Module 12 - Moral Development Flashcards
(150 cards)
1
Q
Who was a foundational theorist of cognitive development, and also one of the first to pay attention to the moral development of children?
A
Piaget
2
Q
Who were the two people that were primarily interested in how children think about moral situations?
A
Piaget and Kohlberg
3
Q
Piaget was interested in children’s understanding of:
A
1) Rules
2) Moral Responsibility
3) Justice
Rules - For example, where do rules come from? Who makes rules?
Moral Responsibility - For example, who is to blame for bad things? Is there a difference between an accident and something that was done on purpose?
Justice- For example, how should someone be punished? Does the punishment fit the crime?
3
Q
In Piaget’s stage theory of moral development, what did he continue to focus on?
A
How children think about moral situations.
More interested in moral reasoning as opposed to moral behaviours.
He developed his theory by watching children play games like marbles, in which the children would make up their own rules and change them as they saw fit
4
Q
Piaget’s three stages of moral development
A
- Heteronomous Stage (Morality Constraint)
- Transitional Stage
- Autonomous Stage
5
Q
Heteronomous Stage (Morality Constraint) (Piaget stages of moral development)
A
1) blind obedience to rules and generally view rules as “things”.
2) pay more attention to the consequences of an action than the intention.
Ex: imagine a boy who accidentally breaks a stack of 5 cups and a girl who steals 1 cookie. Children in this stage would view breaking the cups as a worse offence than stealing the cookie, simply because more cups were broken (i.e., it doesn’t matter that it was an accident).
3) believe in the concept of imminent justice.
Ex: That is, if you break the rules, you will definitely get caught and be punished (in one way or another). For example, imagine that the little girl who stole the cookie accidentally slipped on some ice and fell into a cold puddle later that day. When asked why the girl slipped, children in this stage would say “because she stole the cookie”, not because the ice was slippery.
4) This stage lasts until approximately age 7 and corresponds with the pre-operational stage of cognitive development.
6
Q
Transitional Stage (Piaget stages of moral development)
A
In this stage, children begin to understand that rules can change depending on the situation and majority opinion. For example, they may learn that the rules for playing a game of tag might change depending on who is playing or whether they are at home or at school.
This stage lasts from approximately ages 7-10 years and corresponds with the concrete operational stage of cognitive development.
7
Q
Autonomous stage (Piaget stages of moral development)
A
children are able to consider intentions and view them as more important than consequences. For example, they would now view stealing 1 cookie as a worse offence than accidentally breaking 5 cups. In other words, right and wrong is no longer absolute.
Additionally, children now understand that punishments must fit the crime and become upset when they perceive injustices or think things are not fair.
Since children now have an understanding of abstract components of rules and justice, they can also understand why these are required for society to function. Cognitive development also enables children at this stage to see situations from another person’s point of view.
This stage begins around age 11 and corresponds with the formal operational stage of cognitive development.
8
Q
Weaknesses of Piaget’s Theory on Moral Development
A
-Quality of peer and parent interactions matter
– Piaget didn’t consider relationships
- Children’s understanding of intentions actually develops earlier
-Moral reasoning isn’t always as linear as proposed by Piaget
9
Q
How did Piaget study children’s moral reasoning?
A
Piaget presented vignettes to children and examined their responses. Typically, Piaget presented the children with two vignettes and asked which child was “naughtier” and why.
10
Q
Strengths of Piaget’s Theory on Moral Development
A
-Moral development does depend on cognitive maturity
-Considered interactions with others
-Increasingly considered understanding of intentions
-Used multiple methods of data collection (interviews, observations)
11
Q
What does Kohlberg’s theory of moral development consists of?
A
discontinuous, hierarchical stages. (Influenced by Piaget)
However, Kohlberg was more interested in the rationale behind moral decisions.
Kohlberg’s theory also focuses on moral development across the lifespan and is not restricted to childhood.
12
Q
Kohlberg’s most famous hypothetical moral dilemmas…
A
Heinz dilemma (dying wife/big pharma life saving drug too expensive)
13
Q
Kohlberg’s theory of moral development is more complex than Piaget’s. It consists of 3 levels, what are the levels?
A
Level 1: Preconventional Moral Reasoning
Level 2: Conventional Moral Reasoning
Level 3: Postconventional Moral Reasoning
14
Q
Level 1: Preconventional Moral Reasoning
A
At this level, children’s moral reasoning is self-centred. They are focused on getting rewards and avoiding punishments. This level consists of the following two stages:
Stage 1: Punishment and Obedience Orientation: all about avoiding punishment! Notice in the examples that it’s not about whether or not Heinz should steal the drug, but about the consequences.
“If you steal, you’ll be caught and sent to jail.”
“If you let your wife die, you will get in trouble.”
Stage 2: Instrumental and Exchange Orientation: All about “what’s in it for me?” OR the idea of a fair exchange. Notice in the examples that they focus on getting something positive for oneself out of the situation or a focus on “tit for tat” fairness.
“He should steal the drug so his wife can cook for him.”
“It’s not fair to steal because the doctor worked hard to make that drug and spent lots of money.”
15
Q
Level 2: Conventional Moral Reasoning
A
At this level, moral reasoning is focused on social relationships, as well as compliance with social duties and laws.
Stage 3: “Good girl, Nice Boy” Orientation: all about doing what is expected of you. Notice in the examples that the responses are all about what other people would think about you.
“If you let your wife die, your family will be disappointed in you.”
“If you get caught, the druggist will be mad at you and you’ll bring dishonour to your family.”
Stage 4: “Law and Order” Orientation: all about fulfilling duties, upholding laws, and contributing to society. Notice how the examples are focused on duty and law and order.
“As her husband, it’s his duty to steal the drug. But if he gets caught, he broke the law so he should go to jail.”
“It’s against the law to steal.”
16
Q
Level 3: Postconventional Moral Reasoning
A
At this level, moral reasoning becomes more abstract and focuses on ideals and moral principles.
Stage 5: Social Contract/Individual Rights Orientation: all about upholding rules that are in the best interest of the group, BUT certain universal values/rights should be upheld. In other words, the rules of a group matter, but not more than universal rights of people.
“He should steal because everyone in society has the right to life.”
“The right to life is more important than the right to property.”
Stage 6: Universal Ethical Principles: all about commitment to self-chosen ethical principles (e.g., equality of human rights). In other words, justice supersedes laws. Don’t worry if you’re left wondering how this is different than Stage 5 – this stage was poorly described by Kohlberg and is now viewed in combination with stage 5.
17
Q
What as found in a cross-sectional study, Kolhberg examined how rationalizations to moral dilemmas change from childhood (age 10) to well into adulthood (age 36).
A
At age 10, most children are in preconventional moral reasoning. This includes stage 2 (“what’s in it for me”) and stage 1 (avoiding punishments)
Throughout the teenage years, we see a decline in preconventional moral reasoning and an increase in conventional moral reasoning. By age 18, most teens are in stage 3 (doing what is expected by others). Notably, most adults remain in the conventional stage of moral reasoning throughout their 20s and 30s. While stage 4 (duties and laws) eventually becomes most common, few adults reach postconventional levels of moral reasoning.
