Human 4

Weaknesses:
Possibility of confusing normal drawing development & clinical significance, meaning over analyzing
Reliability & inter-rater reliability, meaning that there might be disagreement (personal history comes into play)
Are projective tests valid?
Strengths:
Facilitates discussion
Easy to administer/enjoyed by child
Provides basis for hypothesis

No single drawing or feature of drawing should be taken in isolation
Interpretations not based on unvarying principles
Drawing analysis is a formal operational exercise

18 months-2.5 years: scribbles
2.5-5 years:
Combines: superimposed shapes such as squares, triangles, crosses, mandala
Tapole figures (3.5 years), only head not body

Baurind's parenting styles: parenting behaviors and attitudes that set the emotional climate of the parent-child interactions
Two dimensions of parenting style:
1) The degree of responsiveness: warmth, support, and acceptance
2) The degree of parental control and demandingness

Style: High in demandingness and low in responsiveness
Typical parent characteristics: nonresponsive to child's needs, exercise of parental power, oriented toward obedience and authority, compliance
Typical child characteristics: low in social and academic competence, boys affected more negatively than girls

(optimal, look in book)

Style: Low in demandingness and high in responsiveness
Typical parent characteristics: responsive to their children's needs, do not require that their children regulate themselves
Typical child characteristics: lacking in self-control, and low in school achievement.

Style: low demandingness, low responsiveness
Typical parent characteristics: no limits or monitoring of child's behavior, focused on own needs rather than child's
Typical child characteristics: antisocial behavior, poor self-regulation, substance abuse, and low academic and social competence

Why Children Turn Out the Way They Do… Parents Matter Less Than You Think and Peer Matter More.
Harris' question: Do parents have any important long-term effects on the development of their child's personality? I will examine the evidence and conclude the answer is no. In the formation of an adult, gene, and peer matter, but parents don't.. Parents do not have any important long-term effects on their child's personality."

The Nurture Assumption: "the notion that parents are the most important part of the child's environment and can determine, to a large extent, how the child turns out."

Harris: the nurture assumption is a "cherished cultural myth."

1. Adults siblings are equally similar whether they grew up together or apart.
2. Adoptive siblings are no more similar than two people picked at random.
3. Identical twins raised apart are just as similar as identical twins raised together.

A measurement of the degree to which children are liked or disliked to which children are liked or disliked by their peers as a group
Methods
On a piece of paper you like hanging out with, don't like to hang out with
Ratings

Attractiveness
Athletic ability
Social behavior
Personality
Cognition about self and others
Goals when interacting with peers (use them, bonding)
Also influenced by the status of the child's friends

Entry behavior: skilled at initiating interactions with peers
Tend to be cooperative, friendly, socialable, and sensitive to others
Not prone to intense negative emotions and regulate themselves well-rounded
Tend to be less aggressive than average children
Difference between children who are popular in terms of sociometric measures and those who perceived by peers as being popularity
Individuals with high status in the peer group are often labeled “popular” by peers, but tend o be above average in aggression
The relationship between perceived popularity and aggression is especially high in adolescence, particularly among high-status girls, who may use relational aggression: intent to cause harm to others' relationships or social status by spreading rumors or withholding friendship.

Children who people actively do not want around
A majority of rejected children fall into two categories
Aggressive rejected
Prone to hostile and threatening behavior, physical aggression, disruptive behavior, delinquency
about 40%-50% of rejected children tend to be aggressive whereas others develop a network of aggressive friends
Also engage in relational aggression
Bullies
Causing harm
Withdrawn rejected
Are socially withdrawn, wary, and often timid
Not all socially withdrawn children are rejected or socially excluded
Rather, it appears that withdrawn behavior combined with negative actions or emotions is correlated with rejection
Socially deficient

Social cognition and social rejection

Display relatively few behaviors that differ greatly from those of many other children
Simply not noticed

Tend to have characteristics of both popular and rejected children.
Aggressive
Disruptive
Prone to anger
Socialable
Humorous
Athletic
i.e. class clown

For preschoolers, proximity is the key factor in friendship selection
Similarities in age is also a major factor
A preference for same-sex friends emerges in preschool and continues through adolescence
Same race is also a factorBy age 7, children tend to like peer who are similar to themselves in the cognitive maturity of their play and in aggressive behavior

Fourth to eighth grade friends are more similar in prosocial behaviors, antisocial behavior, peer acceptance, and academic motivation.

