negatively and intensely.

The slow-to-warm-up child (15 percent of the sample) is inactive, shows mild, low-key reactions to environmental stimuli, is negative in mood, and adjusts slowly to new experiences.

Note that 35 percent of the children did not fit any of these categories. Instead, they showed unique blends of temperamental characteristics.

The difficult child pattern has sparked the most interest because children who display it are at high risk for adjustment problems—both anxious withdrawal and aggressive behavior in early and middle childhood (Bates, Wachs, & Emde, 1994; Ramos et al., 2005; Trentacosta et al., 2011). Use of the label “difficult” is problematic, however, because judgments of child difficulty vary widely across caregivers and cultures. Compared with difficult children, slow-to-warm-up children present fewer problems initially. However, they tend to show excessive fearfulness and slow, constricted behavior in the late preschool and school years, when they are expected to respond actively and quickly in classrooms and peer groups (Chess & Thomas, 1984; Schmitz et al., 1999).

Today, the most influential model of temperament is Mary Rothbart’s, described in Table 7.1 on page 250. It combines related traits proposed by Thomas and Chess and other researchers, yielding a concise list of just six dimensions. For example, distractibility and persistence are considered opposite ends of the same dimension, which is labeled “attention span/persistence.” A unique feature of Rothbart’s model is inclusion of both “fearful distress” and “irritable distress,” which distinguish between reactivity triggered by fear and reactivity due to frustration (Rothbart, 2011; Rothbart, Ahadi, & Evans, 2000). And Rothbart’s model excludes such overly broad dimensions in Thomas and Chess’s model as regularity of routines and intensity of reaction. A child who is regular in sleeping is not necessarily regular in eating or bowel habits. And a child who smiles and laughs intensely is not necessarily intense in fear, irritability, or motor activity.

Table 7.1 Rothbart’s Model of Temperament

Dimension

Description

Reactivity

Activity level

Level of gross-motor activity

Attention span/persistence

Duration of orienting or interest

Fearful distress

Wariness and distress in response to intense or novel stimuli, including time to adjust to new situations

Irritable distress

Extent of fussing, crying, and distress when desires are frustrated

Positive affect

Frequency of expression of happiness and pleasure

Self-Regulation

Effortful control

Capacity to voluntarily suppress a dominant, reactive response in order to plan and execute a more adaptive response

In the first two years, called orienting/regulation, which refers to the capacity to engage in self-soothing, shift attention from unpleasant events, and sustain interest for an extended time

A mother calmly waits out her toddler’s tantrum at having to go on an errand, offering brief words of explanation and reassurance that they’ll return soon. Patient, supportive parenting can help him modify his biologically based temperament and better manage his reactivity.

Rothbart’s dimensions represent the three underlying components included in the definition of temperament: (1) emotion (“fearful distress,” “irritable distress,” “positive affect”), (2) attention (“attention span/persistence”), and (3) action (“activity level”). According to Rothbart, individuals differ not just in their reactivity on each dimension but also in the self-regulatory dimension of temperament, effortful control—the capacity to voluntarily suppress a dominant response in order to plan and execute a more adaptive response (Rothbart, 2011, 2015; Rothbart & Bates, 2006). Variations in effortful control are evident in how effectively a child can focus and shift attention, inhibit impulses, and manage negative emotion.

The capacity for effortful control in early childhood predicts favorable development and adjustment in diverse cultures, with some studies showing long-term effects into adolescence and adulthood (Chen & Schmidt, 2015). Positive outcomes include persistence, task mastery, academic achievement, moral maturity (such as concern about wrongdoing and willingness to apologize), and social behaviors of cooperation, sharing, and helpfulness, which contribute to positive relationships with adults and peers (Eisenberg, 2010; Kochanska & Aksan, 2006; Posner & Rothbart, 2007b; Valiente, Lemery-Chalfant, & Swanson, 2010).

Turn back to page 212 in Chapter 6 to review the concept of executive function, and notice its resemblance to effortful control. These converging concepts, which are associated with similar positive outcomes, reveal that the same mental activities lead to effective regulation in both the cognitive and emotional/social domains.

7.2.2 Measuring Temperament

Temperament is often assessed through interviews or questionnaires given to parents. Behavior ratings by pediatricians, teachers, and others familiar with the child and laboratory observations by researchers have also been used. Parental reports are convenient and take advantage of parents’ depth of knowledge about their child across many situations (Chen & Schmidt, 2015). Although information from parents has been criticized as being biased, parental reports are moderately related to researchers’ observations of children’s behavior (Majdandcžić & van den Boom, 2007; Mangelsdorf, Schoppe, & Buur, 2000). And parent perceptions are vital for understanding how parents view and respond to their child.

Observations by researchers in the home or laboratory avoid the subjectivity of parent reports but can lead to other inaccuracies. In homes, observers find it hard to capture rare but important events, such as infants’ response to frustration. And in the unfamiliar lab setting, fearful children who calmly avoid certain experiences at home may become too upset to complete the session (Rothbart, 2011). Still, researchers can better control children’s experiences in the lab. And they can conveniently combine observations of behavior with neurobiological measures to gain insight into the biological basis of temperament.

Most neurobiological research has focused on children who fall at opposite extremes of the positive-affect and fearful-distress dimensions of temperament: inhibited, or shy, children, who react negatively to and withdraw from novel stimuli, and uninhibited, or sociable, children, who display positive emotion and approach novel stimuli. As the Biology and Environment box on page 252 reveals, biologically based reactivity—evident in heart rate, hormone levels, and measures of brain activity—differentiates children with inhibited and uninhibited temperaments.

7.2.3 Stability of Temperament

Young children who score low or high on attention span, irritability, sociability, shyness, or effortful control tend to respond similarly when assessed again several months to a few years later and, occasionally, even into the adult years (Casalin et al., 2012; Caspi et al., 2003; Kochanska & Knaack, 2003; Majdandcžić & van den Boom, 2007; van den Akker et al., 2010). However, when assessed across wider intervals of several months or more, the stability of temperament is low to moderate in infancy and toddlerhood. And stability across intervals of several years is moderate from the preschool years on, with a tendency for traits to become more stable with age (Bornstein et al., 2015; Parade et al., 2015; Shiner, 2015).

Why isn’t temperament more stable? A major reason is that temperament itself develops over time. To illustrate, let’s look at irritability and activity level. Recall from Chapter 4 that the early months are a period of fussing and crying for most babies. As infants better regulate their attention and emotions, many who initially seemed irritable become calm and content. In the case of activity level, the meaning of the behavior changes. At first, an active, wriggling infant tends to be highly aroused and uncomfortable, whereas an inactive baby is often alert and attentive. Once infants move on their own, the reverse is so! An active crawler is usually alert and interested in exploration, whereas an inactive baby may be fearful and withdrawn.

These discrepancies help us understand why long-term prediction from early temperament is best achieved after age 3, when children’s styles of responding are better established (Dyson et al., 2015; Roberts & DelVecchio, 2000). In line with this idea, between ages 2½ and 3, children improve substantially and also perform more consistently across a wide range of tasks requiring effortful control, such as waiting for a reward, lowering their voice to a whisper, succeeding at games like “Simon Says,” and selectively attending to one stimulus while ignoring competing stimuli (Kochanska, Murray, & Harlan, 2000; Li-Grining, 2007). Around this time, areas in the prefrontal cortex involved in suppressing impulses develop rapidly (Rothbart, 2011).

Nevertheless, the ease with which children manage their reactivity in early childhood depends on the type and strength of the reactive emotion involved. Preschoolers who were highly fearful as toddlers score slightly better than their agemates in effortful control. In contrast, angry, irritable toddlers tend to be less effective at effortful control at later ages (Bridgett et al., 2009; Kochanska & Knaack, 2003). Other evidence confirms that child rearing plays an important role in modifying temperamental traits. Toddlers and young preschoolers who have fearful or negative, irritable temperaments but experience patient, supportive parenting gain most in capacity to manage their reactivity (Bates, Schermerhorn, & Petersen, 2012; Kim & Kochanska, 2012). But if exposed to insensitive or unresponsive parenting, these emotionally negative children are especially likely to score low in effortful control, placing them at risk for adjustment problems.

In sum, diverse personal factors affect the extent to which a child’s temperament remains stable, including development of the biological systems on which temperament is based, the child’s capacity for effortful control, and the success of her efforts, which depend on the quality and intensity of her emotional reactivity. In addition, child rearing can modify biologically based temperamental traits considerably, and children with certain traits, such as negative emotionality, are especially susceptible to the influence of parenting—a finding we will return to shortly.

Biology and EnvironmentDevelopment of Shyness and Sociability

Two 4-month-old babies, Larry and Mitch, visited the laboratory of Jerome Kagan, who observed their reactions to a variety of unfamiliar experiences. When exposed to new sights and sounds, such as a moving mobile decorated with colorful toys, Larry tensed his muscles, moved his arms and legs with agitation, and began to cry. In contrast, Mitch remained relaxed and quiet, smiling and cooing at the excitement around him.

As toddlers, Larry and Mitch returned to the laboratory, where they experienced a variety of procedures designed to induce uncertainty. Electrodes were placed on their bodies and blood pressure cuffs on their arms to measure heart rate; toy robots, animals, and puppets moved before their eyes; and unfamiliar people entered and behaved in unexpected ways or wore novel costumes. While Larry whimpered and quickly withdrew, Mitch watched with interest, laughed at the strange sights, and approached the toys and strangers.

On a third visit, at age 4½ Larry barely talked or smiled during an interview with an unfamiliar adult. In contrast, Mitch was outgoing, asking questions and communicating his pleasure at each new activity the adult suggested. In a playroom with two unfamiliar peers, Larry pulled back and watched, while Mitch made friends quickly.

In longitudinal research on several hundred European-American infants followed into adolescence, Kagan found that about 20 percent of 4-month-olds were, like Larry, easily upset by novelty; another 40 percent, like Mitch, were comfortable, even delighted, with new experiences. About 20 to 25 percent of these extreme groups retained their temperamental styles as they grew older (Kagan, 2003, 2013d; Kagan et al., 2007). But most children’s dispositions became less extreme over time. Genetic makeup and child-rearing experiences jointly influenced stability and change in temperament.

Neurobiological Correlates of Shyness and Sociability

Individual differences in arousal of the amygdala, an inner brain structure devoted to processing of novelty and emotional information, contribute to these contrasting temperaments. In shy, inhibited children, novel stimuli easily excite the amygdala and its connections to the prefrontal cortex and the sympathetic nervous system, which prepares the body to act in the face of threat. In sociable, uninhibited children, the same level of stimulation evokes minimal neural excitation (Schwartz et al., 2012). And additional neurobiological responses known to be affected by arousal of the amygdala distinguish these two emotional styles:

Heart rate. From the first few weeks of life, the heart rates of shy children are consistently higher than those of sociable children, and they speed up further in response to unfamiliar events (Schmidt et al., 2007). In addition, vagal tone—naturally occurring variation in heart rate during each resting-state breathing cycle (a rise with inhalation, a decline with exhalation)—tends to be reduced in shy children. Low vagal tone is a sign of persistent stress (Chen & Schmidt, 2015).

Cortisol. Saliva concentrations of the stress hormone cortisol tend to be higher, and to rise more in response to a stressful event, in shy than in sociable children (Schmidt et al., 1999; Zimmermann & Stansbury, 2004).

Pupil dilation, blood pressure, and skin surface temperature. Compared with sociable children, shy children show greater pupil dilation, rise in blood pressure, and cooling of the fingertips when faced with novelty (Kagan et al., 2007).

Another physiological correlate of approach–withdrawal to people and objects is the pattern of brain waves in the frontal lobes of the cerebral cortex. Shy infants and preschoolers show greater EEG activity in the right frontal lobe, which is associated with negative emotional reactivity. In contrast, sociable children display greater activity in the left frontal lobe, which is linked to expressions of joy (Diaz & Bell, 2012; Fox et al., 2008). Inhibited children also show a stronger ERP brain-wave response to unfamiliar visual scenes (Kagan, 2013d). Neural activity in the amygdala, which is transmitted to the frontal lobes, probably contributes to these differences.

Child-Rearing Practices

According to Kagan, most extremely shy or sociable children inherit a physiology that biases them toward a particular temperamental style (Kagan, 2013d). Yet experience, too, has a powerful impact.

A strong physiological response to uncertain situations prompts this child to cling to her father. With patient, insistent encouragement, her parents can help her overcome the urge to retreat from unfamiliar events.

Child-rearing practices affect the chances that an emotionally reactive baby will become a fearful child. Warm, supportive parenting reduces shy infants’ and preschoolers’ intense physiological reaction to novelty, whereas cold, intrusive parenting that punishes or denies children’s feelings heightens anxiety (Davis & Buss, 2012; Kiel, Premo, & Buss, 2016). And if parents overprotect infants and young children who dislike novelty, they make it harder for the child to overcome an urge to retreat. Parents who make appropriate demands for their child to approach new experiences help shy youngsters develop strategies for regulating fear (Chronis-Tuscano et al., 2015).

When inhibition persists, it leads to excessive cautiousness, low self-esteem, and loneliness. In adolescence, it increases the risk of severe anxiety, depression, and other internalizing problems, including unrealistic worries about harm, illness, and criticism for mistakes as well as social phobia—intense fear of being humiliated in social situations (Kagan, 2013d; Karevold et al., 2012). For inhibited children to acquire effective social skills, parenting must be tailored to their temperaments—a theme we will encounter again in this and later chapters.

When we consider the evidence as a whole, the low to moderate stability of temperament makes sense. Let’s look more closely at genetic and environmental contributions to temperament and personality.

7.2.4 Genetic and Environmental Influences

The word temperament implies a genetic foundation for individual differences in personality. Identical twins are more similar than fraternal twins across a wide range of temperamental traits (activity level, attention span, difficultness, shyness/sociability, irritability, and effortful control) and personality measures (introversion/extroversion, anxiety, agreeableness, curiosity and imaginativeness, and impulsivity) (Caspi & Shiner, 2006; Micalizzi, Wang, & Saudino, 2017; Saudino & Micalizzi, 2015). In Chapter 2, we noted that heritability estimates derived from twin studies suggest a moderate role for genetic factors in temperament and personality: About half of individual differences have been attributed to differences in genetic makeup.