18
Q
Kohlberg’s stages are positively associated with …
A
cognitive ability and perspective-taking skills.
In addition, there is some external validity to Kohlberg’s theory: there is a moderate correlation between moral reasoning and moral behavior.
19
Q
Criticisms of Kohlberg’s theory
A
There are cultural differences in moral reasoning. While Kohlberg initially noted that non-Western, non-industrialized cultures are less likely to obtain higher levels of moral reasoning, this is due to Western bias in his theory (not deficits in morality). Different cultures emphasize different values, which impacts their “level” in Kohlberg’s theory. While Kohlberg placed social duties in the conventional level, non-Western cultures may view social duties as more valuable than abstract concepts of justice.
Like Piaget, Kohlberg claimed his stages were hierarchical – this means that each stage is more important than the last, so once you “level up”, you don’t go back. We now know that moral development is not that straightforward. Children and adults give varying types of responses (depending on the dilemma, culture, social norms, etc), showing more gradual progress as opposed to discontinuous stages. Kohlberg’s theory was only moderately able to predict actual prosocial behaviour.
20
Q
Piaget and Kohlberg both postulated stage theories of moral development, however what are the main differences?
A
They both emphasized thinking over behaviours. While Piaget focused more on how children understand rules and punishments, Kohlberg focused more on moral reasoning across the lifespan.
21
Q
According to Piaget, children in the _______ stage of moral development view rules as things. This corresponds with the ______ stage of cognitive development.
A
heteronomous, pre-operational
22
Q
Which stage of Kohlberg’s theory of moral reasoning is most concerned with moral principles?
A
Postconventional
23
Q
What is a key difference between moral reasoning dilemmas (like Kohlberg used) and prosocial moral dilemmas (like Eisenberg uses)?
A
Kohlberg’s moral reasoning dilemmas are especially tricky because they involve choosing between two options that are both wrong.
For example, the choice between stealing and allowing a loved one to die is really tough!
In contrast, Eisenberg’s prosocial moral dilemmas are more typical of everyday situations. They involve a conflict between personal advantage with fairness or welfare of others.
24
Nancy Eisenberg
recognized the limitations of Kohlberg’s theory and aimed to develop a theory to better understand prosocial behaviours among children.
Using vignettes Eisenberg also developed a stage theory of prosocial reasoning, which consists of 5 levels (although there are really 6 levels, as level 4 has two substages).
25
Eisenbergs 5 levels of stage theory of prosocial reasoning (HNASTS)
Level 1: Hedonistic, Self-Focused Orientation
Level 2: Needs-Based Orientation
Level 3: Approval/Stereotyped Orientation
Level 4a: Self-Reflective Empathetic Orientation
Level 4b: Transitional Level
Level 5: Strongly Internalized Stage
26
Level 1: Hedonistic, Self-Focused Orientation
Primarily concerned with personal interest and gains
Common among preschoolers and young elementary school children
Examples:
"He should go to the party because it’s going to be really fun for him."
"He should help because then he may get a thank-you gift."
27
Level 2: Needs-Based Orientation
Level 2: Needs-Based Orientation
–
Concerned with others’ needs, even when they conflict with their own.
Common among preschoolers and elementary school children. Notice that this type of “other orientation” is occurring a lot earlier than the other theories we talked about. How do you think this is related to the types of vignettes the researchers used?
Example:
“He should help because the other boy is bleeding and hurt.”
28
Level 3: Approval/Stereotyped Orientation
Concerned with gaining approval of others, AND/OR concerned with stereotyped images of good and bad.
Common among some elementary school children and high schoolers.
Example:
“Eric should help because his mom will be proud of him if he does. He’ll be a good boy.”
29
Level 4a: Self-Reflective Empathetic Orientation
Answers involve sympathetic responding/role-taking, OR a concern for other’s humanness, OR guilt/positive emotion related to consequences of actions. In other words, it’s all about using perspective taking to think about how someone would feel in the situation.
Most common among high school children, but some older elementary children may be at this stage.
Examples:
“Eric should think about how he would feel in that situation.”
“He would feel really guilty if he went to the party and didn’t help”
30
Level 4b: Transitional Level
Answers involve internalized values, norms, duties, or responsibilities. They may also reflect concerns for larger society and/or human rights BUT are not clearly/strongly stated. Overall, this is really considered a “transitional” stage because the answers are not fully articulated.
Only a minority of individuals, in high school or older, reach this stage.
In this example, you can notice that helping is an internalized value, but the sentiment is not fully elaborated on:
“Eric should help because helping is something that’s important.”
31
Level 5: Strongly Internalized Stage
Involve internalized values, norms, duties, or responsibilities. They may also reflect concerns for society and human rights AND are clearly & strongly stated (this is the key difference from 4b).
An even smaller minority of people, in high school and older, reach this stage.
Example:
“Eric would feel bad if he didn’t help because he’d know he hadn’t lived up to his values. It’s important to help people in need.”
32
Children’s reasoning based on Eisenberg’s vignettes shows a...
much higher correlation with children’s actual prosocial behaviour.
This probably isn’t surprising given that her vignettes are much less abstract than Kohlberg’s.
Thus, when children are presented with realistic and familiar situations, we see a faster development of moral reasoning.
33
Parents roles in children's development of conscience:
Parents are very important in the development of conscience. This involves socialization and awareness of others’ thoughts and feelings.
Providing children with explanations for why they should help other people, encouraging them to engage in perspective taking, and having secure relationships are all related to the development of conscience.
For example, having a secure attachment relationship helps children learn about right and wrong because children have a safe place to learn from their mistakes. If children are so distressed about wrongdoings, it is extremely difficult for them to engage in more cognitively complex tasks like perspective taking.
34
Teachers roles in children's development of conscience:
One method teachers and other adults use to help support children’s moral development is through inductive discipline.
Inductive discipline involves offering explanations for why a behaviour is right or wrong, clarifying how the child should behave, and guiding their understanding of expectations for behaviour.
This is also done in a warm, empathic way so children can learn from their behaviour without feeling badly about themselves.
35
“helper” and a “hinderer” experimental tasks.
this research demonstrates that infants as young as 3 months of age show a preference towards “helpers” over “hinderers”, lending support for an innate capacity for moral development
36
Compared to other theories, Eisenberg's theory of prosocial moral development is a more...
concrete way to understand children's moral development.
Children's understanding of right and wrong is influenced by both nature and nurture factors.
37
What is true about the development of the conscience?
-Secure attachment relationships promote children's development of conscience
-Parents and teachers can promote the development of conscience by using inductive discipline
- Encouraging perspective-taking is related to the development of conscience
38
What is prosocial behaviour?
Prosocial behaviour reflects actions that are taken to benefit another.
For example, volunteering at a dog shelter, lending a friend money for lunch, or standing up to a school-yard bully could all be considered prosocial behaviors.
