8.1 The Nature of the Child

As explained in the previous chapter, steady growth, brain maturation, and intellectual advances make middle childhood a time when children gain independence and autonomy (see At About This Time). They acquire an increasing ability to regulate themselves, to take responsibility, and to exercise self-control—all strengths that make this a period of positive growth (Huston & Ripke, 2006).

One result is that school-age children can care for themselves. They not only feed themselves, but also make their snacks; they not only dress themselves, but also pack their suitcases; and they not only walk to school, but also organize games with friends. They venture outdoors alone. Boys are especially likely to put some distance between themselves and their home, engaging in activities without their parents’ awareness or approval (Munroe & Romney, 2006). This budding independence fosters growth.

Industry and Inferiority

Although adults have always taught 6- to 11-year-olds the skills they will need later on, it was not until developmentalists focused on the characteristics of these children that it became clear why they are such great learners. More than people of any other age, school-age children are industrious, practising whatever skills their culture values, or busy with their own activities. At the same time, they are much more vulnerable to criticism than are younger children.

Erikson’s InsightsThe tension between productivity and incompetence is the fourth psychosocial crisis, industry versus inferiority, as described by Erik Erikson. He noted that during these years, the child “must forget past hopes and wishes, while his exuberant imagination is tamed and harnessed to the laws of impersonal things,” and he becomes “ready to apply himself to given skills and tasks” (Erikson, 1963).

Learning to read and add numbers can be a painstaking and boring process. For instance, slowly sounding out “Jane has a dog” or writing “3 + 4 = 7” for the hundredth time is not exciting. Yet children are intrinsically motivated to read a page, finish a worksheet, memorize a spelling word, colour a map, and so on. Similarly, they enjoy collecting, categorizing, and counting whatever they accumulate—perhaps stamps, stickers, stones, or seashells. That is industry. Children are able to do more complex tasks and look for ways to master new skills.

The Need to Celebrate No matter where they live, 6- to 11-year-olds seek to understand and develop whatever skills are valued by their culture. They do so in active, industrious ways, as described in every theory. This is illustrated here, as friends in Assam, northeastern India, usher in spring with a Bihu celebration. Soon they will be given sweets and tea, which is the sociocultural validation of their energy, independence, and skill.

THIERRY FALISE/LIGHTROCKET VIA GETTY IMAGES

Overall, children judge themselves as either industrious or inferior—deciding whether they are competent or incompetent, productive or useless, winners or losers. Being productive is intrinsically joyous, and it fosters the self-control that is a crucial defense against emotional problems (Bradley & Corwyn, 2005).

Parents who are supportive of their children’s attempts and initiatives help them master skills and develop a sense of confidence in themselves. In contrast, parents who provide little or no encouragement to their children run the risk of instilling feelings of inferiority and helplessness in them.

A sense of industry may be a defence against early substance use as well. In a longitudinal study in Arizona of 509 Grade 3 and 4 students over a five-month period, an increasing number tried, or were expecting to try, alcohol (from 58 to 72 percent) and cigarettes (from 18 to 23 percent) (Jones, 2011). These children were aged 9 and 10, yet many already wanted the drugs that adolescents use. But here is the crucial finding: The children most likely to anticipate smoking or drinking were those who increasingly felt inferior, not industrious (Jones, 2011). For example, they did not agree that they “stick with things until they are finished” and they were not proud of what they did.

Freud on LatencySigmund Freud described this period as latency, a time when emotional drives are quiet and unconscious sexual conflicts are submerged. Some experts complain that “middle childhood has been neglected at least since Freud relegated these years to the status of an uninteresting ‘latency period’” (Huston & Ripke, 2006).

But in one sense, at least, Freud was correct: Sexual impulses are quiet. Even when children were betrothed before age 12 (rare today, but not uncommon in earlier centuries), the couple had little interaction. Everywhere, boys and girls in middle childhood choose to be with others of their own sex. Indeed, boys who scrawl “Girls stay out!” on their clubhouses and girls who complain that “boys stink” are typical.

Self-Concept

As children mature, they develop their self-concept, which is how they perceive themselves, including intelligence, personality, abilities, gender, and ethnic background. As you remember, the very notion that they are individuals is a discovery in toddler-hood, and a positive, global self-concept is typical in early childhood.