Although genetic influences on temperament are clear, environment is also powerful. Recall from Chapter 5 that children exposed to severe malnutrition in infancy remain more distractible and irritable than their agemates, even after dietary improvement. And infants reared in deprived orphanages are easily overwhelmed by stressful events. Their poor regulation of emotion results in inattention and weak impulse control, including frequent expressions of fear and anger (see pages 162 and 171 in Chapter 5).

Furthermore, heredity and environment often jointly contribute to temperament, since a child’s initial approach to the world can be intensified or lessened by experience. To illustrate, let’s begin by looking closely at ethnic and gender differences in temperament.

Ethnic and Gender Differences

Compared with European-American infants, Chinese and Japanese babies tend to be less active, irritable, and vocal; more easily soothed when upset; and better at quieting themselves (Kagan, 2013d; Lewis, Ramsay, & Kawakami, 1993). East Asian babies are also more attentive and less distractible, and as 2-year-olds, they are more compliant and cooperative with adults and higher in effortful control—for example, able to wait longer to play with an attractive toy (Chen et al., 2003; Gartstein et al., 2006). Grace’s capacity to remain contentedly seated in her highchair through a long family event at a restaurant certainly fits with this evidence. Chinese and Japanese babies are also more fearful and inhibited (Chen, Wang, & DeSouza, 2006; Slobodskaya et al., 2013). They remain closer to their mothers in an unfamiliar playroom and display more anxiety on encountering a stranger.

These variations may have genetic roots, but they are supported by cultural beliefs and practices, yielding possible gene–environment correlations. Japanese mothers, for example, usually say that babies come into the world as independent beings who must learn to rely on their parents through close physical contact. European-American mothers, in contrast, typically believe that they must wean their babies away from dependency toward autonomy. Consistent with these beliefs, East Asian mothers interact gently, soothingly, and gesturally with their infants, whereas European-American mothers use a more active, stimulating, verbal approach (Kagan, 2010). Also, recall from our discussion of emotional self-regulation that Chinese and Japanese adults discourage babies from expressing strong emotion, which contributes further to their infants’ tranquility.

At a Hong Kong playground, a 2-year-old assists her mother in wiping sand off a seesaw before climbing aboard. Compared to their European-American counterparts, East Asian babies are more compliant, less distractible, and higher in effortful control.

Similarly, gender differences in temperament are evident as early as infancy, suggesting a genetic foundation. Boys are more active and daring, less fearful, more irritable when frustrated, more likely to express high-intensity pleasure in play, and slightly more impulsive than girls—factors that contribute to boys’ higher injury rates throughout childhood and adolescence. Girls, in contrast, tend to be more anxious and timid. And girls’ large advantage in effortful control undoubtedly contributes to their greater compliance and cooperativeness, better school performance, and lower incidence of behavior problems (Else-Quest, 2012; Olino et al., 2013). At the same time, parents more often encourage their young sons to be physically active and their daughters to seek help and physical closeness—through activities they encourage and through more positive reactions when their child exhibits temperamental traits consistent with gender stereotypes (Bryan & Dix, 2009; Hines, 2015). Perhaps for this reason, gender differences in some temperamental traits widen by adolescence.

Look and Listen

In her first two years, Grace experienced a cultural mix of caregiving—by her East Asian birth mother for 16 months and by her European-American adoptive parents thereafter. How might this mix affect Grace’s developing temperament?

Differential Susceptibility to Rearing Experiences

Earlier we discussed findings indicating that emotionally reactive toddlers function worse than other children when exposed to ineffective parenting yet benefit more from good parenting. Researchers have become increasingly interested in temperamental differences in children’s susceptibility (or responsiveness) to environmental influences (Pluess & Belsky, 2011; Slagt et al., 2016). Using molecular genetic testing, they are clarifying how these gene–environment interactions operate.

Consistently, young children with a chromosome 7 gene containing a certain repetition of DNA base pairs called short 5-HTTLPR—which interferes with functioning of the inhibitory neurotransmitter serotonin and, thus, greatly increases the risk of self-regulation difficulties—are highly susceptible to the effects of parenting quality. Those exposed to maladaptive parenting readily develop externalizing behavior problems (anger and aggression). But when parenting is kind and supportive, children with this genetic marker fare exceedingly well in adjustment (Kochanska et al., 2011, 2015; van Ijzendoorn, Belsky, & Bakermans-Kranenburg, 2012). Among children without the 5-HTTLPR genotype, parenting—whether positive or negative—has minimal impact on adjustment.

Findings from a two-year follow-up of 1-year-olds from poverty-stricken families provide an impressive illustration (see Figure 7.2) (Davies & Cicchetti, 2014). Toddlers with the high-risk 5-HTTLPR genotype subjected to hostile, rejecting maternal parenting became increasingly emotionally reactive to their mother’s behavior, responding with distress, anger, and uncontrolled screaming. Their negative emotionality, in turn, predicted a sharp rise in defiance and aggression by age 3. In contrast, high-risk toddlers of affectionate, involved, and encouraging mothers displayed effective emotion regulation and far less anger and aggression than children with a low-risk genotype! Low-risk children barely reacted to variation in parenting quality.

As these outcomes reveal, children with the short 5-HTTLPR genetic marker show unusually high early plasticity (see page 9 in Chapter 1 to review). Their emotion regulation is particularly susceptible to the effects of both positive and negative parenting. Because young children with this “susceptibility attribute” fare better than other children when parenting is supportive, they are likely to benefit most from interventions aimed at reducing parental stress and promoting responsive child rearing.

Figure 7.2 Angry reactivity at age 3 in response to positive and negative maternal behaviors for children with and without the short 5-HTTLPR genotype. Children with a high-risk genotype (with the genetic marker) were highly susceptible to parenting quality—both good and bad. They displayed little anger when exposed to maternal affection and encouragement but high anger to maternal insensitivity and hostility. Children with a low-risk genotype (without the genetic marker) responded little to quality of maternal behavior. (From P. T. Davies and D. Cicchetti, 2014, “How and Why Does the 5-HTTLPR Gene Moderate Associations Between Maternal Unresponsiveness and Children’s Disruptive Problems?” Child Development, 85, p. 494. Adapted by permission of John Wiley & Sons.)

Siblings’ Unique Experiences

In families with several children, another influence on temperament is at work. When asked to describe their children’s personalities, parents often focus on differences: “She’s a lot more active.” “He’s more sociable.” “She’s far more persistent.” As a result, they often view siblings as more distinct than other observers do.

In a large study of 1- to 3-year-old twin pairs, parents rated identical twins as less alike in temperament than researchers’ ratings indicated. And whereas researchers rated fraternal twins as moderately similar, parents viewed them as somewhat opposite in temperament—one shy and the other sociable, one active and the other restrained, one persistent and the other distractible (Saudino, 2003). This tendency to exaggerate each child’s unique qualities affects parenting practices. Each child, in turn, evokes responses from caregivers that are consistent with parental beliefs and with the child’s developing temperament.

Besides different experiences within the family, siblings have distinct experiences with teachers, peers, and others in their community that affect development. And as we will see in Chapter 13, in middle childhood and adolescence, siblings often seek ways to differ from one another. For all these reasons, both identical and fraternal twins tend to become increasingly dissimilar in personality with age (Loehlin & Martin, 2001). In sum, temperament and personality can be understood only in terms of complex interdependencies between genetic and environmental factors.

Look and Listen

Ask several parents of siblings to describe their children’s temperaments, along with child-rearing practices they use with each. Do the parents tend to emphasize differences? Do their child-rearing practices reflect their views of each child’s unique qualities?

7.2.5 Temperament and Child Rearing: The Goodness-of-Fit Model

Thomas and Chess (1977) proposed a goodness-of-fit model to explain how temperament and environment can together produce favorable outcomes. Goodness of fit involves creating child-rearing environments that recognize each child’s temperament while simultaneously encouraging more adaptive functioning. If a child’s disposition interferes with learning or getting along with others, adults must gently but consistently counteract the child’s maladaptive style.

Difficult children (who withdraw from new experiences and react negatively and intensely) frequently experience parenting that fits poorly with their dispositions. As infants, they are less likely to receive sensitive caregiving. By the second year, their parents tend to resort to angry, punitive discipline, which undermines the development of effortful control. As the child reacts with defiance and disobedience, parents become increasingly stressed. As a result, they continue their coercive tactics and also discipline inconsistently, at times rewarding the child’s noncompliance by giving in to it (Lee et al., 2012; Micalizzi, Wang, & Saudino, 2017; Pesonen et al., 2008). These practices sustain and even increase the child’s irritable, conflict-ridden style.

In contrast, positive and sensitive parenting helps infants and toddlers—especially those who are emotionally reactive—regulate emotion, reducing difficultness by age 2 or 3 (Raikes et al., 2007). In toddlerhood and childhood, parental sensitivity, support, clear expectations, and limits foster effortful control, lessening the likelihood that difficultness will persist and lead to emotional and social difficulties (Cipriano & Stifter, 2010).

Effective parenting of difficult children, however, also depends on life conditions—good parental mental health, marital happiness, and favorable economic conditions (Schoppe-Sullivan et al., 2007). In comparisons of the temperaments of Russian and U.S. babies, Russian infants were more emotionally negative, fearful, and upset when frustrated (Gartstein, Slobodskaya, & Kinsht, 2003; Slobodskaya et al., 2013). At the time of these investigations, Russian parents faced a severely depressed national economy compared to that of the United States. Because of financial worries and longer work hours, Russian parents may have lacked time and energy for patient parenting.

Cultural values also affect the fit between parenting and child temperament, as research in China illustrates. In the past, high valuing of social harmony, which discourages self-assertion, led Chinese adults to evaluate shy children positively. But, rapid expansion of a market economy, which requires assertiveness and sociability for success, prompted a reversal in Chinese parents’ and teachers’ attitudes toward childhood shyness (Chen, Wang, & DeSouza, 2006; Yu, 2002). Whereas shyness was positively correlated with academic competence, peer acceptance, and leadership in the early 1990s, these correlations gradually weakened and became negative, until they mirrored findings of Western research. Today, shyness in Chinese children is linked to maladjustment—poor achievement, internalizing difficulties (anxiety and loneliness), and peer relationship problems (Chen et al., 2005; Coplan et al., 2016; Liu et al., 2017). Nevertheless, positive valuing of shyness has persisted in rural areas of China, where many shy children continue to be well-adjusted (Chen, Wang, & Cao, 2011). Cultural context makes a difference in whether shy children receive support or disapproval and whether they adjust well or poorly.

This parent’s firm but affectionate approach to discipline is “a good fit” with his son’s difficult temperament, helping the toddler gain in effortful control and manage negative emotion.

An effective match between rearing conditions and child temperament is best accomplished early, before unfavorable temperament–environment relationships produce maladjustment. Recall from Chapter 6 that Vanessa often behaved in an overly directive way with Timmy in an effort to contain his high activity level. A poor fit between her intrusive parenting and Timmy’s active temperament may have contributed to his tendency to move from one activity to the next with little involvement.

The goodness-of-fit model reminds us that babies have unique dispositions that adults must accept. Parents can neither take full credit for their children’s virtues nor be blamed for all their faults. But parents can turn an environment that exaggerates a child’s problems into one that builds on the child’s strengths. As we will see, goodness of fit is also at the heart of infant–caregiver attachment. This first intimate relationship grows out of interaction between parent and baby, to which the emotional styles of both partners contribute.

Ask Yourself

Connect ■ Explain how findings on ethnic and gender differences in temperament illustrate gene–environment correlation, discussed on page 80 in Chapter 2.

Apply ■ Mandy and Jeff are parents of 2-year-old inhibited Sam and 3-year-old irritable Maria. Explain the importance of effortful control to Mandy and Jeff, and suggest ways they can strengthen it in each of their children.

Reflect ■ How would you describe your temperament as a young child? Do you think it has remained stable, or has it changed? What factors might be involved?

7.3 DEVELOPMENT OF ATTACHMENT

7.3a Describe the features of ethological theory of attachment and its view of the development of attachment during the first two years.

7.3b Describe techniques for measuring attachment security, the stability of attachment patterns, and cultural variations in attachment behavior.

7.3c Discuss factors that influence early attachment security, infants’ and toddlers’ formation of multiple attachments, and how attachment paves the way for peer sociability.

7.3d Discuss the relationship of attachment patterns in infancy and of caregiving quality from infancy through adolescence to children’s long-term adjustment.

Attachment is the strong affectionate tie we have with special people in our lives that leads us to experience pleasure when we interact with them and to be comforted by their nearness in times of stress. By the second half-year, infants have become attached to familiar people who have responded to their needs. Consider how babies of this age single out their parents for special attention: When the parent enters the room, the baby breaks into a broad, friendly smile. When she picks him up, he pats her face, explores her hair, and snuggles against her. When he feels anxious or afraid, he crawls into her lap and clings closely.

Sigmund Freud first suggested that the infant’s emotional tie to the mother is the foundation for all later relationships. Contemporary research indicates that—although the infant–parent bond is vitally important—later development is influenced not just by early attachment experiences but also by the continuing quality of the parent–child relationship.

Attachment has also been the subject of intense theoretical debate. Recall from Chapter 1 that the psychoanalytic perspective regards feeding—satisfying the baby’s oral needs—as the central context in which caregivers and babies build this close emotional bond. Erik Erikson’s psychosocial theory expanded Freud’s view of the oral stage, pointing out that a positive outcome in infancy depends not on the amount of oral stimulation offered but rather on quality of caregiving. When the parent relieves the baby’s discomfort promptly and sensitively, holds the infant gently, and waits patiently until the baby has had enough milk, the infant acquires a sense of trust in the caregiver and the surrounding world. Behaviorism, too, emphasizes feeding as central in the development of attachment, but for different reasons. According to a well-known behaviorist account, infants learn to prefer the mother’s soft caresses, warm smiles, and tender words because these events are paired with tension relief as she satisfies the baby’s hunger.

Although feeding is an important context for building a close relationship, attachment does not depend on hunger satisfaction. In the 1950s, a famous experiment showed that rhesus monkeys reared with terry-cloth and wire-mesh “surrogate mothers” clung to the soft terry-cloth substitute, even though the wire-mesh “mother” held the bottle and infants had to climb onto it to be fed (Harlow & Zimmerman, 1959). Human infants, too, become attached to family members who seldom feed them, including fathers, siblings, and grandparents. And toddlers in Western cultures who sleep alone and experience frequent daytime separations from their parents sometimes develop strong emotional ties to cuddly objects, such as blankets and teddy bears, that play no role in infant feeding!