39
What nature and nurture factors are related to the development of children's prosocial behaviours? how prosocial behaviours are fostered among children:
Genetics
Child Temperament
Empathy and sympathy
Theory of mind
Culture
Parenting practices
40
Genetics (nature/nurture factors to prosocial behviours development)
There are genetic differences related to one’s tendency to engage in prosocial behaviour.
-Differences in the hormone oxytocin(a feel-good neuropeptide related to social bonding, is released during maternal bonding, as well as bonding between partners and friends).
-Differences in Child temperament
41
Empathy and sympathy (nature/nurture factors to prosocial behviours development)
Before offering help, children first need to recognize that someone else is in distress. This is related to both empathy and sympathy.
Empathy is an emotional reaction to another’s emotional state, in which we feel the same emotional experience as someone else (e.g., we feel sad because we see someone else feeling sad).
In contrast, sympathy is more feeling bad for someone. It’s a subtle yet important difference.
42
Theory of mind (nature/nurture factors to prosocial behviours development)
Theory of mind reflects understanding of mental states (including thoughts and feelings).
Children with more developed theory of mind skills tend to engage in more prosocial behaviours.
43
Culture (nature/nurture factors to prosocial behviours development)
Eastern cultures that emphasize mutual cooperation and interrelations tend to engage in more prosocial behaviors than more individualistic Western cultures.
44
Parenting practices- MAD
(nature/nurture factors to prosocial behviours development)
There are many parenting practices that are related to children’s prosocial behaviours.
- Modeling and teaching
- Arranging opportunities for prosocial behaviour
- Disciplinary style
45
Child temperament (nature/nurture factors to prosocial behviours development)
One component of temperament is physiological arousal level.
While some arousal can motivate prosocial behaviours, too much arousal can feel overwhelming and inhibit prosocial behaviours.
In other words, if children feel distressed by another’s distress, they may not be capable of helping.
Shyness can also inhibit prosocial behaviour, as children feel awkward about engaging with others.
46
Hoffman (Sympathy and Empathy)
- young children experience empathy but do not always know how to help
-Empathetic parenting is important for developing empathy in one's child.
47
Parents - Modeling and teaching
1) Through principles of social learning, children learn and imitate prosocial behaviours that they see their parents engaging in.
Ex: children would be more likely to use manners if they witness their parents modeling “please” and “thank you”.
2) In addition to modeling, parents provide explicit instructions about prosocial behaviours and ethical obligations.
Ex: parents may explicitly tell their children that it’s good to help a friend if they accidentally hurt themselves, as that’s how they’d hope to be treated in the same situation.
48
Parents - Arranging opportunities for prosocial behaviour
-encouraging prosocial behaviours when they see another child hurt or upset on the playground
-or more complex like arranging formal volunteering opportunities in the community.
49
Parents - Disciplinary Style
Responsive, sensitive parenting is related to children’s prosocial behaviour.
Importantly, parents should be careful not to encourage prosocial behaviour by making it about rewards and punishments – this is not effective. Rewards and punishments are external motivators that do not help children to internalize prosocial values.
It is best to encourage prosocial behaviour through inductive discipline (e.g., explaining why it is important), which helps to promote more internal motivation for prosociality.
50
Early precursors of prosocial behaviour include(ETT):
Empathy
Theory of mind
Temperament
51
Types of anti social behaviours
-Aggressive Behaviours
-Delinquent Behaviours
-
52
Reactive Aggression
occurs as a hostile, emotional reaction to provocation.
A young child hitting their sibling after they didn’t get their own way would be an example of reactive aggression.
53
Antisocial Behaviours
antisocial behaviours are those that are harmful to others (e.g., aggressive behaviours, bullying) or violate social norms (e.g., rule-breaking, lying).
54
Proactive Aggression
Aggression that is used to obtain a need or desire.
Ex, a child who uses force to obtain a desired toy from someone else would be using proactive aggression. This type of aggression is quite common in young children, as they do not always have the language skills to communicate their desires.
54
Other types of aggressive behaviours can be differentiated by their form, such as...
physical (e.g., hitting, kicking)
verbal (e.g., saying mean comments, name-calling)
relational (e.g., spreading rumours, leaving someone out on purpose).
In general, the prevalence of physical aggression decreases with development while the prevalence of verbal and relational aggression follows an inverted u-shape, peaking in middle childhood/early adolescence.
55
Bullying is a subset of aggressive behaviour that involves several components:
1) a perception of harm
2) a power differential between the aggressor and the victimized child
3) repetition or the possibility of repetition.
56
Bullying is also repeated over time – this means that one instance of name-calling is
NOT bullying.
57
Delinquent behaviours
including rule-breaking, vandalism, or skipping school (although aggression doesn’t always precede these behaviours).
Lying is a special example – while chronic lying can be problematic, it certainly isn’t always an antisocial behaviour and can be a sign of cognitive maturity in children.
58
Transdermal Optical Imaging
Helps detect emotions not visible to the nakes eye (when children lie, they have a neutral face but are actually expericing a lot of emotions underneath, this helps show this) Reveal hidden emotion associated with people's lies.
85% accuracy.
Pinnoceho affect - cheeks decrease and facial blufo(?) on the nose increases
59
Factors related to antisocial behaviours - Child Characteristics
Children who engage in antisocial behaviours tend to have a difficult temperament from infancy.
In preschool, they tend to have low self-control, demonstrate high impulsivity, are very distractible, and have high emotional lability (moods change quickly).
These children tend to struggle with demonstrating empathy and demonstrate a hostile attribution bias towards ambiguous events (i.e., they interpret ambiguous events with hostile intent).
They struggle with conflict resolution and expect aggressive behaviours to be successful in solving their problems.
Some studies find that aggressive children tend to have higher testosterone levels, although this research is mixed.
Many of these children meet criteria for neurodevelopmental disorders such as ADHD or have neurological deficits (e.g., difficulties with executive functioning).
60
Factors related to antisocial behaviours - Environmental Characteristics
Aggressive children also tend to experience aggression at home. They are more likely to be subjected to physical punishment and tend to have parents who are less warm. Thus, aggression is modeled and reinforced at home as a way to solve problems. Aggression is also modeled at home in other ways (e.g., high parental conflict). Overall, aggression tends to be very salient.
Not only is aggressive behaviour common from parents, but parents also tend to be inconsistent and ineffective. They lack sensitivity such that they sometimes respond to their child’s needs but often do not.
Antisocial behaviours are more common in lower SES environments. This is related to many factors including increased environmental stressors (e.g., financial stress, neighbourhood crime, etc.) as well as fewer opportunities to engage with protective factors (e.g., extracurricular activities).
Outside of the home, peers can also model and reinforce aggressive and delinquent behaviours.
61
Overall, the development of antisocial behaviour is the result of
many individual and environmental factors that interact with one another. Given these interactions, it is very difficult to disentangle the unique contributions of each of these factors on children’s antisocial behaviours.
62
Sociometry (or sociometrics)
is the process through which researchers quantify social relationships.