Cliques: friendship groups that children voluntarily form
In middle childhood, cliques tend to include 3-9 children
The clique becomes the new family
Boys group slightly larger. Cliques well established by 11 years.

age
sex
residential proximity
race
clique members not necessarily close friends
Clique members tend to be similar in academic motivation, aggression, attractiveness, popularity, social skills
membership of cliques in late childhood tend to fluctuate over the course of a year. (often based on classroom assignment)

Socializing
Sense of Belonging outside of family
Affirm role behavior & sense of self

From ages 11-18, increase in ties to several cliques and increase in stability of cliques (10th grade cliques stable over year)
During early and middle adolescence, children highly value conformity and popularity, increased friction
With increasing age, adolescence are more autonomous

Although older adolescents seem to be less tied to cliques, they still often belong to crowds i.e. groups of adolescents who have similar stereotyped reputations
Crowd membership may be “assigned”. You don't have to hang around them to be assigned.
Informal association of 2-4 cliques, approximately 15-30 membership
Have similar stereotyped reputations

Not as cohesive as cliques
May not share values but are compatible and share common interests
Crowds distinguished by approximately 2 year difference

Provide opportunities for romantic/intimate relationships
Predominate activity: parties/social functions
Clique membership usually a prerequisite

Stage 1: Precrowd stage: uni-sexual cliques focused on role socialization
High status members: initiate activities and primarily instrumental in role definition
Conformity, intimation, and internalization of roles becomes apparent
Stage 2: Beginning of the crowd: uni-sexual cliques begin to interact
Intersection often led by high status members.
Stage 3: crowd in structural transition: upper status members begin to form romantic/intimate partnership while still retaining clique membership
Stage 4: fully developed crowd: cliques include both genders and crowd interaction becomes prevalent.
Crowd provides opportunities for seeking romantic/intimate relationships in “safe” environment
Stage 5: Beginning of crowd disintegration: couples begin to “pair up” and become basic unit of social interaction

“ethic of justice” focuses on fairness, equity, impartiality

1. Pre-conventional: moral decisions based on rewards and punishments (based on the self)
2. Conventional: moral decisions based on rules and doing what others expect us to do. What's good for the general community/society.
3. Post-conventional: moral decisions based on universal moral principles.

Heinz's wife dying of cancer
Drug that can save her
But he can't afford it so does he steal it?
K interested in how the children answer the question

The effects of different parenting styles and practices vary somewhat as a function of ethnic or racial group
Among AA adolescents at all economic levels, authoritarian control with positive outcomes
Authoritarian child-rearing practices associated with less negative consequences in Chinese and first-generation Chinese-American families than in Euro-American families

Too anxious about self-esteem
Worried about child's psyches
They let them give up

Children's physical appearance influences the way their respond to them
Unattractive infants may experience somewhat different parenting than attractive infants, and this pattern continues across development.
Tendency to play and look at attractive infants

Differences in children's behavior with their parents also affect parenting
Genetic factors related to temperament
Children can learn to be noncompliant thought interactions with their parents that reinforce their negative behavior

Bidirectionality of parent-child interactions is the idea that parents affects children's characteristics, and vice versa
Overtime, this effect reinforces and perpetuates each party's behavior

Do our first social relationships set the template for later relationships?

Seeking family influence/distinctiveness may influence personality more than parenting style. How do I fit in?

score higher on achievement, intelligence, leadership, impulse control, and maturity measures than children with siblings.

More similar in personality to other firstborns to other firstborns than own siblings

Compared to later born children: higher IQ, more ambitious, high achieving, leadership qualities and more obedient (firstborn doesn't want change), socially responsible, conforming (doesn't want change), defensive, anxious, neurotic (change), conservative nature (doesn't want change)
Identify more closely with parents, slower to recover from upsets. Don’t' like change in life.
Identify w/ power/authority: score higher on measures of assertiveness/dominance
More likely to express ambivalence about siblings

More likely to develop a revolutionary personality, more adventurous, risk-taking
Less likely to conform or reach consensus

Less liberal than yc; more willing to compromise, share power, achieve coalitions
More popular, agreeable, cooperative, easygoing