Both psychoanalytic and behaviorist accounts of attachment have another problem: They emphasize the caregiver’s contribution to the attachment relationship but pay little attention to the importance of the infant’s characteristics.

Baby monkeys reared with “surrogate mothers” preferred to cling to a soft terry-cloth “mother” instead of a wire-mesh “mother” that held a bottle. These findings contradict explanations of infant–caregiver attachment that assume the relationship is based on feeding.

Nina Leen/The LIFE Picture Collection/Shutterstock

7.3.1 Bowlby’s Ethological Theory

Today, ethological theory of attachment, which recognizes the infant’s emotional tie to the caregiver as an evolved response that promotes survival, is the most widely accepted view. John Bowlby (1969), who first applied this perspective to the infant–caregiver bond, retained the psychoanalytic idea that quality of attachment to the caregiver has profound implications for the child’s feelings of security and capacity to form trusting relationships.

At the same time, Bowlby was inspired by Konrad Lorenz’s studies of imprinting in baby geese (see Chapter 1). Bowlby believed that the human infant, like the young of other animal species, is endowed with a set of built-in behaviors that keep the parent nearby to protect the infant from danger and to provide support for exploring and mastering the environment. Contact with the parent also ensures that the baby will be fed, but Bowlby maintained that feeding is not the basis for attachment. Rather, attachment can best be understood in an evolutionary context in which survival of the species—through ensuring both safety and competence—is of utmost importance.

With gentle encouragement, this toddler reaches for her familiar caregiver’s hand, separating from her mother with little protest at child care. As language and representational skills increase, enabling toddlers to predict the parent’s return, separation anxiety declines.

According to Bowlby, the infant’s relationship with the parent begins as a set of innate signals that call the adult to the baby’s side. Over time, a true affectionate bond forms, supported by new cognitive and emotional capacities as well as by a history of warm, sensitive care. In Bowlby’s theory, attachment develops in four phases:

Preattachment phase (birth to 6 weeks). Built-in signals—grasping, smiling, crying, and gazing into the adult’s eyes—help bring newborn babies into close contact with other humans, who comfort them. Infants of this age recognize their own mother’s smell, voice, and face (see Chapter 4). But they are not yet attached to her, since they do not mind being left with an unfamiliar adult.

“Attachment in the making” phase (6 weeks to 6–8 months). During this phase, infants respond differently to a familiar caregiver than to a stranger. For example, at 4 months, Timmy smiled, laughed, and babbled more freely when interacting with his mother than with other adults and quieted more quickly when she picked him up. As infants learn that their own actions affect the behavior of those around them, they begin to develop a sense of trust—the expectation that the caregiver will respond when signaled—but they still do not protest when separated from her.

“Clear-cut” attachment phase (6–8 months to 18 months–2 years). Now attachment to the familiar caregiver is evident. Babies display separation anxiety, becoming upset when their trusted caregiver leaves. Like stranger anxiety (see page 245), separation anxiety does not always occur; it depends on infant temperament and the current context. But in many cultures, separation anxiety increases between 6 and 15 months, suggesting that infants have developed a clear understanding that the caregiver continues to exist when not in view. Besides protesting the parent’s departure, older infants and toddlers try hard to maintain her presence. They approach, follow, and climb on her in preference to others. And they use the familiar caregiver as a secure base from which to explore.

Formation of a reciprocal relationship (18 months to 2 years and on). By the end of the second year, rapid growth in representation and language enables toddlers to understand some of the factors that influence the parent’s coming and going and to predict her return. As a result, separation protest declines. Children of this age are able to negotiate with the caregiver, using requests and persuasion to alter her goals. For example, at age 2, Caitlin asked Carolyn and David to read her a story before leaving her with a babysitter. The extra time with her parents, along with a better understanding of where they were going (“to have dinner with Uncle Sean”) and when they would be back (“right after you go to sleep”), helped Caitlin withstand her parents’ absence.

According to Bowlby (1980), out of their experiences during these four phases, children construct an enduring affectionate tie to the caregiver that they can use as a secure base in the parent’s absence. This image serves as an internal working model, or set of expectations about the availability of attachment figures, their likelihood of providing support during times of stress, and the self’s interaction with those figures. The internal working model becomes a vital part of personality, serving as a guide for all future close relationships (Bretherton & Munholland, 2008).

Look and Listen

Watch an 8- to 18-month-old at play for 20 to 30 minutes. Describe the baby’s use of the parent or other familiar caregiver as a secure base from which to explore.

Consistent with these ideas, as early as the second year, toddlers form attachment-related expectations about parental comfort and support. In several studies, securely attached 12- to 16-month-olds looked longer at a video of an unresponsive caregiver (inconsistent with their expectations) than a video of a responsive caregiver. Insecurely attached agemates, in contrast, either looked longer at the responsive caregiver or did not distinguish between the two (see Figure 7.3) (Johnson, Dweck, & Chen, 2007; Johnson et al., 2010). The researchers concluded that the toddlers’ visual responses reflected “surprise” at caregiver behavior at odds with their own internal working model. With age, children continually revise and expand their internal working model as their cognitive, emotional, and social capacities increase and as they interact with parents and form other close bonds with adults, siblings, and friends.

7.3.2 Measuring the Security of Attachment

Although all family-reared babies become attached to a familiar caregiver by the second year, the quality of this relationship varies. Some infants appear relaxed and secure in the presence of their caregiver; they know they can count on the familiar adult for protection and support. Others seem anxious and uncertain.

A widely used laboratory technique for assessing the quality of attachment between 1 and 2 years of age is the Strange Situation. In designing it, Mary Ainsworth and her colleagues reasoned that securely attached infants and toddlers should use the parent as a secure base from which to explore in an unfamiliar playroom. In addition, when the parent leaves and an unfamiliar adult enters the room, the baby should be less comforted by the stranger than by the parent. The Strange Situation takes the baby through eight short episodes in which brief separations from and reunions with the parent occur (see Table 7.2).

Figure 7.3 Testing toddlers for internal working models of attachment. (a) First, 12- to 16-month-olds were habituated to a video of two animated shapes, one large (the “caregiver”) and one small (the “child”). The caregiver traveled halfway up an incline to a plateau, and the child began to “cry,” depicted by pulsing and bouncing paired with an infant cry. Next the researchers presented two test events: (b) In the responsive caregiver outcome, the caregiver returned to the child. (c) In the unresponsive caregiver outcome, the caregiver continued up the slope away from the child. Securely attached toddlers looked longer at the unresponsive outcome, depicting caregiver behavior inconsistent with their expectations. Insecurely attached toddlers did not differentiate between the two test events. (Based on Johnson, Dweck, & Chen, 2007.)

Observing infants’ responses to these episodes, researchers identified a secure attachment pattern and three patterns of insecurity; a few babies could not be classified (Ainsworth et al., 1978; Main & Solomon, 1990; Thompson, 2013). Although separation anxiety varies among the groups, the baby’s reunion responses largely define attachment quality. From the description at the beginning of this chapter, which pattern do you think Grace displayed after adjusting to her adoptive family?

Table 7.2 Episodes in the Strange Situation

Episode

Events

Attachment Behavior Observed

Researcher introduces parent and baby to playroom and then leaves.

Parent is seated while baby plays with toys.

Parent as a secure base

Stranger enters, is seated, and talks to parent.

Reaction to unfamiliar adult

Parent leaves room. Stranger responds to baby and offers comfort if baby is upset.

Separation anxiety

Parent returns, greets baby, and offers comfort if necessary. Stranger leaves room.

Reaction to reunion

Parent leaves room.

Separation anxiety

Stranger enters room and offers comfort.

Ability to be soothed by stranger

Parent returns, greets baby, offers comfort if necessary, and tries to reinterest baby in toys.

Reaction to reunion

Note: Episode 1 lasts about 30 seconds; each of the remaining episodes lasts about 3 minutes. Separation episodes are cut short if the baby becomes very upset. Reunion episodes are extended if the baby needs more time to calm down and return to play.

Source: Ainsworth et al., 1978.

Secure attachment. These infants use the parent as a secure base. When separated, they may or may not cry, but if they do, it is because the parent is absent and they prefer her to the stranger. When the parent returns, they convey clear pleasure—some expressing joy from a distance, others asking to be held until settling down to return to play—and crying is reduced immediately. About 60 percent of North American infants in middle-SES families show this pattern. (In low-SES families, a smaller proportion of babies show the secure pattern, with higher proportions falling into the insecure patterns.)

Insecure–avoidant attachment. These infants seem unresponsive to the parent when he is present. When the parent leaves, they usually are not distressed, and they react to the stranger in much the same way as to the parent. During reunion, they avoid or are slow to greet the parent, and when picked up, they often fail to cling. About 15 percent of North American infants in middle-SES families show this pattern.

Insecure–resistant attachment. Before separation, these infants seek closeness to the parent and often fail to explore. When the parent leaves, they are usually distressed, and on her return they combine clinginess with angry, resistive behavior (struggling when held, hitting, and pushing) or with an anxious focus on the parent. Many continue to cry after being picked up and cannot be comforted easily. About 10 percent of North American infants in middle-SES families show this pattern.

Disorganized/disoriented attachment. This pattern reflects the greatest insecurity. At reunion, these infants show confused, contradictory behaviors—for example, looking away while the parent is holding them or approaching the parent with flat, depressed emotion. Most display a dazed facial expression, and a few cry out unexpectedly after having calmed down or display odd, frozen postures. About 15 percent of North American infants in middle-SES families show this pattern.

An alternative method, the Attachment Q-Sort, suitable for children between 1 and 5 years, depends on home observations (Waters et al., 1995). Either the parent or a highly trained observer sorts 90 behaviors—such as “Child greets mother with a big smile when she enters the room,” “If mother moves very far, child follows along,” and “Child uses mother’s facial expressions as a good source of information when something looks risky or threatening”—into nine categories ranging from “highly descriptive” to “not at all descriptive” of the child. Then a score, ranging from high to low in security, is computed.

Because the Q-Sort is based on lengthy, naturalistic home observations and taps a wider array of attachment-related behaviors than the laboratory-based Strange Situation, it may better reflect the parent–infant relationship in everyday life. However, the Q-Sort method is time-consuming, requiring a nonparent informant to spend several hours observing the child before sorting the descriptors, and it does not differentiate between types of insecurity. The Q-Sort responses of expert observers correspond moderately well with babies’ secure-base behavior in the Strange Situation. In contrast, associations between parents’ Q-Sorts and infants’ Strange Situation reactions are weak (Cadman, Diamond, & Fearon, 2015; van IJzendoorn et al., 2004). Parents of insecure children, especially, may have difficulty accurately reporting their child’s attachment behaviors.

7.3.3 Stability of Attachment

Research on the stability of attachment patterns between 1 and 2 years of age yields a wide range of findings. In some studies, as many as 70 to 90 percent of children remain the same in their reactions to parents; in others, only 30 to 40 percent do. A careful look at which babies stay the same and which ones change yields a more consistent picture. Quality of attachment is usually secure and stable for middle-SES babies experiencing favorable life conditions. And infants who move from insecurity to security typically have well-adjusted mothers with positive family and friendship ties (Pinquart, Feufner, & Ahnert, 2013; Thompson, 2006, 2013). Perhaps many became parents before they were psychologically ready but, with social support, grew into the role.

In contrast, in low-SES families with many daily stresses, attachment generally moves away from security or changes from one insecure pattern to another (Fish, 2004; Levendosky et al., 2011). In follow-ups extending from infancy to late adolescence and early adulthood, shifts from security to insecurity were associated with single parenthood, maternal depression, and poor family functioning and parenting, including child maltreatment (Booth-LaForce et al., 2014; Weinfield, Sroufe, & Egeland, 2000; Weinfield, Whaley, & Egeland, 2004).

These findings indicate that securely attached babies more often maintain their attachment status than insecure babies, whose relationship with the caregiver is, by definition, fragile and uncertain. The exception is disorganized/disoriented attachment, an insecure pattern that is either highly stable or that consistently predicts insecurity of another type (Groh et al., 2014; Weinfeld, Whaley, & Egeland, 2004). Furthermore, adults with histories of attachment disorganization are at increased risk of having children who display disorganized/disoriented attachment (Raby et al., 2015). As you will soon see, many disorganized/disoriented infants experience extremely negative caregiving, which may disrupt emotional self-regulation so severely that confused, ambivalent feelings toward parents persist, impairing child rearing in the next generation.

7.3.4 Cultural Variations

Though broadly accepted as a brief, convenient laboratory procedure for assessing attachment security, the Strange Situation has been criticized for not taking into account family cultural context. Some researchers claim that that the attachment patterns derived from the Strange Situation, which are based on the primacy Bowlby accorded to a close infant–parent (mostly maternal) attachment bond, are inappropriate for children in non-Western cultures (Vicedo, 2017). Even when parents are the main caregivers, variations in their child-rearing beliefs and goals can modify children’s attachment-related behaviors.

In hunting-and-gathering and subsistence farming societies, nonmaternal caregivers, called allomothers, often share responsibility for infants, even assisting with breastfeeding (Meehan & Hawks, 2014b). Caregivers carry infants while they work and grant them few opportunities to independently explore. Consequently, their infants express secure base behavior through observing their surroundings and manipulating nearby objects rather than venturing away from the caregiver and returning for emotional support (Keller & Chaudhary, 2017; Mesman, van Ijzendoorn, & Sagi-Schwartz, 2016; Morelli et al., 2017). Furthermore, as we saw earlier in our discussion of Nso and Aka cultures, collective caregiving results in low levels of stranger anxiety—a key indicator of Western infants’ attachment security.

The Samburu, a nomadic people of northern Kenya, practice a form of shared caregiving in which grandmothers, acting as allomothers, care for infants while mothers forage for food and assist with herding of livestock. As a result, Samburu infants become attached to a network of caregivers.

Research in diverse Western and non-Western developed nations using the Strange Situation also indicates that attachment behaviors can have distinct, cultural meanings. For example, as Figure 7.4 shows, German infants show considerably more avoidant attachment than American babies do. But German parents value independence and encourage their infants to be nonclingy, so the baby’s behavior may be an intended outcome of cultural beliefs and practices (Grossmann et al., 1985).