63
Sociometric status
Sociometric status (originally developed by Coie & Dodge, 1988) is a measurement that assesses the degree to which children are liked or disliked by their peers.
Using this method, researchers would typically go into a classroom and ask the children to rate how much they like and dislike each of their classmates.
Based on these responses, researchers can classify children into 5 status groups:
Popular: Receive many positive nominations, few negative nominations
Rejected: Receive many negative nominations, few positive nominations
Neglected: Receive few nominations of either kind
Average: Receive an average number of both positive and negative nominations
Controversial: Receive many positive and many negative nominations
64
Children who are rejected by their peers are more likely to experience numerous psychosocial difficulties, this includes:
Poor academic achievement – This is at least partially because they generally do not like going to school. They are more likely to have sick days, skip school, and are less engaged when they are at school.
More likely to have internalizing and externalizing behaviours. This includes things like depression, anxiety, and substance use.
More likely to be victimized – Peer rejection tends to come before being targeted by bullying, although peer rejection and victimization can influence each other.
65
Overall, antisocial behaviours consist of
both aggressive and delinquent behaviours. Aggressive behaviours, like bullying, are the most common form of antisocial behaviour among school-aged children. Aggressive children and those who are rejected by their peers are at a heightened risk for experiencing a variety of psychosocial difficulties.
66
_____ aggression is most common among preschoolers, whereas _____ is associated with hostile attribution bias:
reactive, proactive
67
Piaget, Kohlberg, and Eisenberg all used what to study the development of children's moral reasoning?
all used vignettes to study the development of children's moral reasoning. In general, morality shifts from a focus on external (e.g., punishments) to internal (e.g., values) reasoning with development.
68
observational research suggests that children witness bullying at school once every
7 minutes.
This begs the question of whether or not children are getting the message that adults are sending about the importance of kindness (or if we're sending it at all).
69
Harvard's Making Caring Common project
wanted to learn about children's values and the messages they receive from adults about their importance.
Participants were asked to rank what is most important to them from the following:
caring for others
achieving at a high level
being a happy person (feeling good most of the time)
Caring was the lowest ranked value - only 22% of students ranked caring as their top priority.
Most students (60%) ranked achievement over caring, with 2/3 believing that their peers would do the same. Older students were less likely to prioritize caring than younger students.
However, 96% of parents view developing moral character in children as “very important, if not essential” and highly valued their children “being honest, loving, and reliable”(Bowman et al., 2012).
But, children aren't getting this message. They think that their parents' and teachers' top value for them was achievement.
70
One evidence-based intervention program aimed at reducing aggressive and other antisocial behaviours.
Toronto's Child Development Institute is called SNAP: SNAP: Stop Now And Plan.
To help children under the age of 12 for emotion regulation, self control, and problem solving.
(my own note - is that a video on this program said that if children are lying more than what's typical than it is a warning sign they are headed down a path of bad behaviour, but the Ted talk (Kenn Lung?) said that lying was completely normal and actually provided the same development skills required for success in life.)
71
Common Sociometric Categories for Peer Ratings
- Popular
- Rejected
- Neglected
- Average
- Controversial
Over relatively short periods such as weeks or a few months, children who are popular or rejected tend to remain so, whereas children who are neglected or controversial are likely to acquire a different status
Over longer periods, children’s sociometric status is more likely to change.
Over time, sociometric stability for rejected children is generally higher than for popular, neglected, or controversial children and may increase with the age of the child.
72
sociometric status
a measurement that reflects the degree to which children are liked or disliked by their peers as a group
73
Popular Children
children or adolescents who are viewed positively (liked) by many peers and are viewed negatively (disliked) by few peers
Popular children are designated as popular if they are rated by their peers as being highly liked and accepted and highly impactful.
Popular children tend to be skilled at initiating interaction with peers and at maintaining positive relationships with others
Popular children are perceived by their peers, teachers, and adult observers as cooperative, friendly, sociable, helpful, and sensitive to others
They are also able to regulate their own emotions and behaviors and tend to have a relatively high number of low-conflict reciprocated friendships
Popular children tend to have more emotional and behavioral strengths compared to children in the other sociometric groups
not necessarily the most likable in their peer group; rather, they have other attributes, such as prestige, athletic ability, physical attractiveness, or wealth, that give them power over their peers
74
Rejected Children
children or adolescents who are liked by few peers and disliked by many peers
are designated as rejected if they are low in acceptance and preference and high in rejection but also high in impact.
Rejected children tend to differ from more popular children in their social motives and in the way they process information related to social situations
For example, rejected children are more likely than better-liked peers to be motivated by goals such as “getting even” with others or “showing them up”
also have more trouble than other children do in finding constructive solutions to difficult social situations, such as wanting to take a turn on a swing when someone else is using it. When asked how they would deal with such situations, rejected children suggest fewer strategies than do their more popular peers, and the ones they suggest are more hostile, demanding, and threatening
also tend to be anxious and depressed and to be rated lowest by teachers in their behavioral competence
Perhaps one reason rejected children are more likely to select inappropriate strategies is that their theory of mind is less developed; they may therefore have greater difficulty understanding others’ feelings and behaviors
75
Neglected Children
children or adolescents who are infrequently mentioned as either liked or disliked; they simply are not noticed much by peers
are designated as neglected if they are low in social impact—that is, if they receive few positive or negative ratings. These children are not especially liked or disliked by peers; they simply go unnoticed.
These children tend to be both less sociable and less disruptive than average children and are likely to back away from peer interactions that involve aggression
-Children and adolescents who are simply not social and prefer solitary activities may not be especially prone to peer rejection
-Neglected children perceive that they receive less support from peers (Walker, 2009), yet they are not particularly anxious about their social interactions
-In fact, other than being less socially interactive, neglected children are rated by their teachers as being as socially competent as popular children
76
Average Children
are designated as average if they receive moderate ratings on both impact and preference.
77
Controversial Children
children or adolescents who are liked by quite a few peers and are disliked by quite a few others
are designated as controversial if they are rated as very high in impact but average in preference. They are noticed by peers and are liked by quite a few children and disliked by quite a few others.
tend to have characteristics of both popular and rejected children (Rytioja et al., 2019). For example, they tend to be aggressive, disruptive, and prone to anger, but they also tend to be cooperative, sociable, good at sports, and humorous
-They are very socially active and tend to be group leaders
- it may seem counterintuitive that aggressive children could also be popular, it is the case that aggressive children sometimes develop a network of aggressive friends and are accepted in their peer group
-controversial children tend to be viewed by peers as arrogant and snobbish
78
Interventions aimed to improve children’s relationships with their peers by enhancing aspects of their emotional development.
Promoting Alternative Thinking Strategies (PATHS) curriculum, in which children from 4 to 11 years of age learn to identify emotional expressions (using pictures, for example) and to think about the causes and consequences of different ways to express emotions
78
Why are some children liked better than others?
One obvious factor is physical attractiveness.
