dev psycho Flashcards
(32 cards)
bioecological model, Urie bronfenbrenner (1979)
->lab based research
view child as developing within a complex system of relationship
system theory: take component parts and think of it as a whole
complex set of relations exist between the developing person and person’s developmental setting, focuses on ways n which processes on macro level effects on micro level
environmental features : Microsystem
activities, roles and relatonshiop that child participate in becomes more complex /active /interactive over time biderectional relationship (parent to child-child to parent)
relational dynamics:
- negative: hostile parenting, peer rejection, conflict, poor teaching practices
- positive: supportive parenting, positive peer relations, effective teachers
environmental features : mesosystem
connection among microsystem elements
- parent and teachers
- peer and teacher
- adaptive connection foster child well-being
environmental features : exosystem
indirect effect : parents work hours, strees, day care job loss neighborhoods educational system
environmental features : macrosystem
other values embedded in other values
- general culture
- subculture
- social class
- ideologies
each dynamic is varies around the world
don’t assume universality
environmental features : chronosystem
societies change over time w implications for child dev.
-mobile phone, access to internet
proximal and distal effect
every level impacts children dev. directly or indirectly
to understand direct effect : look at distal process
-> which effect child indirectly
caveats
neglect internal world of child
ex: focuses on influence of wide social context on the fam, but neglecting ways the fam influences outside world
or how children influence fam
-> role of reciprocal effects or bidirectionally
parenting tradition, Diana Baumrind
children experience differ in rules parents apply and the way they’re enforced -> determines diffs in dev and achievement
parenting style-> parenting behaviors and attitudes that set emotional climate for children -child intervnetion
model’s of parenting, Maccoby and martin
emotional responsiveness: ranges from warm: responsive to cold: rejecting and hostile
control and demandingness: range from rule and boundary setting to authoritarian power assertion to indifference and neglect
family and why we’re interested
- grp that involcves at least one adult who’s related to the child ( by birth, marriage,adoption, foster status) who’s responsible for providing basic necessities ( love, support, safety, stability, opportunities for learning) Siegler et al 2020
- fam in central to microsystem : provides direct support for child’s dev
interested bc: provides environment and heritbale influence which interact in complex ways to shape child
parenting behaviour, Diana baumrind
-authoritative parents: demanding but warm and responsive set clear standard allow to dev. in autonomy attentive to child concern measured and consistent in discipline
->child: competent, independent, self-assured, popular w peers low in antisocial behaviour, drug use as teen
-authoritharian:
cold and unresponsive to needs
controlling demanding
expect child to comply w demands without asking Q
->child: low in social and academic competence, unhappy, unfriendly and low in self confidence
-permissive parents
responsive to needs and wishes
lenient (merciful, tolerant)
do not require child to behave appropriately
-> child: impulsive, lacking self control , low in social achievement, drug use and misconduct
-uninvolved
disenagged undemanding low in responsiveness, no limits monitor behaviour
unsupportive
->child: disturbed attachment, problem w peers, antisocial and depression , social withdrawal, risky sexual behaviour
parenting in context
interplay between inner psychological stressors and external social circumstances
understanding of parenting need to take account of factors that interfere w good parenting
for example economic pressure
day care and child dev.
child care: stimulate, social skills and capacities
-> learn to be aggressive
experience effect depends on quality of non-maternal child care
quantity of time in day care
risk fctor of day care
non maternal care may disrupt formation of attachment bond w mother
peers: -highlight why transgression is wrong
- model imitating problem behaviour
quantity of time in day acre -> increased problems
- positive time in day care-> protective for children from high risk background
- positive quality of day care -> increased language/cognitive dev
- negative maternal sensitivity, more time in - quality = more behavioural problems
divorce
children whos parnts divorced etween 7-11 y haf more behavioural problems, lower academic attainment
if behaviour probelm, academic failure, fam distress before divorce, effect of divorce were non signifianct
should be concerned about the the parents manage the situation w children
single parent family
single parent homes have more social and psycho problems depend on income outcome of divorce maternal age and education type of marriage
effect of single parent on children depends on mental health, stress, financial circumstances and access to socai support
step fams
likely to have adjustemnt probelms but small effect size and large indv. diff
but other factors included
effect explained by quality of the parent-child relationship and child perception of the relationship
step fams= highly complex entities
peers vs friendship
peers: people of same age and status
friendship: intimate reciprocated positive relationship between two people
friendships
people who spend time together, feel affection for one another and interactions characterised by recirpoceties
2-3y cooperative play
3-4y best friendship, pretend play, symbolic trust
5-8y shared linking activities, conflict and resolution
late adolescence: increased role of shared values, admiration, loyalty. level of importance of intimacy change
functions of friendship
support and validation -when child feels lonely
-during difficult periods
used as a buffer in difficult times/ when child feels victimized
help dev. social skills positive relationships w other people
benefits:
typically have positive outcome
emotional support: security
buffer: against problem w teachers and peers
cost:
aggression/ disruptiveness
contagious and negative affect
alcohol and substance abuse
peer groups
- cliques: grp that children join themselves similarities among members
- crowds: grp of adolescents w similar stereotypes reputation-may be assigned by peers
- gangs: grp of yound adult identified as grp and engage in illegal activities
the goth study Bones et al 2015
young people idetfied as goth 1.6 to 3 times more ikey to have depression and self harm
possible confounder factor: - maternal depression, history of depression, peer problems
people identified as sporty were least likely to have depression/ self harm
->social contagion, stigma, ostracism
romantic relationship and peers
mix gender grp: dating, partners based similar characteristic and having approval of peers
later relationship: sense of self and belonging
can lead to negative effect : early dating and sexual activity-> problematic behaviour(drinking, drugs , emotional difficulty)
-> dev romantic relationship in adolescence based on parent-child relationship and working model of parental relationship
secure attachment at 12 m: social competence at school
friendship at 16m: positive romantic relationship in early adulthood, less negative affect in conflict resolution