Japanese infants, in contrast, rarely show avoidant attachment (refer again to Figure 7.4). Rather, many are resistantly attached, but this reaction may not represent true insecurity. The Japanese ideal of amae, emphasizing interdependency and oneness between infant and mother, leads Japanese mothers to seldom leave their babies in others’ care, so the Strange Situation probably induces greater distress in them than in infants who frequently experience maternal separations (Takahashi, 1990). Also, Japanese parents view the attention seeking that is part of resistant attachment as a normal indicator of infants’ efforts to satisfy dependency and security needs (Rothbaum, Morelli, & Rusk, 2011).

Figure 7.4 A cross-cultural comparison of infants’ reactions in the Strange Situation. A high percentage of German babies seem avoidantly attached, whereas a substantial number of Japanese and Korean infants appear resistantly attached. Note that these responses may not reflect true insecurity. Instead, they are probably due to cultural differences in child-rearing practices. (Based on Jin et al., 2012; van IJzendoorn & Kroonenberg, 1988; van IJzendoorn & Sagi-Schwartz, 2008.)

Likewise, Figure 7.4 indicates that resistant attachment is high among Korean infants, while almost none are avoidantly attached. The Korean concept of maternal dew stresses the importance of a strong bond between infant and mother, who is seen as having special healing powers. For example, many Korean mothers believe that if their baby has an upset stomach, merely touching it will help the infant recover (Jin et al., 2012). Korean mothers are highly attentive to their babies’ needs and, like Japanese mothers, rarely separate from them.

In sum, infants’ ways of expressing attachment and exploration differ widely across cultures. Although the secure pattern is the most common attachment quality in all societies studied to date, culturally specific definitions and research methods are needed to achieve a more complete understanding of infant–caregiver attachment relationships around the world (Morelli et al., 2017; van IJzendoorn & Sagi-Schwartz, 2008).

7.3.5 Factors That Affect Attachment Security

What factors might influence attachment security? Researchers have looked closely at four important influences: (1) early availability of a consistent caregiver, (2) quality of caregiving, (3) the baby’s characteristics, and (4) family context, including parents’ internal working models.

Early Availability of a Consistent Caregiver

What happens when a baby does not have the opportunity to establish a close tie to any caregiver? To find out, researchers followed the development of infants in British institutions with good caregiver–child ratios and a rich selection of books and toys but with such rapid staff turnover that the average child had 50 caregivers by age 4½ Many of these children became “late adoptees” who were placed in homes after age 4. Most developed deep ties with their adoptive parents, indicating that a first attachment can develop as late as 4 to 6 years of age (Hodges & Tizard, 1989; Tizard & Rees, 1975). But these children were more likely to display attachment difficulties, including an excessive desire for adult attention, “overfriendliness” to unfamiliar adults and peers, failure to check back with the parent in anxiety-arousing situations, and few friendships.

Although adopted children who spent their first year or more in deprived Eastern European orphanages are able to bond with their adoptive parents, they show greatly elevated rates of attachment insecurity, especially disorganized/disoriented attachment (Lionetti, Pastore, & Barone, 2015; Smyke et al., 2010; van den Dries et al., 2009). They are also at high risk for emotional and social difficulties. Many are indiscriminately friendly toward unfamiliar adults; others are sad, anxious, and withdrawn; and still others are angry and aggressive (Bakermans-Kranenburg et al., 2011; Kreppner et al., 2010; O’Connor et al., 2003). Symptoms tend to persist over time and are associated with wide-ranging mental health problems in middle childhood and adolescence.

Furthermore, institutionalized children as young as 7 months show reduced ERP brain waves in response to facial expressions of emotion and have trouble discriminating such expressions—outcomes that suggest disrupted formation of neural structures involved in “reading” emotions (Parker et al., 2005). These problems are still evident in preschoolers adopted during the second year, who find it hard to match appropriate facial expressions with situations in stories (Fries & Pollak, 2004). Consistent with these findings, in adopted children with longer institutional stays, the volume of the amygdala (see page 252) is atypically large. The larger the amygdala, the worse adopted children perform on tasks assessing understanding of emotion, the greater their emotional reactivity, and the poorer their emotional self-regulation (Tottenham, 2012).

Finally, formerly institutionalized children and youths often show weak executive function skills, which contribute to lasting emotional problems. Brain-imaging evidence reveals that the prefrontal cortex of these children is reduced in volume, myelination, and neural activity (McLaughlin, Sheridan, & Nelson, 2017; Merz et al., 2016). Lack of early opportunities to form attachments combined with inadequate early stimulation are believed to be responsible. Overall, the evidence indicates that fully normal emotional development depends on establishing a close tie with a caregiver early in life.

Quality of Caregiving

Dozens of studies report that sensitive caregiving—responding promptly, consistently, and appropriately to infants and holding them tenderly and carefully—is moderately related to attachment security in both biological and adoptive mother–infant pairs and in diverse cultures and SES groups (Belsky & Fearon, 2008; Cassidy, Jones, & Shaver, 2013; van IJzendoorn et al., 2004). In contrast, insecurely attached infants tend to have mothers who engage in less physical contact, handle them awkwardly or “routinely,” and are resentful and rejecting (Ainsworth et al., 1978; McElwain & Booth-LaForce, 2006).

Cultures, however, vary greatly in their view of sensitivity toward infants. In Western societies that highly value independence, sensitive caregivers follow the baby’s lead by noticing infant cues, interpreting these signals accurately, and responding contingently to them, especially when the infant is distressed (Feeney & Woodhouse, 2016). For example, when Caitlin fussed and cried, Carolyn picked her up, carried her to the rocking chair, and whispered soothingly, “Are you sleepy?” When Caitlin excitedly shook a rattle, Carolyn smiled broadly and encouraged enthusiastically, “That-a-girl!” Also, mothers of securely attached babies in Western nations frequently refer to their infants’ mental states and motives: “You really like that swing!” “Do you remember Grandma?” This maternal mind-mindedness—the tendency to treat the baby as a person with inner thoughts and feelings—seems to promote sensitive responsiveness (Shai & Meins, 2018; Zeegers et al., 2017).

In non-Western village communities and Asian cultures that emphasize interdependence, proximal care—keeping the baby physically close, dampening emotional expressiveness by anticipating the infants’ physical needs (feeding before the baby starts to cry), and orienting infants to face toward others so as to notice their wants and needs—is deemed sensitive because it advances the child’s connectedness to their social group and promotes social harmony (Keller et al., 2018; Morelli, 2015). Among the Gusii people of Kenya, for example, mothers are quick to quiet their infants and satisfy their physical needs, but they rarely interact contingently or playfully with them. Yet most Gusii infants appear securely attached (LeVine et al., 1994). Puerto Rican mothers, who highly value obedience and socially appropriate behavior, often physically direct and limit their babies’ actions—a caregiving style linked to attachment security in Puerto Rican culture (Carlson & Harwood, 2003). Yet typically in Western cultures, such physical control and restriction of exploration are viewed as intrusive and predict insecurity (Whipple, Bernier, & Mageau, 2011).

Compared with securely attached infants, avoidant babies tend to receive overstimulating, intrusive care. Their mothers might, for example, talk energetically to them while they are looking away or falling asleep. By avoiding the mother, these infants appear to be escaping from overwhelming interaction. Mothers of resistant infants often engage in inconsistent care. At times, they are sensitively responsive to infant signals; at other times, they are insensitive or unresponsive (Cassidy & Berlin, 1994; Vondra, Shaw, & Kevenides, 1995). The baby seems to react with impatience and anger to the mother’s unreliable behavior.

Highly inadequate caregiving is a powerful predictor of disruptions in attachment. Child abuse and neglect (topics we will consider in Chapter 10) are associated with all three forms of attachment insecurity. Among maltreated infants, disorganized/disoriented attachment is especially high (Cyr et al., 2010; Doyle & Cicchetti, 2017). Persistently depressed mothers, mothers with very low marital satisfaction, and parents suffering from a traumatic event, such as serious illness or loss of a loved one, also tend to promote the uncertain behaviors of this pattern (Campbell et al., 2004; Madigan et al., 2006). And some mothers of disorganized/disoriented infants engage in frightening, contradictory, and unpleasant behaviors, such as looking scared, teasing the baby, holding the baby stiffly at a distance, roughly pulling the baby by the arm, or seeking reassurance from the upset child (Hesse & Main, 2006; Solomon & George, 2011). Perhaps the baby’s disorganized behavior reflects a conflicted reaction to the parent, who sometimes comforts but at other times arouses fear.

Top photo: A father responds contingently to his baby’s signals, “reading” the infant’s joy and smiling exuberantly in return—a form of sensitivity common in Western societies. Bottom photo: In non-Western village communities and Asian cultures, parental sensitivity is expressed through physical closeness, calmness, and promptly meeting the infant’s physical needs.

Chad Springer/Media Bakery

Infant Characteristics

Because attachment is the result of a relationship between two partners, infant characteristics should affect how easily it is established. In Chapters 3 and 4 we saw that prematurity, birth complications, and newborn illness make caregiving more taxing. In families under stress, these difficulties are linked to attachment insecurity. In one study, the combination of preterm birth with either socioeconomic risk (poverty, single parenthood, high-school dropout) or maternal psychological risk (depression, high emotional stress)—but not preterm birth alone—reduced maternal sensitivity, which predicted insecure attachment at 12 months (Candelaria, Teti, & Black, 2011). Infants with special needs probably require greater parental sensitivity, which stressed parents often cannot provide. At-risk newborns whose parents have adequate time and patience to care for them fare quite well in attachment security (Brisch et al., 2005; Cox, Hopkins, & Hans, 2000).

With respect to temperament, combined analyses of many studies with thousands of infant and young child participants diverse in SES and ethnicity reveal only a weak relationship between temperament and attachment, with one exception: An emotionally reactive temperament is modestly associated with attachment insecurity (Groh et al., 2017; van IJzendoorn et al., 2004; Vaughn, Bost, & Van IJzendoorn, 2008). Again, however, evidence highlighting gene–environment interactions suggests that parental mental health and caregiving are involved.

In several investigations, babies with emotionally reactive temperaments, or with genetic markers predisposing them to emotional reactivity (including the short 5-HTTLPR gene, see page 254), were more likely than infants with low-risk genotypes to exhibit insecure attachment, but only when their mothers displayed negative parenting characteristics (Kim et al., 2017; Luijk et al., 2011; Spangler et al., 2009). With exposure to sensitive caregiving, these babies tended to be more secure. In other research, mothers’ experience of relationship trauma was associated with attachment disorganization, but only in infants with a chromosome-11 gene having a certain repetition of DNA base pairs (called DRD4 7-repeat), which disrupts the inhibitory effects of the neurotransmitter dopamine and is linked to impulsive, overactive behavior (Bakermans-Kranenburg & van Ijzendoorn, 2016; van IJzendoorn & Bakermans-Kranenburg, 2006). Infants with this genetic marker, who face special self-regulation challenges, appeared more susceptible to the negative impact of maternal adjustment problems.

If children’s temperaments alone determined attachment quality, we would expect attachment, like temperament, to be at least moderately heritable. Yet twin comparisons reveal that the heritability of attachment is virtually nil (Roisman & Fraley, 2008). Rather, babies with certain genotypes are at increased risk for attachment insecurity when they also experience insensitive parenting. Consistent with this conclusion, about two-thirds of siblings establish similar attachment patterns with their parents, although the siblings often differ in temperament (Cole, 2006). This suggests that most parents try to adjust their caregiving to each child’s individual needs.

Interventions that teach parents to interact sensitively with difficult-to-care-for infants and toddlers enhance both sensitive caregiving and attachment security (van IJzendoorn & Bakermans-Kranenburg, 2015). One program that focused on both maternal sensitivity and effective discipline was particularly effective in reducing irritable distress and disruptive behavior in toddlers with the DRD4 7-repeat gene (Bakermans-Kranenburg & van IJzendoorn, 2011; Bakermans-Kranenburg et al., 2008a, 2008b). These findings suggest that the DRD4 7-repeat—like the short 5-HTTLPR gene—makes children more susceptible to the effects of both negative and positive parenting.

Family Circumstances

Shortly after Timmy’s birth, his parents divorced, and his father moved to a distant city. Anxious and distracted, Vanessa placed Timmy in Ginette’s child-care home and began working 50-hour weeks to make ends meet. On days Vanessa stayed late at the office, a babysitter picked Timmy up, gave him dinner, and put him to bed. Once or twice a week, Vanessa retrieved Timmy from child care. As he neared his first birthday, Vanessa noticed that unlike the other children, who reached out, crawled, or ran to their parents, Timmy ignored her.

Timmy’s behavior reflects a repeated finding: Job loss, a failing marriage, financial difficulties, or parental psychological problems (such as anxiety or depression) can undermine attachment indirectly by interfering with parental sensitivity. These stressors can also negatively affect babies’ sense of security directly, by altering the emotional climate of the family (for example, exposing them to angry adult interactions) or by disrupting familiar daily routines (Feeney & Monin, 2016; Thompson, 2013). Social support can foster attachment security by reducing parental stress and improving the quality of parent–child communication (Moss et al., 2005). Ginette’s sensitivity toward Timmy was helpful, as was the parenting advice Vanessa received from Ben, a psychologist. As Timmy turned 2, his relationship with his mother seemed warmer.

Family circumstances are linked to attachment quality. Observing her parents’ heated quarrels may undermine this child’s sense of emotional security.

Parents’ Internal Working Models

Parents bring to the family context their own history of attachment experiences, from which they construct internal working models that they apply to the bonds they establish with their babies. Monica, who recalled her mother as tense and preoccupied, expressed regret that they had not had a closer relationship. Is her image of parenthood likely to affect Grace’s attachment security?

To assess parents’ internal working models, researchers ask them to evaluate childhood memories of attachment experiences (Main & Goldwyn, 1998). Parents who discuss their childhoods with objectivity and balance, regardless of whether their experiences were positive or negative, tend to behave sensitively and have securely attached infants. In contrast, parents who dismiss the importance of early relationships or describe them in angry, confused ways usually have insecurely attached children and are less warm, sensitive, and encouraging of learning and mastery. However, the relationship between parents’ internal working models and sensitivity toward their own infants is only modest (McFarland-Piazza et al., 2012; Shafer et al., 2015; Verhage et al., 2016; Whipple, Bernier, & Mageau, 2011). As we have seen, family circumstances and infant characteristics also influence caregiving quality.