Athleticism is also related to high peer status, albeit more strongly for boys than for girls
Further affecting peer status is the status of one’s friends: having popular friends appears to boost one’s own popularity
Beyond these simple determiners, sociometric status also seems to be affected by a variety of other factors, including children’s social behavior, personality, cognitions about others, and goals when interacting with peers.
79
Chen's 1990's study...
shy, reserved behavior in Chinese elementary school children has become increasingly associated with lower levels of peer acceptance, at least for urban children
For children from rural areas who have had only limited exposure to the dramatic cultural changes in China in recent years, shyness is associated with high levels of both peer liking and disliking, albeit more to liking
In addition, for the rural children, being unsociable—that is, uninterested in social interaction—is associated with peer rejection (Chen et al., 2009), whereas among North American children it often is not, at least for younger children. Thus, culture and changes in culture appear to affect children’s evaluations of what is desirable behavior.
79
A majority of rejected children tend to fall into one of two categories:
those who are overly aggressive and those who are withdrawn.
80
withdrawn-rejected (peer status)
rejected children who are socially withdrawn, wary, and often timid
-make up 10% to 25% of the rejected category, are socially withdrawn, wary, timid, and socially anxious
-They frequently are victimized by peers, and many feel isolated, lonely, and depressed
80
aggressive-rejected (peer status)
children who are viewed by their peers as especially prone to physical aggression, disruptive behavior, delinquency, and negative behavior such as hostility and threatening others
40% to 50% of rejected children tend to be aggressive.
-especially prone to hostile and threatening behavior, physical aggression, disruptive behavior, and delinquency
When they are angry or want their own way, many rejected children also engage in relational aggression
are at risk for becoming even more aggressive over time, and for engaging in delinquent behavior and to exhibit symptoms of hyperactivity and attention-deficit disorder, conduct disorder, and substance abuse
81
Piaget’s Theory of Moral Judgment
Piaget’s book The Moral Judgment of the Child (1932/1965) form the foundation of cognitive theories about the origin of morality.
Piaget describes how children’s moral reasoning changes from a rigid acceptance of the dictates and rules of authorities to an appreciation that moral rules are a product of social interaction and are therefore modifiable.
Piaget believed that interactions with peers, more than adult influence, account for advances in children’s moral reasoning.
Piaget argued that through games, children learn that rules are a creation of human beings —that they are not absolute but rather interpreted and that they can be changed with the consensus of the peer group.
81
Cross-Cultural Similarities and Differences in Factors Related to Peer Status
Most of the research on behaviors associated with sociometric status has been conducted in the United States, but findings similar to those discussed here have been obtained in a wide array of cross-cultural research.
Studies from Australia, Canada, China, Finland, Greece, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, and the Netherlands have found that socially rejected children tend to be aggressive and disruptive while popular children tend to be prosocial and to have leadership skills
Research in a variety of regions, including North America, China, and Indonesia, further indicates that rejected children, especially those who are aggressive, are more likely than their peers to have academic difficulties
Approximately 25% to 30% of rejected children drop out of school, compared with approximately 8% or less of other children (Rubin et al., 1998). Clearly, children who are rejected by peers are at risk for academic and adjustment problems.
Various studies done in Germany, Italy, and Hong Kong, for example, have shown that, as in the United States, withdrawal becomes linked with peer rejection in preschool or elementary school
there are certain cultural and historical differences in the characteristics associated with children’s sociometric status. One notable example involving both types of differences is the status associated with shyness among Chinese children.
Chinese children who were shy, sensitive, and cautious or inhibited in their behavior were—unlike their inhibited or shy Western counterparts—viewed by teachers as socially competent and as leaders, and they were liked by their peers. A probable explanation for this difference is that Chinese culture traditionally values self-effacing, withdrawn behavior, and Chinese children are encouraged to behave accordingly.
Western cultures place great value on independence and self-assertion, withdrawn children in these cultures are likely to be viewed as weak, needy, and socially incompetent.
82
Moral Judgement
- Piaget’s Theory of Moral Judgment
-Kohlberg’s Theory of Moral Reasoning
- Social Domain Theory of Moral Development
- The Development of Conscience
82
Why do some children and adolescents act in moral and prosocial ways, while others act in immoral and antisocial ways?
The starting point for answering this question lies in understanding the aspects of children’s thinking and behavior that contribute to morality.
To act in moral ways on a regular basis, children must have an understanding of right and wrong and the reasons why certain actions are moral or immoral.
In addition, they must have a conscience—that is, they must be concerned about acting in a moral manner and feel guilty when they do not.
children’s moral development is influenced by advances in their social and cognitive capacities, as well as by both genetic factors and environmental factors, including family and culture.
83
Piaget’s first stage of moral development...
which he referred to as heteronomous morality, is most characteristic of children who have not achieved Piaget’s stage of concrete operations—that is, children younger than 7 years who are in the preoperational stage.
At around ages 11 or 12, children enter Piaget’s second stage of autonomous morality. Piaget believed that children at this stage no longer accept blind obedience to authority as the basis of moral decisions.
children typically progress from the heteronomous morality of constraint to autonomous moral reasoning. Individual differences in the rates of children’s progress are due to numerous factors, including differences in cognitive maturity, in opportunities for interactions with peers and for reciprocal role-taking, and in how authoritarian and punitive parents are with them.
84
Piaget suggested that young children’s belief that rules are unchangeable is due to two factors:
one social and one cognitive.
First, Piaget argued that parental control of children is coercive and unilateral, leading to children’s unquestioning respect for rules set by adults.
Second, children’s cognitive immaturity causes them to believe that rules are “real” things, like chairs or gravity, that exist outside people and are not products of the human mind.
84
Kohlberg’s Theory of Moral Reasoning
was interested in the sequences through which children’s moral reasoning develops over time.
Kohlberg proposed that the development of moral reasoning proceeds through a specific series of stages that are discontinuous and hierarchical. That is, each new stage reflects a qualitatively different, more advanced way of thinking than the one before it.
85
Critique of Piaget’s Theory
Piaget underestimated young children’s ability to appreciate the role of intentionality in morality
86
Critique of Kohlberg’s Theory
1) When the boys were 10 years old, they used primarily Stage 1 reasoning (blind obedience to authority) and Stage 2 reasoning (self-interest). Thereafter, reasoning in these stages dropped off markedly.
2) findings has raised concern that assessment through the use of dilemmas, like Kohlberg’s Heinz dilemma, is not valid across cultures
3) research has shown that children and adults alike often reason at different levels on different occasions—or even on the same occasion (Rest, 1979). As a consequence, it is not clear that the development of moral reasoning is qualitatively discontinuous. Rather, children and adolescents may gradually acquire the cognitive skills to use higher stages of moral reasoning but also may use lower stages when doing so is consistent with their goals, motives, or beliefs in a particular situation.