That global self-acceptance changes in middle childhood. Self-concept gradually becomes more specific and logical, as one might expect, given increases in cognitive development and social awareness. Children begin to view themselves as being in specific domains (e.g., as students, as athletes). As one group of researchers explains, “The cognitive ability to combine specific behavioral features of the self (I can run fast and throw far) into higher order generalizations…(I am athletic) appears in middle childhood …” (Pfeifer et al., 2010).

As self-concept becomes more specific and logical, it also incorporates influences from peers and the overall society. For example, some 6-year-olds from minority ethnic groups are unaware of prejudice against their group; by age 11, they are aware, usually taking pride in their self-concept as a member of an ethnic minority in defence against specific insults they have heard (Garcia Coll & Marks, 2009).

Compared With OthersThe schoolchild’s self-concept no longer mirrors the parents’ perspective. Every theory and every observer notes that children become more concerned with the opinions of their peers as they age from 6 to 11.

During preadolescence, “the peer group exerts an increasingly salient socializing function” (Thomaes et al., 2010). Research in many nations has found that teaching anxious children to confide in friends as well as to understand their own emotions helps them develop a better self-concept (Siu, 2007). Afterschool activities, particularly sports, can provide a foundation for friendship and realistic self-esteem, helping children develop a self-concept as industrious, not inferior. However, the influence of peers does not mean that parents are irrelevant. For example, parental attachment still mitigates low self-esteem at age 10 and 12 (Kerns et al., 2011).

Parents, peers, older children, and even strangers become potential critics. Children depend on social comparison, comparing themselves with other people, as they develop their self-concept (Carpendale & Lewis, 2004; Davis-Kean et al., 2009). Ideally, children develop feelings of self-esteem, competence, and individuality during middle childhood as they begin comparing themselves with peers (Ripke et al., 2006). Yet some children—especially those from minority ethnic or religious groups—become newly aware of prejudices they need to overcome (Kiang & Harter, 2008; McKown & Strambler, 2009). Children also become aware of gender discrimination as they compare themselves with peers of the other sex. For example, girls complain that they are not allowed to play tougher sports and boys complain that teachers favour the girls (Brown et al., 2011).

For all children, increasing self-understanding and social awareness come at a price. Self-criticism and self-consciousness rise from ages 6 to 11. By middle childhood the earlier overestimate of their ability decreases while self-esteem falls (Davis-Kean et al., 2009). In addition, partly because children think concretely during middle childhood, materialism increases and appearances matter. Attributes that adults might find superficial become important to children, which makes self-esteem more fragile and more dependent on externals (Chaplin & John, 2007). For example, insecure 10-year-olds might covet the latest shoes, cellphones, and so on. They also might criticize the way their parents dress, or talk, or style their hair.

Same Situation, Far Apart: Helping at Home While household chores may differ in different countries, children everywhere often help out at home, as these children from North America and China do.

ARIEL SKELEY/CORBIS
TAO IMAGES LIMITED/GETTY IMAGES

Culture and Self-EsteemHigh self-esteem is neither universally valued nor universally criticized. Although many North American parents praise their children and want them to be proud of themselves, this is a cultural view, not a universal one (Yamaguchi et al., 2007). Many other cultures expect children to be modest, not prideful. For example, Australians say that “tall poppies” are cut down, and the Japanese discourage social comparison aimed at making oneself feel superior. Interestingly, research finds that very high self-esteem in middle childhood can undercut effort and empathy and thus work against healthy development (Reijntjes et al., 2011; Menon et al., 2007).

Culture seems to be more relevant than objective accomplishment in developing self esteem. For example, Japanese children excel at math on the TIMSS, but only 17 percent are confident of their math ability (Snyder & Dillow, 2010). In Ontario, 33 percent of those taking the TIMSS are confident of their math ability, and those who enjoy math and are confident in their abilities have higher levels of achievement (Mullis et al., 2012a). In contrast, in Estonia low self-esteem correlates with high academic achievement (Pullmann & Allik, 2008).

Resilience and Stress

Young children depend on their families for many things, including food, emotional support, learning, and life itself. Then “experiences in middle childhood can sustain, magnify, or reverse the advantages or disadvantages that children acquire in the preschool years” (Huston & Ripke, 2006).