Furthermore, we must not assume any direct transfer of parents’ childhood experiences to quality of attachment with their own children. Internal working models are reconstructed memories affected by many factors, including relationship experiences over the life course, personality, and current life satisfaction. Longitudinal research reveals that negative life events can weaken the link between attachment security in infancy and a secure internal working model in adulthood. And insecurely attached babies who become adults with insecure internal working models often have lives that, based on self-reports in adulthood, are filled with family crises (Waters et al., 2000; Weinfield, Sroufe, & Egeland, 2000).

In sum, our own early rearing experiences do not destine us to become either sensitive or insensitive parents. Rather, the way we view our childhoods—our ability to come to terms with negative events, to integrate new information into our working models, and to look back on our own parents in an understanding, forgiving way—is more influential in how we rear our children than the actual history of care we received.

Attachment in Context

Carolyn and Vanessa returned to work when their babies were 2 to 3 months old. Monica did the same a few weeks after Grace’s adoption. When parents divide their time between work and parenting and place their infants and toddlers in child care, is quality of attachment and child adjustment affected? See the Social Issues: Health box on page 266 for research that addresses this issue.

After reading the box, consider each factor that influences the development of attachment—infant and parent characteristics, parents’ relationship with each other, outside-the-family stressors, the availability of social supports, parents’ views of their attachment history, and child-care arrangements. Although attachment builds within the warmth and intimacy of caregiver–infant interaction, it can be fully understood only from an ecological systems perspective. Return to pages 25–27 in Chapter 1, to review Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory. Notice how research confirms the importance of each level of the environment for attachment security.

7.3.6 Multiple Attachments

As we have indicated, babies develop attachments to a variety of familiar people—not just mothers, but also fathers, grandparents, siblings, and professional caregivers. Although Bowlby (1969) believed that infants are predisposed to direct their attachment behaviors to a single special person (usually the mother), especially when they are distressed, his theory allows for attachments to other familiar adults.

Fathers

An anxious, unhappy 1-year-old who is permitted to choose between the mother and the father as a source of comfort and security will usually choose the mother. But this preference typically declines over the second year. And when babies are not distressed, they approach, vocalize to, and smile equally often at both parents, who in turn are equally responsive to their infant’s social overtures (Bornstein, 2015; Parke, 2002).

Fathers’ sensitivity toward infants predicts attachment security, but less strongly than mothers’. Security is less common in infant ties with fathers than with mothers, perhaps because fathers typically spend less time with their infants (Brown, Mangelsdorf, & Neff, 2012; Fuertes et al., 2016; Lucassen et al., 2011). At the same time, interventions aimed at increasing parental sensitivity and attachment security, though successful with both mothers and fathers, appear more effective with fathers (Bakermans-Kranenburg, Van IJzendoorn, & Juffer, 2003). As infancy progresses, mothers and fathers in many cultures, including Australia, Canada, Germany, India, Israel, Italy, Japan, and the United States, tend to interact differently with their babies: Mothers devote more time to physical care and expressing affection, and fathers to playful interaction (Freeman & Newland, 2010; Pleck, 2012).

Also, mothers and fathers tend to play differently. Mothers more often provide toys, talk to infants, and gently play conventional games like pat-a-cake and peekaboo. In contrast, fathers—especially with their infant sons—tend to engage in highly stimulating physical play with bursts of excitement and surprise (Feldman, 2003). As long as fathers are also sensitive, this stimulating, startling play style helps babies regulate emotion in intensely arousing situations and may prepare them to venture confidently into active, unpredictable contexts, including novel physical environments and play with peers (Cabrera et al., 2007; Hazen et al., 2010). Fathers’ sensitive, challenging play with preschoolers is associated with favorable emotional and social adjustment from early childhood to early adulthood (Bureau et al., 2017; Grossmann et al, 2008; StGeorge, Wroe, & Cashin, 2018). In contrast, paternal insensitivity during play is linked to preschoolers’ attachment insecurity and externalizing problems, even after other factors related to these outcomes (such as SES and parental stress) have been controlled.

Look and Listen

Observe parents at play with infants at home or a family gathering, and describe both similarities and differences in mothers’ and fathers’ behaviors. Are your observations consistent with research findings?

Social Issues: HealthDoes Child Care in Infancy Threaten Attachment Security and Later Adjustment?

Are infants who experience daily separations from their employed parents and early placement in child care at risk for attachment insecurity and developmental problems? Evidence from the U.S. National Institute of Child Health and Development (NICHD) Study of Early Child Care—the largest longitudinal investigation of the effects of child care to date, which included more than 1,300 infants and their families—confirmed that nonparental care by itself does not affect attachment quality (NICHD Early Child Care Research Network, 2001). Rather, the relationship between child care and emotional well-being depends on both family and child-care experiences.

Family Circumstances

We have seen that family conditions affect children’s attachment security and later adjustment. The NICHD Study showed that parenting quality, based on a combination of maternal sensitivity and HOME scores (see page 222 in Chapter 6), exerts a more powerful impact on children’s adjustment than does exposure to child care (NICHD Early Childhood Research Network, 1998; Watamura et al., 2011).

For employed parents, balancing work and caregiving can be stressful. Mothers who are fatigued and anxious because they feel overloaded by work and family pressures may respond less sensitively to their babies, thereby risking the infant’s security. As paternal involvement in caregiving has risen (see page 267), many more U.S. fathers in dual-earner families also report role overload (Pew Research Center, 2018a).

Quality and Extent of Child Care

Nevertheless, poor-quality child care may contribute to a higher rate of insecure attachment. In the NICHD Study, when babies were exposed to combined home and child-care risk factors—insensitive caregiving at home along with insensitive caregiving in child care, long hours in child care, or more than one child-care arrangement—the rate of attachment insecurity increased. Overall, mother–child interaction was more favorable when children attended higher-quality child care and also spent fewer hours in child care (NICHD Early Child Care Research Network, 1997, 1999).

Furthermore, when these children reached age 3, a history of higher-quality child care predicted better social skills (NICHD Early Child Care Research Network, 2002b). However, at ages 4½ to 5, children averaging more than 30 child-care hours per week displayed more externalizing problems, especially defiance, disobedience, and aggression (NICHD Early Child Care Research Network, 2003a, 2006).

This does not necessarily mean that child care causes behavior problems. Rather, heavy exposure to substandard care, which is widespread in the United States, may promote these difficulties, especially when combined with family risk factors. A closer look at the NICHD participants during the preschool years revealed that those in both poor-quality home and child-care environments fared worst in social skills and problem behaviors, whereas those in both high-quality home and child-care environments fared best. In between were preschoolers in high-quality child care but poor-quality homes (Watamura et al., 2011). These children benefited from the protective influence of high-quality child care.

Evidence from other industrialized nations confirms that full-time child care need not harm children’s development. For example, amount of time spent in child care in Norway, which offers high-quality, government-subsidized center-based care, is unrelated to children’s behavior problems (Zachrisson et al., 2013). And when family income drops, Norwegian children who don’t attend child care show more behavior problems than children who do attend (Zachrisson & Dearing, 2015).

Still, some children may be particularly stressed by long child-care hours. Many infants, toddlers, and preschoolers attending child-care centers for full days show a mild increase in saliva concentrations of the stress hormone cortisol across the day—a pattern that does not occur on days they spend at home. Children rated as highly fearful by their caregivers experience an especially sharp increase in cortisol levels (Gunnar et al., 2011; O’Brien, Franco, & Dunn, 2014). Inhibited children may find the constant company of large numbers of peers particularly stressful. Nevertheless, a secure attachment to a professional caregiver is protective (Badanes, Dmitrieva, & Watamura, 2012). It is associated with falling cortisol levels across the child-care day.

A caregiver supports exploration and social interaction in toddlers, one with cerebral palsy. High-quality child care, with generous caregiver–child ratios, small group sizes, and knowledgeable caregivers, can be part of a system that promotes all aspects of development, including attachment security.

Conclusions

Taken together, research suggests that some infants may be at risk for attachment insecurity and adjustment problems due to inadequate child care, long hours in such care, and parental role overload. But it is inappropriate to use these findings to justify a reduction in child-care services. When family incomes are limited or mothers who want to work are forced to stay at home, children’s emotional security is not promoted.

Instead, it makes sense to increase the availability of high-quality child care and to relieve role overload by providing parents with paid employment leave (see pages 132–133 in Chapter 4) and opportunities for part-time work. Longer employment leaves in the first year are linked to more sensitive maternal interaction with infants and, in turn, to increased attachment security in the second year (Plotka & Busch-Rossnagel, 2018). Similarly, part-time (as opposed to full-time) employment is associated with maternal sensitivity and a higher-quality home environment, which predicts more favorable development in early childhood (Brooks-Gunn, Han, & Waldfogel, 2010).

Finally, the professional caregiver’s relationship with the baby is vital. When caregiver–child ratios are generous, group sizes are small, and caregivers are educated about child development, caregivers’ interactions are more positive, their attachments to babies are more secure, and children develop more favorably—cognitively, emotionally, and socially (Biringen et al., 2012; Howes, 2016). Child care with these characteristics can become part of an ecological system that relieves parental and child stress, thereby promoting healthy attachment and development.

Play is a vital context in which fathers build secure attachments. It may be especially influential in cultures where long work hours prevent most fathers from sharing in infant caregiving, such as Japan (Ishii-Kuntz, 2013). In many Western nations, however, a strict division of parental roles—mother as caregiver, father as playmate—has changed over the past several decades in response to women’s workforce participation and to cultural valuing of gender equality.

National surveys of thousands of U.S. married couples with children reveal that although their involvement continues to fall far short of mothers’, today’s fathers spend more than triple the amount of time caring for children as fathers did in 1965 (see Figure 7.5) (Pew Research Center, 2018a, 2018b). Paternal availability to children is fairly similar across U.S. SES and ethnic groups, with one exception: Hispanic fathers spend more time engaged with their infants and young children, probably because of the particularly high value that Hispanic cultures place on family involvement (Cabrera, Aldoney, & Tamis-LeMonda, 2014; Hofferth, 2003).

A warm marital bond and supportive coparenting (see page 66 in Chapter 2) promote both parents’ sensitivity and involvement and children’s attachment security, but they are especially important for fathers. See the Cultural Influences box on page 268 for cross-cultural evidence documenting this conclusion—and also highlighting the powerful role of paternal involvement in children’s development.

Figure 7.5 Average hours per week U.S. mothers and fathers reported caring for children in 1965 and 2018. In national surveys of thousands of married couples, mothers’ time spent caring for children between birth and age 18 years increased moderately from 1965 to 2018. Though falling far short of mothers’, fathers’ time devoted to children more than tripled. (Based on Pew Research Center, 2018a, 2018b.)

Grandparent Primary Caregivers

Nearly 1.8 million U.S. grandparents live with grandchildren but apart from the children’s parents in skipped-generation families (U.S. Census Bureau, 2016). The number of grandparents with primary responsibility for rearing grandchildren has increased over the past two decades, with an especially sharp rise during the economic recession of 2007 to 2009. The arrangement occurs in all ethnic groups, but more often in African-American, Hispanic, and Native-American families than in European-American families. Although grandparent caregivers are more likely to be women than men, many grandfathers participate (Ellis & Simmons, 2014; Fuller-Thomson & Minkler, 2005, 2007). As we saw in Chapter 2, in U.S. ethnic minority groups that highly value close, supportive extended family ties, grandparents often share in child rearing (see page 74). But grandparents who fully assume the child-rearing role generally do so when parents’ troubled lives—severe financial hardship, substance abuse, child abuse and neglect, family violence, or physical or mental illness—threaten children’s safety and security (Smith, 2016). Often these families take in two or more children.

As a result, grandparents in skipped-generation families engage in child rearing under highly stressful life circumstances. Unfavorable child-rearing experiences have left their mark on the children, who show high rates of learning, emotional, and behavior problems. Absent parents’ adjustment difficulties strain family relationships. Grandchildren also introduce financial burdens into households that often are already low-income (Hayslip, Blumenthal, & Garner, 2014; Henderson & Bailey, 2015). All these factors heighten grandparents’ emotional distress.

Grandparent caregivers, at a time when they anticipated having more time for spouses, friends, and leisure, instead have less. Many report feeling emotionally drained, depressed, and worried about what will happen to the children if their own health fails (Henderson & Bailey, 2015). Nevertheless, because they provide physical and emotional care for an extended time and are invested in the child’s well-being, grandparent caregivers forge significant attachment relationships with their grandchildren. Warm grandparent–grandchild bonds help protect children from worsening adjustment problems, even under conditions of great hardship (Hicks & Goedereis, 2009). Still, grandparent caregivers have a tremendous need for social and financial support and intervention services for their at-risk grandchildren.

Despite stressful family conditions, grandparents who provide long-term physical and emotional care form deep attachments with their grandchildren.

Siblings

Despite declines in family size, nearly 80 percent of U.S. children grow up with at least one sibling (U.S. Census Bureau, 2017a). The arrival of a new baby is a challenging experience for most preschoolers, who—realizing that they must now share their parents’ attention and affection—often display a temporary increase in aggressive behavior and become demanding, clingy, deliberately naughty, and less affectionate with their parents for a time. Attachment security may also decline, especially for children over age 2 (old enough to feel threatened and displaced) and for those with mothers under stress (Teti et al., 1996; Volling, 2012; Volling et al., 2017).

Cultural InfluencesThe Role of Fathers’ Involvement in Children’s Development

In studies of many societies and ethnic groups around the world, researchers coded fathers’ expressions of love and nurturance—evident in such behaviors as cuddling, hugging, comforting, playing, verbally expressing love, and praising the child’s behavior. Fathers’ sustained affectionate involvement predicted later cognitive, emotional, and social competence as strongly as did mothers’ warmth—and occasionally more strongly (Daniel, Madigan, & Jenkins, 2016; Veneziano, 2003). In Western cultures, paternal warmth and secure attachment are associated with higher academic achievement, better social skills, and a reduction in child and adolescent behavior problems (Bornstein, 2015; Lamb & Lewis, 2013; Michiels et al., 2010).

What factors promote fathers’ involvement? Cross-cultural research reveals a consistent association between the amount of time fathers spend near infants and toddlers and their expressions of caring and affection (Rohner & Veneziano, 2001). Consider the Aka of the Central African Republic, where fathers spend more time in physical proximity to their babies than in any other known society. Aka fathers are within arm’s reach of infants more than half the day, and they pick up, cuddle, and play with their babies at least five times as often as fathers in other hunting-and-gathering societies. Why are Aka fathers so involved? The bond between Aka husband and wife is unusually cooperative and intimate. Throughout the day, couples share hunting, food preparation, and social and leisure activities (Hewlett, 1992). The more time Aka parents are together, the greater the father’s loving interaction with his baby.