4) Biased against females because it does not adequately recognize differences in the way males and females reason morally (Kohlberg interviews with a sample of boys)
87
Social Domain Theory of Moral Development
current thinking about children’s moral development is largely driven by social domain theory.
growth in moral reasoning occurs not through stage-like change but through gradual change based on the child’s social interactions with peers and adults as well as through direct socialization from their parents
Differences in children’s moral judgments are understood to result from differences in the environments in which children live and the experiences they have within those environments.
social domain theory also emphasizes the role of peers as a strong influence on children’s moral development.
88
Parents are key in the social domain moral development process:
parents transmit values to their children both explicitly (through teaching and discipline) and implicitly (by example).
However, this relationship is understood to be bidirectional, such that children’s moral judgments and related behaviors also affect their parents’ behaviors.
89
Peer relationships in social domain theory or moral development
Peer relationships involve equal power (in contrast to the parent–child relationship), which allows children to have more agency in their behaviors in moral situations. Moreover, peer-to-peer interactions involve numerous settings in which children both observe and are forced to initiate moral behaviors.
90
Social domain theory argues that, in order to successfully negotiate their social worlds, children must understand principles in three different domains of social knowledge, these domains are:
1) Moral Domain
2) Societal Domain
3) Personal Domain
91
Moral Domain
an area of social knowledge based on concepts of right and wrong, fairness, justice, and individual rights; these concepts apply across contexts and supersede rules or authority
92
Societal Domain
an area of social knowledge that encompasses concepts regarding the rules and conventions through which societies maintain order
93
Personal Domain
an area of social knowledge that pertains to actions in which individual preferences are the main consideration; there are no right or wrong choices
94
Social Domain Theory - Cultural and Socioeconomic Similarities and Differences
Cultures around the world share some characteristics when it comes to how their members make moral decisions.
Moral judgments in particular, such as judgments about behaviors related to fairness and the welfare of others, are largely universal
Take the question of one’s obligation to attend to the needs of one’s parents and to try to address the needs of friends or strangers. Children in India believe they have a clear moral obligation to attend to these needs, while children in the United States appear to consider it a matter of personal judgment or a combination of moral and personal judgments
Socioeconomic class can also influence the way children make such designations. Research in the United States and Brazil indicates that children of lower-income families are somewhat less likely than middle- class children to differentiate sharply between moral and societal actions and, prior to adolescence, are less likely to view personal judgments as a matter of choice. These differences may be due to the tendency of individuals of low socioeconomic status to place a greater emphasis on submission to authority and to allow children less autonomy
95
conscience
an internal regulatory mechanism that increases an individual’s ability to conform to standards of conduct accepted in their culture
96
The Development of Conscience
One factor that may push a child toward making a moral judgment (whether in the moral, societal, or personal domain) is conscience.
Conscience restrains antisocial behavior or destructive impulses and promotes a child’s compliance with adults’ rules and standards, even when no one is monitoring the child’s behavior .
Conscience can also promote prosocial behavior by causing the child to feel guilty when engaging in uncaring behavior or failing to live up to internalized values about helping others
Because conscience is tied to cultural standards about right or wrong, psychologists long thought that morality was completely learned (i.e., nurture) and not at all innate (i.e., nature). However, recent evidence from studies with infants suggests that humans may have an innate drive to prefer actions that help others over ones that hinder them. (Helper/ hinder climb a hill study)
Early development of conscience undoubtedly contributes to whether children come to accept the moral values of their parents and society.
97
Children with different temperaments may develop a conscience in different ways.
Toddlers who are prone to fear unfamiliar people or situations tend to exhibit more guilt at a young age than do less fearful children
Fearless children appear motivated more by the desire to please their mother than by a fear of her.
The effects of parenting on children’s conscience also vary with the child’s genes because genes affect children’s temperaments. This can be seen in the dynamic between maternal responsiveness—the mother’s acceptance of, and sensitivity to, the child—and the child’s genotype for the serotonin transporter gene, SLC6A4 (believed to make children especially reactive to their rearing environment).
98
prosocial behavior
voluntary behavior intended to benefit another, such as helping, sharing with, and comforting others
Cooperation is a form of prosocial behavior, one that may be driven by sympathy but may also be driven by a child’s sense of fairness.
99
The Development of Prosocial Behavior
To experience empathy, children must be able to identify the emotions of others (at least to some degree) and understand that another person is feeling an emotion or is in some kind of need.
To experience sympathy for another person are not merely feeling the same emotion as the other person.
In order for children to express empathy or sympathy, they must be able to take the perspective of others.
- By 14 months of age, children become emotionally distressed when they see other people who are upset and express verbal and nonverbal concern for an adult who has been hurt. These studies suggest that children feel empathy and sympathy by the second year of life.
-second to fourth years of life, some types of prosocial behaviors increase, while others decrease. Findings suggests that young children may not be able to act on their feelings of sympathy when others are distressed until they reach age 3, in part because that is the age at which they begin to understand social norms
-middle childhood and into adolescence, their increasingly higher levels of moral reasoning and of their perspective- taking ability lead to accompanying increases in how often they engage in prosocial behaviors such as helping, sharing, and donating
100
The Origins of Individual Differences in Prosocial Behavior
-Biological Factors;
They believe that humans have evolved the capacity for prosocial behavior because collaboration in foraging for food and in repelling enemies ensured survival (Tomasello & Vaish, 2013). According to this view, people who help others are more likely than less helpful people to be assisted when they themselves are in need and, thus, are more likely to survive and reproduce (Trivers, 1983). In addition, assisting those with whom they share genes increases the likelihood that those genes will be passed on to the next generation
- The Socialization of Prosocial Behavior;
The primary environmental influence on children’s development of prosocial behavior is their socialization in the family. Researchers have identified three ways in which parents socialize prosocial behavior in their children:
(1) by modeling and teaching prosocial behavior;
(2) by arranging opportunities for their children to engage in prosocial behavior
(3) by disciplining their children and eliciting prosocial behavior from them. Parents also communicate and reinforce cultural beliefs about the value of prosocial behavior
101
The Socialization of Prosocial Behavior
-Modeling and the communication of values
-Opportunities for prosocial activities
-Discipline and parenting style
- Peer Influences
- Interventions
102
Modeling and the communication of values (socialization of prosocial behaviour)
Consistent with social-learning theory’s emphasis on observation and imitation, children tend to imitate other people’s helping and sharing behavior, including even that of strangers.
Children are especially likely to imitate the prosocial behavior of adults with whom they have a positive relationship
103
Opportunities for prosocial activities (socialization of prosocial behaviour)
Providing children with opportunities to engage in helpful activities can increase their willingness to take on prosocial tasks at a later time.
In the home, opportunities to help others include household tasks that are performed on a routine basis and benefit others, although performance of household tasks may foster prosocial actions primarily toward family members).
For adolescents, voluntary community service such as working in homeless shelters or other community agencies also can be a way of gaining experience in helping others and deepening feelings of prosocial commitment
Participation in prosocial activities may also give children and adolescents opportunities to take others’ perspectives, to increase their confidence that they are competent to assist others, and to experience emotional rewards for helping.
104
Discipline and parenting style (socialization of prosocial behaviour)
High levels of prosocial behavior and sympathy in children tend to be associated with constructive and supportive parenting, including authoritative parenting.