Supportive families continue to be protective, but children may escape destructive family influences by finding their own niche in the larger world. Some children break free, seemingly unscathed by early experiences. They have been called “resilient” or even “invincible.” Resilience has been defined as “a dynamic process encompassing positive adaptation within the context of significant adversity” (Luthar et al., 2000). Note the three parts of this definition:

1. Resilience is dynamic, not stable: It may be evident at one age but not a later one.
2. Resilience is a positive adaptation to stress. For example, if home problems lead a child to greater involvement with schoolwork and school friends, that is positive adaptation.
3. Adversity must be significant. Some adversities are comparatively minor (large class size, poor vision) and some are major (victimization, neglect). Children cope with all kinds of adversities, but not all coping is resilient.

Over the past six decades, researchers across the globe have been exploring resilience in children who have faced adversity. In Canada, Michael Ungar and Linda Liebenberg are directors of the Resilience Research Centre at Dalhousie University in Nova Scotia, where they have been examining children’s responses to different types of stress in various cultures and countries.

In a 2008 review of the resilience literature, Ungar (2008) found that the term had different meanings depending on its context. Specifically, resilience

• describes a group of characteristics that allow certain children to grow up successfully despite being born into difficult circumstances
• refers to a child’s ability to demonstrate competence under stress
• is the ability to recover from traumatic experiences.

In studying 1500 children around the world, Ungar concluded that culture and context are important factors in determining a child’s ability to deal with stress. As an example, he quotes Mani, a young Innu woman from Sheshatshkiu in Newfoundland and Labrador, who made the following comments in response to her cousin’s suicide:

Note that Mani received support from her community and family, which was crucial to her resilient response to this crisis. Note too that even with such support and her determination to cope, Mani realizes that “the scars will live on.”

Indeed, current thinking about resilience (see TABLE 8.1), with insights from dynamic-systems theory, suggests that, although some children cope better than others, none are unaffected by their past (Jenson & Fraser, 2006; Luthar et al., 2003). Sensitivity is affected by genes, early child-rearing, preschool education, and sociocultural values. Thus, a child’s traits alone are not enough to ensure resilience; instead, protective factors (such as parents, teachers, extended family, and the community) that are embedded in the child’s environment and culture are also important.

Cumulative StressOne important discovery is that accumulated stresses over time, including minor ones (called “daily hassles”), are more devastating than an isolated major stress. Almost every child can withstand a single stressful, momentary event, but repeated stresses make resilience difficult (Jaffee et al., 2007).

Another example comes from children who survived Hurricane Katrina, in Louisiana. Years after the hurricane, about half were resilient but the other half (especially those in middle childhood) were still traumatized. The incidence of serious psychological problems was affected more by ongoing problems—frequent moves, changes in caregivers, disruption of schooling—than by the hurricane itself (Kronenberg et al., 2010; Viadero, 2007).

An international example of resilience comes from Sri Lanka, where many children have been exposed to war, the 2004 tsunami, poverty, deaths of relatives, and relocation. The accumulated stresses, more than any single problem, increased pathology and decreased achievement. Researchers point to “the importance of multiple contextual, past, and current factors in influencing children’s adaptation” (Catani et al., 2010).

Cognitive CopingCoping measures reduce the impact of repeated stress. One factor is the child’s own interpretation of events. For example, cortisol levels increased in low-income children if they interpreted events connected to their family’s poverty as a personal threat and if the family lacked order and routines (thus increasing daily hassles) (Chen et al., 2010). When low-income children did not take things personally and their family was not chaotic, more were resilient. As you remember from Chapter 7, low income in childhood was less likely to harm later health if the child’s mother was affectionate and supportive (Miller et al., 2011). This applies to psychosocial health as well as physical health. The effects last a lifetime. Many adults who did not consider themselves poor as children nonetheless were poor, as measured by their family’s annual income. Because they did not know they were poor, they were not burdened by their poverty.

In general, a child’s interpretation of a family situation (poverty, divorce, and so on) determines how that context affects him or her (Olson & Dweck, 2008). Some children consider the family they were born into a temporary hardship; they look forward to the day when they can leave childhood behind. Other children experience parentification: They act as parents, taking on the roles and responsibilities that are traditionally associated with adults (Hooper, 2007). When this happens, it can interfere with or halt a child’s own development.

Researchers have noted two distinct types of parentification:

1. emotional, in which children try to respond to the emotional demands of their parents and siblings, for example, by being the peacemaker in the family
2. practical, in which children do all the household’s daily chores, such as cooking meals, cleaning up, and paying bills.

Emotional parentification almost always has a destructive effect on children’s development. Spending long periods as their parent’s confidante can mean children suppress their own emotional needs, and this can cripple their ability to develop adult relationships (Earley & Cushway, 2002; Jurkovic et al., 2001).