In Western cultures as well, happily married fathers whose partners coparent cooperatively with them spend more time with and interact more effectively with infants. In contrast, marital dissatisfaction is associated with insensitive paternal care (Brown et al., 2010; Sevigny & Loutzenhiser, 2010). Clearly, fathers’ relationships with their partners and their babies are closely linked. Evidence for the power of fathers’ involvement, reported in virtually every culture and ethnic group studied, is reason to encourage and support their nurturing care of young children.

In both Western and non-Western nations, fathers’ affectionate, sustained involvement predicts long-term favorable cognitive, emotional, and social development.

Yet resentment is only one feature of the rich emotional relationship that starts to build between siblings after a baby’s birth. Older children also show affection and concern—kissing and patting the baby and calling out, “Mom, he needs you,” when the infant cries. By the end of the first year, babies typically spend much time with older siblings and are comforted by the presence of a preschool-age brother or sister during short parental absences. Throughout childhood, children continue to treat older siblings as attachment figures, turning to them for comfort in stressful situations when parents are unavailable (Seibert & Kerns, 2009). And in the second year, as toddlers imitate and join in play with their brothers and sisters, siblings start to become gratifying sources of companionship (Barr & Hayne, 2003).

Nevertheless, individual differences in sibling relationships emerge early. Temperament plays an important role. High emotional reactivity on the part of the older child increases the likelihood of angry, aggressive reactions after the baby’s arrival and rising sibling conflict (Dunn, 1994; Kolak & Volling, 2013). And maternal warmth toward both children is related to positive sibling interaction and to preschoolers’ support of a distressed younger sibling (Volling, 2001; Volling & Belsky, 1992). In contrast, maternal harshness and lack of involvement are linked to antagonistic sibling relationships (Howe, Aquan-Assee, & Bukowski, 2001). However, older siblings who remain securely attached to their fathers after the baby’s arrival are less likely to experience worsening conflict with their mothers and are more likely to forge positive sibling ties later in the first year (Volling et al., 2017). A close father–child bond seems to support children in adjusting to siblinghood.

The arrival of a new baby is a difficult experience for most preschoolers. Maternal warmth toward both children assures the older sibling of continuing parental love, models affectionate caring, and is related to positive sibling interaction.

Applying What We Know

Encouraging Affectionate Ties Between Infants and Their Preschool Siblings

Suggestion

Description

Spend extra time with the older child.

Parents can minimize the older child’s feelings of being deprived of affection and attention by setting aside time to spend with the child. Fathers can be especially helpful, planning special outings with the preschooler and taking over care of the baby so the mother can be with the older child.

Handle sibling misbehavior with patience.

When parents respond patiently to the older sibling’s misbehavior and demands for attention, these reactions are usually temporary. Parents can give the preschooler opportunities to feel proud of being more grown-up than the baby—for example, by encouraging the older child to assist with feeding, bathing, dressing, and offering toys, and showing appreciation for these efforts.

Discuss the baby’s wants and needs.

By helping the older sibling understand the baby’s point of view, parents can promote friendly, considerate behavior. They can say, for example, “He’s so little that he just can’t wait to be fed” or “He’s trying to reach his rattle, and he can’t.”

Express positive emotion toward your partner and engage in joint problem solving.

When parents mutually support each other’s parenting behavior, their good communication helps the older sibling cope adaptively with jealousy and conflict.

Finally, a good marriage and effective coparenting are correlated with the capacity of older preschool siblings—especially those high in emotional reactivity—to cope adaptively with jealousy and conflict (Kolak & Volling, 2013; Volling et al., 2017). Perhaps good communication between parents serves as a model of effective problem solving. It may also foster a generally happy family environment, giving children less reason to feel jealous.

Refer to Applying What We Know above for ways to promote positive relationships between infants and their preschool siblings. Siblings offer a rich social context in which children learn and practice a wide range of skills, including affectionate caring, conflict resolution, and control of hostile and envious feelings.

7.3.7 From Attachment to Peer Sociability

In cultures where agemates have regular contact during the first year of life, peer sociability begins early. By age 6 months, Caitlin and Timmy occasionally looked, reached, smiled, and babbled when they saw each other. These isolated social acts increase until, by the end of the first year, infant peers occasionally exchange smiles, laughs, gestures, and imitations of one another’s behavior (Vandell & Mueller, 1995).

Between 1 and 2 years, as toddlers appreciate that others have intentions, desires, and emotions distinct from their own, they increasingly view one another as playmates (Brownell & Kopp, 2007). As a result, coordinated interaction occurs more often, largely in the form of offering each other objects, sharing positive emotions, and mutual imitation of play behaviors (Vandell et al., 2006; Williams, Mastergeorge, & Ontai, 2010). As they approach age 2, toddlers use words to talk about and influence a peer’s behavior, as when Caitlin said to Grace, “Let’s play chase,” and after the game got going, encouraged, “Hey, good running!” (Eckerman & Peterman, 2001).

As toddlers approach age 2, advances in peer sociability are evident in increasing use of language to talk about and influence one another’s behavior.

These reciprocal exchanges promote peer engagement and probably facilitate joint understandings, including toddlers increasing sensitivity to playmates’ needs evident in helping and sharing. In one investigation, 18-month-olds spontaneously helped an agemate continue playing a game by providing the peer with the necessary objects, which were accessible only to the helping child (Hepach, Kante, & Tomasello, 2017). Toddlers readily helped even when the game was not engaging to them (its attractive features were visible only to the game-playing peer) and when the peer did not ask for assistance! In another study, when pairs of 18- and 24-month-olds were exposed to attractive play materials (colorful marbles for playing a game) that neither owned ahead of time, they seldom tried to monopolize the materials, taking all of them for themselves. Rather, they divided them so each child got some and often divided them equally (see Figure 7.6) (Ulber, Hamann, & Tomasello, 2015). An opportunity to collaborate with a peer partner in playing a game to secure the marbles further increased toddlers’ willingness to give each player an equal share.

Early peer sociability is promoted by the caregiver–child bond. Toddlers who have a warm parental relationship or who attend high-quality child care with small group sizes and generous caregiver–child ratios—features that promote warm, stimulating caregiving and gentle support for interacting with peers—engage in more positive and extended peer exchanges. These children, in turn, display more socially competent behavior as preschoolers (Deynoot-Schaub & Riksen-Walraven, 2006a, 2006b; Williams, Mastergeorge, & Ontai, 2010).

Figure 7.6 Toddlers’ willingness to divide colorful marbles for playing a game with a peer. Pairs of 18- and 24-month-olds were shown four colorful marbles in a container and told the marbles could be used to play “the jingle game.” An adult then demonstrated the game by throwing a marble into “the jingle box,” which caused a jingling sound. During four game trials, toddlers’ spontaneous divisions of the marbles were recorded. They seldom behaved selfishly, taking all the marbles for themselves. Rather, on most trials, they divided the marbles equally or divided them so that each pair member got some. (Based on Ulber, Hamann, & Tomasello, 2015.)

7.3.8 Attachment and Later Development

According to Erikson’s psychosocial theory and Bowlby’s ethological theory, the inner feelings of affection and security that result from an early, healthy attachment relationship should promote many favorable aspects of emotional and social development. The most extensive longitudinal study conducted to date, which followed children from infancy to age 34, yielded outcomes consistent with this prediction. On reaching the preschool years, children who had been securely attached in the first two years were rated by teachers as higher in self-esteem, social skills, and empathy than were their insecurely attached counterparts, who displayed more behavior problems. When followed up at age 11 in summer camp, children who had been secure as infants and toddlers had more positive peer ties, closer friendships, and better social skills, as judged by camp counselors. And as these well-functioning school-age children became adolescents and young adults, they continued to benefit from more supportive social networks, formed more stable and gratifying romantic relationships, and attained higher levels of education (Elicker, Englund, & Sroufe, 1992; Sroufe, 2002, 2016; Sroufe et al., 2005).

The more favorable social relationships of children and youths with a secure attachment history are consistent with Bowlby’s conviction that attachment security supports healthy psychological development through children’s internal working models of their social world. A wealth of research confirms that an early, secure child–parent bond predicts diverse, interrelated aspects of social competence: a more confident and complex self-concept, more advanced emotional understanding of self and other, more effective emotional self-regulation, greater skill in relating to peers and forming gratifying friendships, a stronger sense of moral responsibility, more positive relationships with teachers, and higher motivation to achieve in school (Drake, Belsky, & Fearon, 2014; Groh et al., 2014; Thompson, 2015, 2016; Viddal et al., 2015).

At the same time, the evidence indicates that early attachment security is more strongly associated with favorable outcomes when children experience parental sensitivity and security not just in infancy but also in later years (Lamb et al., 1985; Thompson, 2013). In contrast, children whose parents are persistently insensitive or who, over a long period, are exposed to a negative family climate tend to establish enduring patterns of avoidant, resistant, or disorganized behavior that heighten their risk for lasting developmental difficulties.

A close look at relationships of early parenting and attachment quality to children’s later adjustment supports the importance of continuity of good caregiving and attachment security for long-term, favorable adjustment. Disorganized/disoriented attachment, a pattern associated with serious parental psychological problems and extended, highly maladaptive caregiving, is strongly linked to internalizing and externalizing behavior problems in childhood (Moss et al., 2006; Steele & Steele, 2014). And when researchers tracked a large sample of children from ages 1 to 3 years, those with histories of secure attachment followed by sensitive parenting scored highest in cognitive, emotional, and social outcomes. Those with histories of insecure attachment followed by insensitive parenting scored lowest, while those with mixed histories of attachment and maternal sensitivity scored in between (Belsky & Fearon, 2002). Specifically, insecurely attached infants whose mothers became more positive and supportive in early childhood showed signs of developmental recovery.

Does this trend remind you of our discussion of resilience in Chapter 1? A child whose parental caregiving improves or who has other compensating affectionate ties can bounce back from adversity. In contrast, a child who experiences tender care in infancy but lacks sympathetic ties later on is at risk for problems.

Although secure attachment in infancy does not guarantee continued good parenting, it does launch the parent–child relationship on a positive path. But the effects of early attachment security are conditional—dependent on the quality of the baby’s future close relationships. Finally, as we will see again in later chapters, attachment is just one of the complex influences on children’s psychological development.

Ask Yourself

Connect ■ Review research on emotional self-regulation on pages 247–248. How do the caregiving experiences of securely attached infants promote emotional self-regulation?

Apply ■ What attachment pattern did Timmy display when Vanessa picked him up from child care, and what factors probably contributed to it?

Reflect ■ How would you characterize your internal working model? What factors, in addition to your early relationships with parents, might have influenced it?

7.4 SELF-DEVELOPMENT

7.4 Describe the development of self-awareness in infancy and toddlerhood, along with the emotional and social capacities it supports.

Infancy is a rich formative period for the development of physical and social understanding. In Chapter 6, you learned that infants develop an appreciation of the permanence of objects. And in this chapter, we have seen that over the first year, infants recognize and respond appropriately to others’ emotions and distinguish familiar from unfamiliar people. That both objects and people achieve an independent, stable existence for the infant implies that knowledge of the self as a separate, permanent entity is also emerging.

7.4.1 Self-Awareness

After Caitlin’s bath, Carolyn often held her in front of the bathroom mirror. As early as the first few months, Caitlin smiled and returned friendly behaviors to her image. At what age did she realize that the charming baby gazing and grinning back was herself?

Beginnings of Self-Awareness

At birth, infants sense that they are physically distinct from their surroundings. For example, newborns display a stronger rooting reflex in response to external stimulation (an adult’s finger touching their cheek) than to self-stimulation (their own hand contacting their cheek) (Rochat & Hespos, 1997). Newborns’ remarkable capacity for intermodal perception (see page 191 in Chapter 5) supports the beginnings of self-awareness (Rochat, 2015). As they feel their own touch, feel and watch their limbs move, and feel and hear themselves cry, babies experience intermodal matches that differentiate their own body from surrounding bodies and objects.

Over the first few months, infants distinguish their own visual image from other stimuli, but their self-awareness is limited—expressed only in perception and action. When shown two side-by-side video images of their kicking legs, one from their own perspective (camera behind the baby) and one from an observer’s perspective (camera in front of the baby), 3-month-olds looked longer at the observer’s view (see Figure 7.7a). In another video-image comparison, they looked longer at a reversal of their leg positions than at a normal view (see Figure 7.7b) (Rochat, 1998). This suggests that young babies have a sense of their own body as a distinct entity, since they have habituated to it, as indicated by their interest in novel views of the body.

This discrimination of a normal view of one’s own limbs from novel views in real-time video presentations reflects an implicit sense of self–world differentiation. Implicit self-awareness is also evident in young infants’ social expectations. Recall that as early as 2 to 3 months, infants start to engage in exchanges of smiles and vocalizations with their caregivers, and they protest or withdraw when give-and-take with a responsive adult is disrupted. Within these turn-taking interactions, infants display a sense of their own agency in relating to others, which suggests an emerging sense of self distinct from other people. By 4 months, they look and smile more at video images of others than video images of themselves, indicating that they treat another person (as opposed to the self) as a potential social partner (Rochat & Striano, 2002). These early signs of self-experience serve as the foundation for development of explicit self-awareness—conscious realization that the self is a unique object in a world of objects.

Figure 7.7 Three-month-olds’ emerging self-awareness, as indicated by reactions to video images. (a) When shown two side-by-side views of their kicking legs, babies looked longer at the novel, observer’s view than at their own view. (b) When shown a normal view of their leg positions alongside a reversed view, infants looked longer at the novel, reversed view. (Based on Rochat, 1998.)

Explicit Self-Awareness

During the second year, toddlers become consciously aware of the self’s physical features. In several studies, 9- to 28-month-olds were placed in front of a mirror. Then, under the pretext of wiping the baby’s face, each mother rubbed red dye on her child’s nose or forehead. Younger babies touched the mirror as if the red mark had nothing to do with them. But the majority of those older than 18 to 20 months touched or rubbed their noses or foreheads, indicating awareness of their unique facial appearance (Lewis, 2017; Lewis & Brooks-Gunn, 1979). And some toddlers act silly or coy in front of the mirror, playfully experimenting with the way the self looks (Bullock & Lutkenhaus, 1990).

