Children's Mixed And Same Sex Interactions example essay topic

Eleanor Maccoby is a renowned psychologist, with publications dating from 1957 to today. She specializes on the socialization of children, developmental change in personality and behavior, relationships of couples after divorce, and parent-child interactions. In this review I focus on her work examining the socialization of children, and parent-child interactions. I link her work between the socialization of children, from their interactions with their parents and with other children, to the interactions of adults.

There is a clear parallel between the sex-typed skills learned in child-interactions and those conveyed in adult interactions. Parent-Child Interactions Maccoby looks at the development of gender through interaction: "social behavior is never a function of the individual alone. It is the function of the interaction between two or more persons" (Maccoby 1990). Maccoby's earlier work dealt with parental effects on children's gender identity, focusing on the sex stereotypes that parents instill in their children through interaction. Rothbart and Maccoby (1966) studied parents' reactions to specific child behaviors, especially those regarded as sex-typed, like dependency and aggression, in hopes of understanding what accounts for sex differences in behavior. Social-learning theory addresses the finding, that girls display more dependent behaviors than boys, and boys display more aggressive behaviors than girls.

And that dependent behaviors are less rewarded for males, just as aggressive behaviors are less rewarded for females (Rothbart and Maccoby 1966). Using social-learning theory, and assuming that the family constitutes the "culture" into which a young child is exposed, Rothbart and Maccoby (1966) predicted that both parents would reinforce dependency more strongly in girls, and aggression more strongly in boys. Rothbart Maccoby (1966) tested their prediction by placing parents in a hypothetical situation with a child, asking them to record their reactions and responses to statements made by the child, such as: "Daddy (or Mommy), come look at my puzzle... Daddy, help me... Baby, you can't play with me.

You " re too little... Leave my puzzle alone or I'll hit you in the head!" (Maccoby and Rothbart 1966). The "child" in this situation was a recording of a 4 year old's voice. Parents were told either that the child was a girl, or that it was a boy. Differences in their responses were examined, scoring the permissiveness of the parent. The parents were then given a questionnaire to measure the extent to which they differentiated between the sexes by either (a) feeling boys and girls are different on selected characteristics, or (b) feeling boys and girls should differ on these characteristics (Rothbart and Maccoby 1966).

Rothbart and Maccoby (1966) hypothesized that parents showing high differentiation between boys and girls would show greater differences in reaction to the boy's voice compared with the girl's voice than would parents who differentiated little between the sexes. The results showed that high sex-role differentiation parents did display larger differences between their treatment of boys and girls than did low-differentiation parents, but their treatment was not more sex-role stereotyped because reactions did not reinforce dependency in females and aggression in boys. High sex-role differentiation parents tended to be more permissive toward the child of the opposite sex. Rothbart and Maccoby (1966) suggest that this may be a result of the parent responding to the child as a member of the opposite sex, reacting more favorably to the actions of the child who most resembles his / her marital partner, or, that the parent may be reacting less favorably to the child of the same-sex because of feelings of rivalry with this child. Mothers in the study were more likely to allow aggression toward themselves from their boys, which is concurrent with sex-role stereotypes, but they were unexpectedly more acceptant of comfort seeking in their sons than in their daughters. Fathers, on the other hand, were more acceptant of comfort seeking from their daughters, and allowed more aggression toward themselves from their daughters than their sons.

Rothbart and Maccoby (1966) concluded from this information that the sex of the parent is a better predictor of his or her differential response to boys and girls than sex-role stereotyping. After studying parents' reactions to the needs / wants of a child, Maccoby's next step was to put parents in real life situations with their own children in order to observe their interactions, and thus, Maccoby (1984), along with Jacklin and Di Pietro, continued her study of how children acquire knowledge of sex-typed behavior. The authors set up visits with 45-month old boys and girls, and observed each child as he / she interacted with one parent, and then another. The experimenters supplied the toys: a set of five hats, a set of five dolls, and a set of props. The hats and dolls were each categorized and given a value according to their masculinity, neutrality, or femininity. The observer then told the child and parent that they could play with whichever toys they wanted, however they wanted.