Practical parentification has milder effects on a child’s development. As mentioned in Chapter 1 in the discussion on family systems theory, the actions of one family member always affect the other members. If a child takes on more household responsibilities, this may reduce the parents’ anxieties. Consequently, the child may feel a sense of accomplishment as the parents’ stress levels decrease (Jurkovic & Casey, 2000; Minuchin et al., 1967).

Escaping Family StressesA 40-year study in Hawaii began with children born into poverty, often to parents who were alcoholic or mentally ill. Many of these children showed signs of deprivation when they were infants (low weight, medical problems, and so on). Experts predicted a troubled future for them. But that did not necessarily happen.

One such infant was Michael, born preterm, weighing just over 2 kilograms. His parents were low-income teenagers; his father was absent for the first two years of his life, returning to impregnate Michael’s mother again and again and again. When Michael was 8, both parents left him and three younger siblings with his grandparents. Yet Michael ultimately became a successful, happy, loving adult (E.Werner, 1979).

Michael was not the only resilient one. Amazingly, about one-third of the high-risk Hawaiian babies coped well. By middle childhood, they had discovered ways to avoid family stresses, to achieve in school, to make good friends, and to find adult mentors. As adults, they left family problems behind (many moved far away) and established their own healthy relationships (E. Werner & Smith, 1992, 2001).

As was true for many of these children, school and then college can be an escape. An easygoing temperament and a high IQ help children cope with adversity, but they are not essential. For the Hawaiian children, “a realistic goal orientation, persistence, and ‘learned creativity’ enabled…a remarkable degree of personal, social, and occupational success,” even for those with learning disabilities (E. Werner & Smith, 2001).

Learning as Lifeline Originally from Libya—where bombs, guns, and death were common—this boy’s family escaped to a refugee camp in Tunisia. The adults suffer from crowding and deprivation, but some children are resilient—especially with the help of a caring teacher and regular schooling.

REUTERS/ANIS MILI

Social Support and Religious FaithSocial support is a major factor that strengthens the ability to deal with stress, especially for minority children who are aware of prejudice against them (Gillen-O’Neel et al., 2011). Compared with the homebound lives of younger children, the expanding social world of middle childhood allows new possibilities. Relatives, teachers, peers, pets, community programs, libraries, and concerts all help children cope with stress (Bryant & Donnellan, 2007). One study concludes:

A specific example is seen in a study of refugee children in Alberta. Fantino and Colak (2001) recount the story of 11-year-old Sanela, who lost her father in the Yugoslav wars of the 1990s. She later immigrated to Canada with her mother and two younger siblings. Since her mother was seriously ill and used a wheelchair, Sanela was responsible for taking care of her brother and sister. At the same time, she had to learn a new language and adapt to life in Canada.

In the beginning, Sanela had nightmares so vivid they kept her terrified for days at a time. She refused to talk about the war, her father, or her homeland. It was only after receiving extensive settlement support and counselling and being connected to a Canadian “host friendship” family that Sanela began to show a sense of relief and some signs of optimism about her future.

Aside from social support services, children may also make use of religion to bolster their resilience. Religion often provides support via adults from the same faith group (P. E. King & Furrow, 2004). Church involvement particularly helps African-American children in communities characterized by social stress and racial prejudice (Akiba & Garcia Coll, 2004). The help occurs in three ways: practical (a church or temple becomes a second home, with many activities); social (children use slightly older believers as role models); and cognitive (concepts of sin, grace, and salvation help children make sense of what they see) (Mattis & Mattis, 2011). Faith is psychologically protective when it helps children reinterpret their experiences (Crawford et al., 2006).

Same Situation, Far Apart: Praying Hands Differences are obvious between the Northern Indian girls entering their Hindu school and the West African boy in a Christian church, even in their clothes and hand positions. But underlying similarities are more important. In every culture, many 8-year-olds take comfort from prayer.

JONKMANNS/LAIF/REDUX
NAFTALI HILGER/LAIF/REDUX

Prayer may also foster resilience. In one study, adults were required to pray for a specific person for several weeks. Their attitude about that person changed (Lambert et al., 2010). Ethics precludes such an experiment with children, but it is known that children often pray, expecting that prayer will make them feel better, especially when they are sad or angry (Bamford & Lagattuta, 2010). As you now know, expectations and interpretations can be powerful.