Around age 2, self-recognition—identification of the self as a physically unique being—is well under way. Children point to themselves in photos and refer to themselves by name or with a personal pronoun (“I” or “me”) (Lewis & Ramsay, 2004). Soon they identify themselves in images with less detail and fidelity than mirrors. Around age 2½ when they see themselves in a live video with a sticker on top of their heads that had been surreptitiously placed there, most reach for the sticker, and around age 3 most recognize their own shadow (Cameron & Gallup, 1988; Suddendorf, Simcock, & Nielsen, 2007).

As self-recognition takes shape, older toddlers also construct an explicit body self-awareness. At the end of the second year, they realize that their own body can serve as an obstacle, are able to locate their own body parts, and know how their body parts are spatially organized (Brownell et al., 2010; Moore et al., 2007). Toddlers who are more advanced at recognizing themselves in mirrors and photos attain these milestones sooner, and they also have larger body-part vocabularies (Waugh & Brownell, 2015). This suggests that firmer self-awareness contributes to toddlers’ developing understanding of the features of their own body.

Nevertheless, toddlers make scale errors, attempting to do things that their body size makes impossible. For example, they will try to put on dolls’ clothes, sit in a doll-sized chair, or walk through a doorway too narrow for them to pass through (Brownell, Zerwas, & Ramani, 2007; DeLoache et al., 2013). Possibly, toddlers lack an accurate understanding of their own body dimensions. Alternatively, they may simply be exploring the consequences of squeezing into restricted spaces, which they are far less likely to try when the risk of harming themselves is high (for example, if the too-narrow doorway is next to a ledge where they could fall) (Franchak & Adolph, 2012). Other evidence suggests that toddlers, in focusing intently on how they can act on objects, often ignore size information (Grzyb et al., 2017). Scale errors decline gradually, between ages 2 and 4. Young preschoolers are still learning to process physical information when acting with their own bodies.

This 18-month-old makes silly faces in a mirror, a playful response to her reflection that indicates she is aware of herself as a separate being and recognizes her unique physical features.

Look and Listen

Ask several parents of 1½- to 3-year-olds if they have observed any instances of scale errors. Have the parent hand the toddler doll-sized clothing (hat, jacket, or shoe) or furniture (table, slide, or car) and watch for scale errors.

Influences on Self-Awareness

According to many theorists, self-awareness and self-recognition develop as infants and toddlers increasingly realize that their own actions cause objects and people to react in predictable ways (Nadel, Prepin, & Okanda, 2005; Rochat, 2013). Sensitive caregiving seems to play an important role. Compared to their insecurely attached agemates, securely attached toddlers display more complex self-related actions during play, such as making a doll labeled as the self (with the child’s own name) take a drink or kiss a teddy bear. They also show greater body self-awareness—for example, in labeling body parts (Pipp, Easterbrooks, & Brown, 1993; Pipp, Easterbrooks, & Harmon, 1992). And 18-month-olds who often establish joint attention with their caregivers are advanced in mirror self-recognition (Nichols, Fox, & Mundy, 2005). Joint attention offers toddlers many opportunities to engage in social referencing—to compare their own and others’ reactions to objects and events—which may enhance their awareness of their own physical uniqueness.

Cultural variations exist in early self-development. In one investigation, urban middle-SES German and East Indian toddlers attained mirror self-recognition earlier than toddlers of non-Western farming communities, such as the Nso people of rural Cameroon and rural families of East India (see Figure 7.8) (Kärtner et al., 2012). Urban German and, to a lesser extent, urban East Indian mothers placed considerable emphasis on autonomous child-rearing goals, including promoting personal talents and interests and expressing one’s own preferences, which strongly predicted earlier mirror self-recognition. In contrast, Nso and East Indian rural mothers valued relational child rearing goals—doing what parents say and sharing with others. In related research, Nso toddlers, though delayed in mirror self-recognition, displayed an earlier capacity to comply with adult requests than did middle-SES urban Greek toddlers, whose mothers encouraged child autonomy (Keller et al., 2004).

A toddler guides her younger sibling in community dancing in a village of the San people of the Kalahari Desert, South Africa. Like many non-Western farming societies, the San value relational child rearing that encourages doing what parents say and sharing with others.

Dave Hamman Photography

Self-Awareness and Early Emotional and Social Development

Self-awareness quickly becomes a central part of children’s emotional and social lives. Recall that self-conscious emotions depend on a strengthening sense of self. Self-awareness also leads to first efforts to understand another’s perspective. We have seen that toddlers increasingly appreciate others’ intentions, feelings, and desires—knowledge that provides the motivational basis for positive social behaviors that become more common over the second year.

Already, 15- to 18-month-olds display a sense of fairness: They expect adults to divide resources and rewards equally among participants (Sloane, Baillargeon, & Premack, 2012; Sommerville et al., 2013). And as we saw in our discussion of peer sociability, toddlers soon act in accord with this expectation. When 2-year-olds assert ownership over toys with the refrain, “Mine!,” they mostly limit this claim to their own possessions (Ross, Friedman, & Field, 2015). They also say, “Yours!,” often handing over toys that belong to their playmates.

Older toddlers who have experienced sensitive caregiving and emotionally available parents draw on their advancing capacity to distinguish what happens to themselves from what happens to others to express first signs of empathy—the ability to understand another’s emotional state and feel with that person, or respond emotionally in a similar way (Bischoff-Köhler, 2012; Moreno, Klute, & Robinson, 2008). They communicate concern when others are distressed and may offer what they themselves find comforting—a hug, a reassuring comment, or a favorite doll or blanket.

Figure 7.8 Mirror self-recognition at 19 months in four cultures. Urban middle-SES German and East Indian toddlers attained mirror self-recognition earlier than Nso toddlers of rural Cameroon and toddlers of rural East India— a finding that held even after toddlers were provided considerable experience in seeing themselves in mirrors. Urban German and East Indian mothers emphasized autonomous child-rearing goals, which strongly predicted earlier self-recognition. In contrast, rural Nso and East Indian mothers valued relational child-rearing goals. (Based on Kärtner et al., 2012.)

At the same time, toddlers demonstrate clearer awareness of how to upset others. One 18-month-old heard her mother talking to another adult about an older sibling: “Anny is really frightened of spiders. In fact, there’s a particular toy spider that we’ve got that she just hates” (Dunn, 1989, p. 107). The innocent-looking toddler ran to the bedroom, returned with the toy spider, and pushed it in front of Anny’s face!

7.4.2 Categorizing the Self

By the end of the second year, language becomes a powerful tool in self-development. Between 18 and 30 months, children develop a categorical self as they classify themselves and others on the basis of age (“baby,” “boy,” or “man”), sex (“boy” or “girl”), physical characteristics (“big,” “strong”), and even goodness versus badness (“I good girl.” “Tommy mean!”). They also start to refer to the self’s competencies (“Did it!” “I can’t”) (Stipek, Gralinski, & Kopp, 1990).

Toddlers use their limited understanding of these social categories to organize their own behavior. As early as their first birthday, they select and play in a more involved way with toys that are stereotyped for their own gender—dolls and tea sets for girls, trucks and cars for boys. Once toddlers can label their own gender, these play preferences rise sharply. Then parents encourage gender-typed behavior further by responding more positively when toddlers display it (Hines, 2015; Zosuls et al., 2009). As we will see in Chapter 10, gender typing increases dramatically during early childhood.

7.4.3 Self-Control

Self-awareness also contributes to effortful control, the extent to which children can inhibit impulses, manage negative emotion, and behave in socially acceptable ways. To behave in a self-controlled fashion, children must think of themselves as separate, autonomous beings who can direct their own actions. And they must have the representational and memory capacities to recall a caregiver’s earlier directive (“Caitlin, don’t touch that light socket!”) and apply it to their current behavior.

As these capacities emerge between 12 and 18 months, toddlers first become capable of compliance: They show clear awareness of caregivers’ wishes and expectations and can obey simple requests and commands. And, as every parent knows, they can also decide to do just the opposite! Although defiance in preschoolers is associated with negative parent–child relationships and poor adjustment, toddlers who sometimes strongly resist parental demands tend to have sensitive, supportive parents with whom they interact positively. These parents recognize the young child’s need for self-assertion and autonomy (Dix et al., 2007).

Indeed, active resistance in toddlerhood does not predict later, persisting defiance. Rather, for most toddlers, assertiveness and opposition occur alongside compliance with an eager, willing spirit, which suggests that the child is beginning to adopt the adult’s directives as her own (Kochanska, Murray, & Harlan, 2000). Compliance quickly leads to toddlers’ first consciencelike verbalizations—for example, correcting the self by saying “No, can’t” before reaching for a treat or jumping on the sofa.

This father encourages compliance and the beginnings of self-control. The toddler joins in dusting snow off the family car with an eager, willing spirit, which suggests he is adopting the adult’s directive as his own.

Researchers often study the early emergence of self-control by giving children tasks that, like the situations just mentioned, require delay of gratification—waiting for an appropriate time and place to engage in a tempting act. Between ages 1½ and 4, children show an increasing capacity to wait before eating a treat, opening a present, or playing with a toy (Cole, LeDonne, & Tan, 2013; Vaughn, Kopp, & Krakow, 1984). Children who are advanced in development of attention, language, and suppressing negative emotion tend to be better at delaying gratification—findings that help explain why girls are typically more self-controlled than boys (Else-Quest, 2012). Some toddlers already use verbal and other attention-diverting techniques—talking to themselves, singing, or looking away—to keep from engaging in prohibited acts.

Applying What We Know

Helping Toddlers Develop Compliance and Self-Control

Suggestion

Rationale

Respond to the toddler with sensitivity and encouragement.

Toddlers whose parents are sensitive and supportive sometimes actively resist, but they are also more compliant and self-controlled.

Provide advance notice when the toddler must stop an enjoyable activity.

Toddlers find it more difficult to stop a pleasant activity that is already under way than to wait before engaging in a desired action.

Offer many prompts and reminders.

Toddlers’ ability to remember and comply with rules is limited; they need continuous adult oversight and patient assistance.

Respond to self-controlled behavior with verbal and physical approval.

Praise and hugs reinforce appropriate behavior, increasing the likelihood that it will occur again.

Encourage selective and sustained attention (see page 213 in Chapter 6).

Development of attention is related to self-control. Children who can shift attention from a captivating stimulus and focus on a less attractive alternative are better at controlling their impulses.

Support language development (see pages 236–237 in Chapter 6).

In the second year, children begin to use language to remind themselves of adult expectations and to delay gratification.

Gradually increase rules in a manner consistent with the toddler’s developing capacities.

As cognition and language improve, toddlers can follow more rules related to safety, respect for people and property, family routines, manners, and simple chores.

Like effortful control in general, young children’s capacity to delay gratification is influenced by both temperament and quality of caregiving. Inhibited children find it easier to wait than angry, irritable children do. But toddlers and preschoolers who experience parental warmth and gentle encouragement are more likely to be cooperative and to resist temptation (Feng & Hooper, 2017; Kochanska & Aksan, 2006). Recall that such parenting—which encourages and models patient, nonimpulsive behavior—is particularly important for emotionally reactive children. And in our consideration of ethnic differences in temperament, we saw that East Asian children, whose mothers emphasize gentle soothing and proximal care, are advanced in effortful control and ability to delay gratification (see page 253). Nso children of rural Cameroon, as well, are ahead of their Western agemates in delay of gratification (Lamm et al., 2017). From an early age, Nso parents expect children to control their own emotions and behavior.

As self-control improves, parents gradually expand the rules they expect toddlers to follow, from safety and respect for property and people to family routines, manners, and simple chores (Gralinski & Kopp, 1993). Still, toddlers’ control over their own actions depends on constant parental oversight and reminders. Several prompts (“Remember, we’re going to go in just a minute”) and gentle insistence were usually necessary to get Caitlin to stop playing so that she and her parents could go on an errand. Applying What We Know above summarizes ways to help toddlers develop compliance and self-control.

As the second year of life drew to a close, Caitlin, Timmy, and Grace’s parents were delighted with their children’s progress in acquiring the rules of social life. As we will see in Chapter 10, advances in cognition and language, along with parental warmth and reasonable demands for maturity, lead preschoolers to make tremendous strides in this area.

Ask Yourself

Connect ■ What type of early parenting fosters the development of emotional self-regulation, secure attachment, and self-control? Why, in each instance, is it effective?

Apply ■ Len, a caregiver of 1- and 2-year-olds, wonders whether toddlers recognize themselves. List signs of self-recognition in the second year that Len can observe. What behaviors reveal that toddlers are still forming objective representations of their own physical features?

Reflect ■ In view of research findings on emotional and social development in the second year, do you think the expression “the terrible twos”—commonly used to characterize typical toddler behavior—is an apt description? Explain.

Summary

7.1 Emotional Development (p. 241)

7.1a Describe the development of basic emotions over the first year, noting the adaptive function of each.

During the first half-year, basic emotions gradually become clear, well-organized signals. The social smile appears between 6 and 10 weeks, though its frequency thereafter varies by culture. Laughter emerges around 3 to 4 months. Happiness strengthens the parent–child bond and fosters physical, cognitive, and social competencies.

Anger and fear increase in the second half of the first year. Stranger anxiety varies with infant-rearing practices. Newly mobile babies use the familiar caregiver as a secure base. Sadness often occurs when infants are deprived of a loving caregiver.

7.1b Summarize changes during the first two years in understanding of others’ emotions, expression of self-conscious emotions, and emotional self-regulation.

Social referencing appears at 8 to 10 months as infants’ ability to detect the meaning of emotional expressions improves. By the middle of the second year, toddlers realize that others’ emotional reactions may differ from their own.

During toddlerhood, self-awareness and adult instruction provide the foundation for self-conscious emotions: guilt, shame, embarrassment, envy, and pride.

Emotional self-regulation emerges as the prefrontal cortex functions more effectively, as caregivers sensitively assist infants in adjusting their emotional reactions, and as infants’ ability to shift attention improves. In the second year, growth in representation and language leads to more effective ways of regulating emotion.

7.2 Temperament and Development (p. 249)

7.2a Explain the meaning of temperament and how it is measured.

Children differ greatly in temperament. The pioneering New York Longitudinal Study identified three patterns: the easy child, the difficult child, and the slow-to-warm-up child. Rothbart’s influential model of temperament includes dimensions representing emotion, attention, and action along with effortful control.