Behavioral observations were recorded on coding-checklists at 6-second intervals. Behaviors coded separately for parent and child included masculine, feminine, or neutral toy manipulation. Interactive scores recorded for parent and child as a pair included cooperative thematic play (masculine, feminine, or neutral) and rough-and-tumble play. At the conclusion of the observation interval, a subjective assessment was made by the coder to the degree to which the parent acted to arouse or stimulate the interest of the child.

This quality of interaction was rated on a range from "not at all arousing" (1) to "highly arousing" (5). The authors found that boys spend more intervals with masculine toys and girls with feminine toys, with both their mothers and fathers. As for the parents, fathers are more likely to play with masculine toys than are mothers. Girls initiated more feminine themes, and had more feminine themes initiated to them by their parents, while boys initiated more masculine themes, and had more masculine themes initiated to them. Mothers initiated more feminine themes to both sons and daughters than did fathers, but fathers did in fact initiate feminine play with their daughters. Boys engaged in more rough-and-tumble play than girls with either parent, and fathers were seen to engage in more rough-and-tumble play with their children than mothers did.

With these results the authors concluded that children do indeed play with culturally defined sex-appropriate toys, and that parents are more likely to manipulate and offer toys concordant with the child's sex. The authors describe parent-child play as "additive", meaning that it can be predicted by adding the sex-appropriate play of each individual (parent and child). Since the mother-son dyads engaged in relatively equal amounts of masculine and feminine play, while the father-daughter pairs played largely feminine themes, it is the father who acts as the discriminative influence on the sex-typing of the interaction. Yet, according to these results, the authors say that it is still to be determined whether the parents' pressure on the child's behavior is a better predictor of the later sex-typed behavior. Snow, Jacklin, and Maccoby (1983) followed up on the prevalence of fathers's ex-typed interactions with their children. In this study, the authors created two different measures of father-child interactions.

In the first sample, the father, with his child, was placed in a "waiting room" with a one-way mirror, where there were some tempting yet hazardous toys: a plastic vase containing colorful flowers, a plastic pitcher filled with water, a half-filled Styrofoam cup, and an ash tray with cigarette butts. There were also toys in the room, which were placed on a shelf low enough for the child to see, but too high for him / her to reach. The toys included four that were highly sex-typed, two dolls and two trucks; and a vacuum and a shovel. In the other sample, the father was placed in a room with no toys while told to complete a questionnaire. After 5 minutes, the toys were brought in and placed on the high shelf, and the father was observed with his child. Behaviors that were recorded for the father were: gives physical or verbal prohibition, father initiated holding or proximity (only for sample 2), gives toy-total, gives doll, gives truck, gives shovel, gives vacuum, and vocalizes.

The behaviors recorded for the child were: touches tempting object, child-initiated holding or proximity (for sample 2 only), plays with toy-total, plays with doll, plays with truck, plays with shovel, plays with vacuum, vocalizes, and explores room. Fathers were found to use more prohibitions with sons than daughters, although the boys attempted to touch the dangerous objects more than the girls. This is concordant with the idea that fathers tend to be more punitive with their sons than with their daughters (Baum rind and Black, 1967, Lambert, Yackney, and Hein, 1971, Siegel man, 1965, as cited by Maccoby et al. 1983) and that this may be the case because fathers believe that girls are weaker than boys, and are less able to cope with the punishment (Maccoby and Jacklin 1974, as cited by Maccoby et al. 1983), and that fathers believe that boys "need" it more (Maccoby 1974, as cited by Maccoby et al. 1983).