When parents are involved with and close to their children, the children are higher in sympathy and regulation, which in turn predicts higher levels of prosocial behavior (Padilla-Walker & Christensen, 2011).
Parental support of and attachment to the child have been found to be especially predictive of prosocial behavior for youths who are low in fearfulness
parenting style that involves physical punishment, threats, and an authoritarian approach (see Chapter 12) tends to be associated with a lack of sympathy and prosocial behavior
The combination of parental warmth and certain parenting practices—not parental warmth by itself—seems to be especially effective for fostering prosocial tendencies in children and adolescents. Therefore, children tend to be more prosocial when their parents are not only warm and supportive but also when they model prosocial behavior, include reasoning and references to moral values and responsibilities in their discipline, and expose their children to prosocial models and activities (i.e., use authoritative parenting;
105
Peer Influences (socialization of prosocial behaviour)
Relationships with other children are another key way that children learn and practice moral principles, such as fairness, justice, reciprocity (e.g., sharing and taking turns), conflict resolution, and not hurting or taking advantage of others. This practice in moral reasoning within peer relationships translates into prosocial
106
Interventions (socialization of prosocial behaviour)
Because most of the research on the socialization of prosocial responding is correlational in design, it does not allow firm conclusions about cause- and-effect relations. However, some school interventions have been effective at promoting prosocial behavior in children, so environmental factors must contribute to its development
107
aggression
behavior aimed at physically or emotionally harming or injuring others
is a subcategory of antisocial behavior that involves acts intended to physically or emotionally harm others
108
School-Based Interventions for Promoting Prosocial Behavior
Research on prevention programs (which attempt to prevent a problem from occurring) and intervention programs (which aim to help children who already exhibit a problem) divides the programs into three levels:
(1) primary prevention (targeting all children in a setting, e.g., school);
(2) secondary prevention (targeting individuals at risk for developing a problem);
(3) tertiary intervention (targeting individuals who already exhibit a problem).
These three levels of prevention and intervention are typically thought of as a pyramid, with the largest number of children receiving primary prevention and the smallest number receiving tertiary intervention.
109
antisocial behavior
disruptive, hostile, or aggressive behavior that violates social norms or rules and that harms or takes advantage of others
110
The Development of Antisocial Behaviors
Instances of aggression over possessing objects occur between infants before 12 months of age— especially behaviors such as trying to tug objects away from each other
Beginning around 18 months of age, physical aggression such as hitting and pushing—particularly over the possession of objects—is normative in development and increases in frequency until about age 2 or 3
with the growth of language skills, physical aggression decreases in frequency, and verbal aggression such as insults and taunting increases.
Conflict over possessions often is an example of instrumental aggression, that is, aggression motivated by the desire to obtain a concrete goal, such as gaining possession of a toy or getting a better place in line. Preschool children sometimes also use relational aggression ( intended to harm others by damaging their peer relationships). This relational aggression has been linked to theory of mind skills, particularly for children with low levels of prosocial skills
Overt physical aggression continues to remain low or to decline in frequency for most children during elementary school, although a relatively small number of children—most of them boys —develop frequent and serious problems with aggression and antisocial behavior at this age. Whereas aggression in young children is usually instrumental (goal directed), aggression in elementary school children often is hostile, arising from the desire to hurt another person, or is motivated by the need to protect oneself against a perceived threat to self-esteem
111
instrumental aggression
aggression motivated by the desire to obtain a concrete goal
112
children who had been identified as aggressive by their peers when they were 8 years old had more ...
criminal convictions and engaged in more serious criminal behavior at age 30
113
Children who are the most aggressive and prone to antisocial behavior such as stealing in middle childhood tend to be...
more aggressive and delinquent in adolescence than children who first develop conduct problems at a later age
114
conduct disorder (CD)
a disorder that involves severe antisocial and aggressive behaviors that inflict pain on others or involve destruction of property or denial of the rights of others
115
In a study of girls only, relational aggression in childhood was related to
subsequent conduct disorders
116
oppositional defiant disorder (ODD)
a disorder characterized by age-inappropriate and persistent displays of angry, defiant, and irritable behaviors
117
The Origins of Aggression and Antisocial Behavior
-Biological Factors
- Social Cognition
- Family Influences on Aggression and Antisocial Behavior
- Peer influences
- Biology and Socialization: Their Joint Influence on Children’s Antisocial Behavior
118
Biological factors of aggression/anti social behaviour
Biological factors undoubtedly contribute to individual differences in aggression, but their precise role is not very clear.
Twin studies suggest that antisocial behavior runs in families and is partially due to genetics
heredity appears to play a stronger role in aggression in early childhood and adulthood than it does in adolescence, when environmental factors are a major contributor to it
Heredity also contributes to both proactive and reactive aggression; but in terms of stability of individual differences in aggression and the association of aggression with psychopathic traits (e.g., callousness, lack of affect, including lack of remorse, and manipulativeness), the influence of heredity is greater for proactive aggression
One genetically influenced contributor to aggression is difficult temperament.
Some aggressive children and adolescents tend to exhibit callous personality traits, in that they feel neither guilt nor empathy nor sympathy for others
Genetic, neurological, or hormonal characteristics may put a child at risk for developing aggressive and antisocial behavior, but whether the child becomes aggressive will depend on numerous factors, including experiences in the social world
119
Social Cognition of aggression/anti social behaviour
Children’s aggressive behaviors are often in reaction to how they interpret social situations
aggressive children tend to interpret the world through an “aggressive” lens.
Compared with nonaggressive peers, their goals in such social encounters are also more likely to be hostile and inappropriate to the situation, typically involving attempts to get back at a peer
aggressive children and adolescents are also inclined to evaluate aggressive responses more favorably and prosocial responses less favorably than do their nonaggressive peers. In part, this is because aggressive children feel more confident of their ability to perform acts of physical and verbal aggression and they expect their aggressive behavior to result in positive outcomes (e.g., getting their way) as well as to reduce negative treatment by others
120
reactive aggression
emotionally driven, antagonistic aggression sparked by one’s perception that other people’s motives are hostile
121
proactive aggression
unemotional aggression aimed at fulfilling a need or desire
(purposeful aggression not evoked by emotion) is used by children to bully others and to get what they want from them.