Temperament is assessed through parental reports, behavior ratings by others familiar with the child, and laboratory observations. Most neurobiological research has focused on distinguishing inhibited, or shy, children from uninhibited, or sociable, children.

7.2b Discuss the roles of heredity and environment in the stability of temperament, including the goodness-of-fit model.

Temperament has low to moderate stability: It develops with age and can be modified by experience. Long-term prediction from early temperament is best achieved after age 3, when effortful control improves substantially.

Temperament has a genetic foundation, but child rearing and cultural beliefs and practices have much to do with maintaining or changing it.

Children with self-regulation difficulties function worse than other children when exposed to ineffective parenting but benefit more from good parenting. Parents’ tendency to exaggerate siblings’ differences also affects development of temperament.

According to the goodness-of-fit model, parenting practices that fit well with the child’s temperament help children achieve adaptive functioning.

7.3 Development of Attachment (p. 256)

7.3a Describe the features of ethological theory of attachment and its view of the development of attachment during the first two years.

Ethological theory of attachment recognizes the infant’s emotional tie to the caregiver as an evolved response that promotes survival. In early infancy, built-in signals help bring infants into close contact with other humans.

Around 6 to 8 months, separation anxiety and use of the caregiver as a secure base indicate a true attachment bond. As representation and language develop, separation anxiety declines. From early caregiving experiences, children construct an internal working model that guides future close relationships.

7.3b Describe techniques for measuring attachment security, the stability of attachment patterns, and cultural variations in attachment behavior.

Using the Strange Situation, a laboratory technique for assessing the quality of attachment between 1 and 2 years of age, researchers have identified four attachment patterns: secure, insecure-avoidant, insecure-resistant, and disorganized/disoriented attachment. The Attachment Q-Sort, based on home observations of children between ages 1 and 5, yields a score ranging from low to high security.

Securely attached babies in middle-SES families with favorable life conditions more often maintain their attachment pattern than insecure babies. However, the disorganized/disoriented pattern is highly stable.

Wide cultural variations in infants’ ways of expressing attachment reflect cultural differences in child-rearing beliefs and goals.

7.3c Discuss factors that influence early attachment security, infants’ and toddlers’ formation of multiple attachments, and how attachment paves the way for peer sociability.

Attachment security is influenced by early availability of a consistent caregiver, quality of caregiving, the fit between the baby’s temperament and parenting practices, and family circumstances.

Late adoption from institutionalized settings is associated with high rates of attachment insecurity and emotional and social difficulties.

In Western cultures that value independence, sensitive caregiving involves responding contingently to infant signals and “reading” the baby’s mental states. In non-Western village communities and Asian cultures that value interdependence, proximal care is deemed sensitive because it promotes connection to the social group.

Babies genetically predisposed to emotional reactivity are at increased risk for insecure attachment, but only when exposed to negative parenting. With exposure to sensitive caregiving, these infants are more likely to be securely attached.

Parents’ internal working models are modestly related to their sensitive caregiving and own infants’ attachment security. However, parents’ childhood experiences do not transfer directly to quality of attachment with their children.

Infants develop strong affectionate ties to fathers, who tend to engage in more exciting physical play than do mothers. In Western cultures, paternal warmth and secure attachment are associated with higher academic achievement, better social skills, and a reduction in child and adolescent behavior problems.

Despite highly stressful life circumstances, grandparents who serve as primary caregivers for grandchildren forge significant attachment ties that help protect children from worsening adjustment problems.

Early in the first year, infants start to form rich emotional relationships with siblings that combine rivalry and resentment with affection and sympathetic concern. Temperament, parenting, and marital quality affect individual differences in quality of sibling relationships.

Peer sociability begins in infancy with isolated social acts followed by reciprocal exchanges that promote peer engagement and increasing sensitivity to playmates’ needs. A warm caregiver–child bond supports peer sociability.

7.3d Discuss the relationship of attachment patterns in infancy and of caregiving quality from infancy through adolescence to children’s long-term adjustment.

Children’s long-term, favorable adjustment is promoted by continuity of good caregiving and attachment security. With improved caregiving, insecurely attached infants show signs of developmental recovery.

7.4 Self-Development (p. 271)

7.4 Describe the development of self-awareness in infancy and toddlerhood, along with the emotional and social capacities it supports.

At birth, infants sense that they are physically distinct from their surroundings, an implicit self-awareness that serves as the foundation for explicit self-awareness. Toward the end of the second year, self-recognition is evident in toddlers’ awareness of their own unique facial appearance.

Soon after, body self-awareness is apparent in toddlers’ ability to locate and name body parts. However, they make scale errors, attempting to do things their body size makes impossible.

Self-awareness leads to toddlers’ first efforts to appreciate others’ perspectives, including expectations of fairness in dividing resources and early signs of empathy. Between 18 and 30 months, as language develops, children develop a categorical self, classifying themselves and others on the basis of age, sex, physical characteristics, and competencies.

Self-awareness also contributes to gains in self-control. Compliance emerges between 12 and 18 months, followed by delay of gratification, which strengthens between 1½ and 4 years. Toddlers who experience parental warmth and gentle encouragement are likely to be advanced in self-control.

IMPORTANT TERMS AND CONCEPTS

attachment (p. 256)

Attachment Q-Sort (p. 259)

basic emotions (p. 242)

categorical self (p. 274)

compliance (p. 274)

delay of gratification (p. 274)

difficult child (p. 249)

disorganized/disoriented attachment (p. 259)

easy child (p. 249)

effortful control (p. 250)

emotional self-regulation (p. 247)

empathy (p. 273)

ethological theory of attachment (p. 257)

goodness-of-fit model (p. 255)

inhibited, or shy, child (p. 251)

insecure–avoidant attachment (p. 259)

insecure–resistant attachment (p. 259)

internal working model (p. 258)

scale errors (p. 272)

secure attachment (p. 259)

secure base (p. 245)

self-conscious emotions (p. 246)

sensitive caregiving (p. 262)

separation anxiety (p. 257)

slow-to-warm-up child (p. 249)

social referencing (p. 246)

social smile (p. 243)

stranger anxiety (p. 245)

Strange Situation (p. 258)

temperament (p. 249)

uninhibited, or sociable, child (p. 251)

MilestonesDevelopment in Infancy and Toddlerhood

Birth–6 months

electra k. vasileladou/getty images

Physical

Height and weight increase rapidly. (153–154)

Newborn reflexes decline. (136)

Distinguishes basic tastes and odors; shows preference for sweet-tasting foods. (141)

Responses can be classically and operantly conditioned. (172–174)

Habituates to unchanging stimuli; recovers to novel stimuli. (174–175)

Sleep–wake schedule increasingly organizes into a night–day pattern. (164)

Holds head up, rolls over, and grasps objects. (178)

Shows sensitivity to motion, then binocular, and finally pictorial depth cues. (186–187)

Recognizes and prefers human facial pattern; recognizes features of mother’s face. (188–189)

Perceives auditory and visual stimuli as organized patterns. (184, 188)

Moves from relying on motion and spatial arrangement to using featural information—shape, color, and pattern—to visually detect the identity of an object. (190–191)

Masters a wide range of intermodal (visual, auditory, and tactile) relationships. (191–192)

Cognitive

Engages in immediate and deferred imitation of adults’ facial expressions. (176, 203)

Repeats chance behaviors that lead to pleasurable and interesting results. (199–200)

Has some awareness of many physical properties (including object permanence) and basic numerical knowledge. (201–203, 208)

Attention becomes more efficient and focused. (212–213)

Recognition memory for visual events improves. (213–214)

Forms categories based on objects’ similar physical properties. (215)

Language

Coos and, by the end of this period, babbles. (231)

Begins to establish joint attention with caregiver, who labels objects and events. (232)

Emotional/Social

Social smile and laughter emerge. (243)

Matches feeling tone of caregiver in face-to- face communication; later, expects matched responses. (245)

Distinguishes positive from negative emotion in voices and facial expressions. (245)

Emotional expressions become well organized and meaningfully related to environmental events (243)

Regulates emotion by shifting attention and self-soothing. (247)

Smiles, laughs, and babbles more to caregiver than to a stranger. (257)

Awareness of self as physically distinct from surroundings increases. (271–272)

7–12 months

Physical

Approaches adultlike sleep–wake schedule. (164)

Sits alone, crawls, and walks. (178)

Reaching and grasping improve in flexibility and accuracy; shows refined pincer grasp. (182–183)

Discriminates among a wider range of facial expressions, including happiness, surprise, sadness, fearfulness, and anger. (189)

Increasingly uses featural information to detect the identity of an object. (191)

Intermodal perception continues to improve. (192)

Cognitive

Engages in intentional, or goal-directed, behavior. (200)

Finds an object hidden in an initial location. (200)

Recall memory improves, as indicated by gains in deferred imitation of adults’ actions with objects. (203–204)

Capacity for tool use in problem solving emerges. (204)

Categorizes objects on the basis of subtle sets of features, even when the perceptual contrast between categories is minimal. (215)

Language

Babbling expands to include many sounds of spoken languages and patterns of the child’s language community. (231–232)

Joint attention with caregiver becomes more accurate. (232)

Takes turns in games, such as pat-a-cake and peekaboo. (232)

Uses preverbal gestures (showing, pointing) to influence others’ behavior and convey information. (232)

Comprehends some word meanings. (233)

Around end of this period, understands displaced reference of words and says first words. (207, 233)

Emotional/Social

Smiling and laughter increase in frequency and expressiveness. (243–244)

Anger and fear increase in frequency and intensity. (244–245)

Stranger anxiety and separation anxiety appear. (245, 257)

Uses caregiver as a secure base for exploration. (245)

Shows “clear-cut” attachment to a familiar caregiver. (257)

Increasingly detects the meaning of others’ emotional expressions and engages in social referencing. (245–246)

Regulates emotion by approaching and retreating from stimulation. (247)

13–18 months

Physical

Height and weight gain are rapid, but not as great as in first year; toddlers slim down. (153–154)

Walking is better coordinated (180)

Manipulates small objects with improved coordination. (183)

Cognitive

Explores the properties of objects by acting on them in novel ways. (199)

Searches in several locations for a hidden object. (199, 202–203)

Engages in deferred imitation of adults’ actions with objects over longer delays and across a change in context—for example, from child care to home. (204)

Sustained attention increases. (213)

Recall memory improves further. (214)

Categorizes objects flexibly, switching basis for grouping. (215)

Realizes that pictures can symbolize real objects. (205)

Language

Steadily adds to vocabulary. (234)

By end of this period, produces 50 words. (231)

Emotional/Social

Joins in play with siblings and peers. (268, 269)

Realizes that others’ emotional reactions may differ from one’s own. (246)

Complies with simple directives. (274)

19–24 months

Physical

Walks up stairs with help, jumps, and walks on tiptoe. (178–180)

Manipulates small objects with good coordination. (183)

Cognitive

Solves simple problems suddenly, through mental representation. (201)

Finds a hidden object that has been moved while out of sight. (201)

Engages in make-believe play, using simple actions experienced in everyday life. (201)

Engages in deferred imitation of actions an adult tries to produce, even if not fully realized. (204)

Categorizes objects conceptually, on the basis of common function or behavior. (217)

Begins to use language as a flexible symbolic tool, to modify existing mental representations. (205)

Language

Produces 200 to 250 words. (231, 234)

Combines two words. (234)

Emotional/Social

Self-conscious emotions (shame, embarrassment, guilt, envy, and pride) emerge. (246)

Acquires a vocabulary for talking about feelings. (248)

Begins to use language to assist with emotional self-regulation. (248)

Begins to tolerate caregiver’s absences more easily; separation anxiety declines. (257–258)

Recognizes image of self and, by end of this period, uses own name or personal pronoun to refer to self. (272)

Less often makes scale errors. (272–273)

Shows signs of empathy. (273)

Categorizes self and others on the basis of age, sex, physical characteristics, goodness and badness, and competencies. (274)

Shows gender-stereotyped toy preferences. (274)

Starts to use words to influence a playmate’s behavior. (269–270)

Helps and shares with peers. (270)

Self-control, as indicated by delay of gratification, emerges. (274–275)

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

Descriptions of Images and Figures

Back to Figure

The graph shows the mean frequency of infant smiling during 3 minutes of mother infant interaction by weeks. The curve labeled Nso infants yields the following data.

• 6 weeks: 0.55

• 8 weeks: 0.9

• 10 weeks: 1.55

• 12 weeks: 0.9

The curve labeled German infants yields the following data.

• 6 weeks: 0.75

• 8 weeks: 3.2

• 10 weeks: 4.05

• 12 weeks: 3.95

All values are estimated.

Back to Figure

The data is as follows. High-risk genotype. Positive maternal behavior: 0.1. Negative maternal behavior: 2.6. Low-risk genotype. Positive maternal behavior: 1.2. Negative maternal behavior: 1.5. All values are estimated.

Back to Figure

The first 3 graphs show a step-like curve going up. Graph a is labeled habituation event and shows a small point right where the first step leads to the second step and a large point in the middle of the second step. Graph b is labeled test event, responsive care giver and shows a small point about halfway through the first step and a large point right where the first step leads to the second step. Graph c is labeled test event, unresponsive caregiver and shows a small point right where the first step leads to the second step and a large point at the beginning of the third step.

The last graph is a bar graph that shows the mean looking time in seconds by attachment type for responsive and unresponsive caregivers. The data is as follows.

• Securely attached. Unresponsive: 10. Responsive: 7.

• Insecurely attached. Unresponsive: 7. Responsive: 8.

All values are estimated.

Back to Figure

The graph shows the percentage of infants, by nation. The data is as follows.

• Germany. Avoidant: 35. Secure: 58. Resistant: 8.

• Japan. Avoidant: 5. Secure: 68. Resistant: 28.

• South Korea. Avoidant: 2. Secure: 78. Resistant: 21.

• United States. Avoidant: 21. Secure: 65. Resistant: 15.

All values are estimated.

Back to Figure

The data is as follows.

• Mothers’ child care. 1965: 10. 2018: 14.

• Fathers’ child care. 1965: 2.5. 2018: 8.

All values are estimated.

Back to Figure

The graph shows the percentage displaying mirror self-recognition by culture as follows.

• Urban German: 100

• Urban Indian: 100

• Rural Indian: 35

• Rural Nso: 58

All values are estimated.