Social Development Notes PDF

Social Development 1 Attachment What is it? An active, intense, emotional relationship between 2 people that endures over time ○ Mother-child attachment ○ Adult attachment in romantic relationships Bowlby’s definition Active, intense, emotional Endures over tim...

Social Development 1 Attachment What is it? An active, intense, emotional relationship between 2 people that endures over time ○ Mother-child attachment ○ Adult attachment in romantic relationships Bowlby’s definition Active, intense, emotional Endures over time Ethological Perspective Innate Need to stay close to caregiver to survive Babies elicit care-giving responses Harry Harlow’s (1958) research Four Studies: ○ Preferred cloth mother over food mother Contact comfort ○ Sought out cloth mother when frightened ○ More comfortable exploring with cloth mother ○ Rushed to cloth mother after separation Mary Ainsworth Strange Situation Measuring Attachment Mary Ainsworth ○ Types of Attachment Secure (60-70%) Insecure/Avoidant (15-20%) Insecure/Ambivalent (10-15%) Disorganized (5-10%) ‭Antecedents of Attachment‬ ‭‬ ‭Parenting style‬ ‭○‬ ‭Secure: Child receives consistent and responsive caregiving‬ ‭○‬ ‭Avoidant: No positive reinforcement to child’s crying‬ ‭○‬ ‭Ambivalent: Inconsistent caregiving‬ ‭○‬ ‭Disorganized: Inconsistent availability‬ ‭Attachment‬ ‭‬ ‭Bowlby’s working models‬ ‭○‬ ‭Schemas‬ ‭○‬ ‭Expectations about others and self‬ ‭○‬ ‭Cognitive representation‬ ‭Social Development 2‬ ‭Attachment Research‬ ‭‬ ‭Sroufe & colleagues (1988): attachment at 12 months related to school-age behavior‬ ‭○‬ ‭Secure: higher self-esteem, more popular; warmth from teachers‬ ‭○‬ ‭Avoidant: distant, less empathy, bullies; anger & control from teachers‬ ‭○‬ ‭Ambivalent: oriented toward adults, too much empathy; laxness from teachers‬ ‭Empirical/Theoretical Issues‬ ‭‬ ‭Categories based on:‬ ‭○‬ ‭Western samples‬ ‭○‬ ‭Mother-infant dyads‬ ‭‬ ‭Attachment to mom vs. dad independent‬ ‭‬ ‭Attachment less stable when family stressed‬ ‭Parenting Styles‬ ‭‬ ‭Authoritarian‬ ‭○‬ ‭Parent: low warmth/high control‬ ‭○‬ ‭Child: poor academics, low self-esteem, peer rejection‬ ‭‬ ‭Authoritative‬ ‭○‬ ‭Parent: high warmth/high control‬ ‭○‬ ‭Child: friendly, happy, cooperative‬ ‭‬ ‭Permissive‬ ‭○‬ ‭Parent: high warmth/low control‬ ‭○‬ ‭Child: impulsive, out of control, aggressive‬ ‭‬ ‭Uninvolved‬ ‭○‬ ‭Parent: low warmth/low control‬ ‭○‬ ‭Child: sexual promiscuity, antisocial behavior, depression, substance abuse‬ ‭Parenting Styles‬ ‭Attachment and Romantic Relationships‬ ‭‬ ‭Secure (~50-55%): Relationships characterized by happiness,trust, and friendship‬ ‭‬ ‭Insecure/avoidant (~25%): Relationships characterized by fear of intimacy‬ ‭‬ ‭Insecure/ambivalent (~20%): Relationships characterized by obsession, emotional highs‬ ‭and lows, jealousy‬ ‭‬ ‭→ Preference for attachment style “match”‬ ‭Kohlberg’s Moral Reasoning Stages‬ ‭‬ ‭In Europe, a woman was near death from a special kind of cancer. A druggist in her town‬ ‭had recently discovered a drug that doctors thought might save her, but he was charging‬ ‭$2,000 for a small dose—10 times what the drug cost him to make. The sick woman’s‬ ‭husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money, trying every legal‬ ‭means to obtain it, but he could only get about $1,000, which was half of what he‬ ‭needed to buy the drug. He told the druggist that his wife was dying and asked him to‬ ‭sell it cheaper or allow him to pay the rest later. But the druggist said, “No, I discovered‬ ‭the drug, and I’m going to make money from it.” Heinz became desperate and‬ ‭considered breaking into the drugstore to steal the drug for his wife. Should Heinz steal‬ ‭the drug? Why or why not?‬ ‭The quotations in each stage description exemplify how a person at that stage might justify a‬ ‭man’s decision to steal an expensive drug that is needed to save his wife’s life.‬ ‭‬ ‭Stage 1: Obedience and punishment orientation‬ ‭○‬ ‭Reasoners in this stage focus on direct consequences to themselves. An action‬ ‭is bad if it will result in punishment, good if it will result in reward. “If he lets his‬ ‭wife die, he will get in trouble.”‬ ‭‬ ‭Stage 2: Self-interested exchanges‬ ‭○‬ ‭Reasoners here understand that different people have different self-interests,‬ ‭which sometimes come into conflict. To get what you want, you have to make a‬ ‭bargain, giving up something in return. “It won’t bother him much to serve a little‬ ‭jail term if he still has his wife when he gets out.”‬ ‭‬ ‭Stage 3: Interpersonal accord and conformity‬ ‭○‬ ‭Reasoners here try to live up to the expectations of others who are important to‬ ‭them. An action is good if it will improve a person’s relationships with significant‬ ‭others, bad if it will harm those relationships. “His family will think he’s an‬ ‭inhuman husband if he doesn’t save his wife.”‬ ‭‬ ‭Stage 4: Law-and-order morality‬ ‭○‬ ‭Reasoners here argue that to maintain social order, each person should resist‬ ‭personal pressures and feel duty-bound to follow the laws and conventions of the‬ ‭larger society. “It’s a husband’s duty to save his wife. When he married her he‬ ‭vowed to protect her.”‬ ‭‬ ‭Stage 5: Human-rights and social-welfare morality‬ ‭○‬ ‭Reasoners here balance their respect for laws with ethical principles that‬ ‭transcend specific laws. Laws that fail to promote the general welfare or that‬ ‭violate ethical principles can be changed, reinterpreted, or in some cases flouted.‬ ‭“The law isn’t really set up for these circumstances. Saving a life is more‬ ‭important than following this law.”‬ ‭ ohlberg’s Moral Reasoning Stages‬ K ‭Stage 1: Obedience and punishment‬ ‭Stage 2: Self-interested exchange‬ ‭Stage 3: Interpersonal accord and conformity‬ ‭Stage 4: Law-and-order‬ ‭Stage 5: Human-rights and social welfare‬