Like instrumental aggression, is aimed at fulfilling a need or desire—tend to anticipate more positive social consequences for aggression
122
Family Influences on Aggression and Antisocial Behavior
Children who experience harsh or low-quality parenting are at greater risk of becoming aggressive or antisocial than are other children
- Parental punitiveness;
- Poor parental monitoring;
- Parental conflict
- Socioeconomic status and children’s antisocial behavior;
123
Parental punitiveness
harsh but non-abusive physical punishment
spanking and yelling were associated with higher levels of aggression in children in six countries—China, India, Kenya, Italy, the Philippines, and Thailand—although this relation was weaker if children viewed such parenting as normal
Harsh or abusive punishment is also consistently associated with the development of antisocial tendencies
124
Poor parental monitoring
One reason parental monitoring may be important is that it reduces the likelihood that older children and adolescents will associate with deviant, antisocial peers
125
Socioeconomic status and children’s antisocial behavior
One major factor is the greater number of stressors experienced by children in poor families, including stress in the family (e.g., due to illness, domestic violence, divorce, or legal problems) and neighborhood violence. Low SES parents are more likely than other parents to be rejecting and low in warmth; to use erratic, threatening, and harsh discipline; and to be lax in supervising their children
126
Peer Influences on Aggression and Antisocial Behavior
aggressive children tend to socialize with other aggressive children and often become more delinquent over time if they have close friends who are aggressive. Moreover, the expression of a genetic tendency toward aggression is stronger for individuals who have aggressive friends.
Associating with delinquent peers tends to increase delinquency because these peers model and reinforce antisocial behavior in the peer group.
it appears that children’s susceptibility to peer pressure to become involved in antisocial behavior increases in the elementary school years peaks at about 8th or 9th grade, then declines thereafter
Peer approval of relational aggression increases in middle school, and students in peer groups that are supportive of relational aggression become increasingly aggressive
However, youth that are more tied to traditional values may play less of a role in promoting antisocial behavior for adolescents who are embedded in a traditional culture oriented toward adults’ expectations (e.g., deference and courtesy toward adults and adherence to adult values)
127
Biology and Socialization: Their Joint Influence on Children’s Antisocial Behavior
often it is a combination of genetic and environmental factors that predict children’s antisocial, aggressive behavior and that some children are more sensitive to the quality of parenting than are others
children with certain gene variants related to serotonin or dopamine, which affect neurotransmission, appear to be more responsive to their environment than are children with different variants. For example, under adverse conditions (e.g., chronic stress, poor parenting, socioeconomic deprivation), children with particular variants of the serotonin transporter gene (SLC6A4), the dopamine receptor gene (DRD4), or the MAOA gene (which controls the enzyme that metabolizes serotonin and dopamine) tend to be more aggressive than children with different variants of these genes
128
Interventions for Aggressive and Antisocial Children
Children with aggressive or antisocial problem behaviors can be successfully treated with individual psychotherapy or with a combination of psychotherapy and drug therapy
It is also often useful and even necessary to involve parents; interventions that teach parents how to better manage their own behavior when interacting with their children can help reduce children’s aggression and antisocial behavior
School setting ex: Fast Track program, a federally funded intervention for children at high risk for antisocial behavior, trained students in a special curriculum designed to promote understanding and communication of emotions, positive social behavior, self-control, and social problem solving
Interventions that take a positive youth development approach focus attention on youths’ strengths and assets, rather than on their weaknesses and deficits, and work to develop and nurture those strengths and assets
Service-learning programs promote positive behaviors by giving students opportunities to design and develop service projects, engage with their communities, and reflect on the benefits of their experiences, both for themselves and for the community
129
positive youth development
an approach to youth intervention that focuses on developing and nurturing strengths and assets rather than on correcting weaknesses and deficits
130
The positive youth development approach emphasizes what are known as the Five Cs
Competence (skill development in social, academic, cognitive, and vocational domains)
Confidence (self-efficacy and self-worth)
Connection (positive bonds with adults and peers in the community) Character (integrity and morality)
Caring and compassion (sympathy and empathy for others)
131
service learning
a strategy for promoting positive youth development that integrates school-based instruction with community involvement in order to promote civic responsibility and enhance learning
132
Piaget delineated two age-related moral stages.
In the first stage, heteronomous morality, young children tend to believe that rules are unchangeable and tend to weigh consequences more than intentions in evaluating the morality of actions.
In the autonomous stage, children realize that rules are social products that can be changed, and they consider motives and intentions when evaluating behavior.
Several aspects of Piaget’s theory have not held up well to scrutiny, but his theory provided the foundation for subsequent work on moral reasoning.
133
Kohlberg outlined three levels of moral judgment—
preconventional, conventional, and postconventional—each originally containing two stages (though Stage 6 was eventually dropped from Kohlberg’s scoring procedure).
Kohlberg hypothesized that his sequence of stages reflects age-related, discontinuous (qualitative) changes in moral reasoning that are universal.
According to Kohlberg, these changes stem from cognitive advances, particularly in perspective taking.
Although there is support for the idea that higher levels of moral reasoning are related to cognitive growth, it is not clear that children’s moral reasoning moves through discontinuous stages of development or develops the same way in all cultures.
134
Social domain theory argues that children’s moral judgments are
strongly influenced by their environments, particularly by parents’ socialization and by interactions with peers.
This theory builds on the recognition that human social knowledge can be divided into three domains.
The moral domain reflects universal concepts of fairness, justice, and rights.
The societal domain includes rules and conventions dictated by a particular culture, and the
personal domain pertains to individuals’ choices about themselves.
135
The conscience involves
internalized moral standards and feelings of guilt for misbehavior; it restrains an individual from engaging in unacceptable behavior.
The conscience develops slowly over time, beginning before age 2.
Children are more likely to internalize parental standards if they are securely attached and if their parents do not rely on excessive parental power in their discipline, depending on their temperament.
136
Prosocial behaviors emerge by
the second year of life and increase in frequency with age, probably due to age-related increases in children’s abilities to feel sympathy and empathy for others.
Differences among children in these abilities contribute to individual differences in children’s prosocial behavior.
137
Heredity, which contributes to differences among children in temperament, likely affects
how empathic and prosocial children are.
138
Aggressive behavior emerges as early as
the first year of life and increases in frequency during the toddler years; physical aggression starts to decline in frequency in the preschool years.
In elementary school, children tend to exhibit more nonphysical aggression (e.g., relational aggression) than at younger ages, and some children increasingly engage in antisocial behaviors such as stealing.
From preschool on, boys are more physically aggressive than girls and are more likely to engage in delinquent behavior.
Early individual differences in aggression and conduct problems predict antisocial behavior in later childhood, adolescence, and adulthood.
139
Biological factors that contribute to differences among children in temperament and neurological functioning likely affect
how aggressive children become. Social cognition also affects aggression: aggressive children tend to attribute hostile motives to others and to have hostile goals themselves.
140
Children’s aggression is promoted by a range of environmental factors, including
low parental support; chaotic families; poor monitoring; abusive, coercive, or inconsistent disciplining; and stress or conflict in the home.
In addition, involvement with antisocial peers likely contributes to antisocial behavior, although it is also likely that aggressive children seek out antisocial peers.
Aggression also varies somewhat across cultures, suggesting that cultural values, norms, and socialization practices may also contribute to individual differences in aggression and antisocial behavior.
141
Children who are diagnosed with an antisocial behavior disorder such as conduct disorder or oppositional defiant disorder display
relatively severe forms of problematic behaviors.
142
In high-risk schools, interventions designed to promote
understanding and communication of emotions, positive social behavior, self-control, and social problem solving can reduce the likelihood that children will develop behavior problems, including aggression.