Fathers and daughter tended to hold one another and stay within close proximity more often than fathers and boys, though fathers initiated most of the holding and proximity with both their sons and daughters. These results are similar to Maccoby's 1966 study, in that fathers tend to encourage dependent behaviors in their daughters. The findings here indicate that the sex differences found at preschool ages, as discovered in Maccoby (1984), in fact begin at an even earlier age. This study also finds, in agreement with the previous two, that fathers limit the sex-appropriate play of their sons much more than for their daughters: fathers gave trucks to their daughters and sons equally, but withheld dolls from their sons. These results indicate that there is sex-typed interaction between fathers and their children at this early stage. But the authors emphasize that the interaction is reciprocal in its sex-typed qualities, it is not only the father who exhibits sex-typed behavior; at 12 months old, the boys and girls already differ in terms of the sex-typed behavior they exhibit in front of their father.

In her studies of parent-child interactions, Maccoby consistently found that parents were not wholly responsible for the sex-typed behavior prevalent in young children, although parents, especially father, do, to some extent, encourage sex-stereotyped play. Maccoby thus sought a different approach to the birth of gender identification among adolescents: child interactions. Numerous studies show children segregate themselves into same-sex play groups (Abel and Sahiskaya 1962; McCandless and Hoyt 1961; Parte n 1933; Strayer 1977, Serb in, Ton nick, and Sternglanz 1975, as cited by Maccoby and Jacklin 1978). Maccoby applied her work with parent-child interactions to her new research, where she began to focus on gender socialization in children's same-sex dyads. Sex-Segregated Interaction among Children In searching for when and how children develop their notions of gender identity, Maccoby began looking at child-interactions. In the 1973 Stanford Longitudinal Study, for example, Maccoby and Jacklin (1987) sought to make a connection between children's play preferences and parents' previous sex-typing.

Maccoby (1987) questioned whether children chose their games, and thus their subsequent play groups, because of the toys they were used to playing with at home. This study includes three cohorts of children, born respectively in 1973, 1974, and 1975. Each group was assessed on several occasions from birth to age 6. I specifically discuss observations made at four and a half and six and a half years old. Observers went to the schools of these children and recorded their indoor and outdoor activities, indicating whether the child was playing in a mixed or same-sex group, the child's activity level, and coded certain content categories when the target child engaged in social behavior directed toward another child (e.g. social approach, demand, suggest, positive affective contact, playful attack, non playful attack, wrestle). For the four and a half year olds, both sexes preferred play in same-sex groups, but when looking at the amount of sex-typed play each child chose, the frequency was quite low for both sexes (Maccoby and Jacklin 1987).

A majority of the children chose to play in the sandbox, on jungle gyms and swings, etc. It was found that the frequency of play with sex-stereotypical toys and activities was not related to a child's preference for same-sex playmates (Maccoby and Jacklin 1987). Apparently, play in all-girl or all-boy groups need not be sex-typed in content Thus it seems that same-sex grouping occurs over and above any effect of mutual interest in sex-typed toys or activities (Maccoby and Jacklin 1987). In the six and a half year olds, degree of sex segregation occurred was much greater than for the four and a half year olds, illustrating that play in same-sex groups is strengthened in free-play situations once the children enter grade school (Maccoby and Jacklin 1987). When the children were six and a half the authors did not find a sex difference in activity level, though there was a significant one in nursery school (boys are more active than girls at six and a half), indicating that the activity level was not a variable that distinguished the play of the two sexes (Maccoby and Jacklin 1987). The children were often observed within one or two weeks of the initial observation to code for stability.

In each visit there were a few children who were playing in mixed-sex groups, upon the second visit, the ratio of children playing in same-sex to mixed -sex groups were the very similar, but the specific children engaging in the play were different (Maccoby and Jacklin 1987). The implication is that gender segregation at this age is more a group phenomenon than something that reflects the dispositions of certain sex-typed children more than other children (Maccoby and Jacklin 1987). Therefore the fact that children overwhelmingly choose to play in sex-segregated groups is not a variable that is particularly useful for describing individual differences in sex. The children in Cohort Three were the 45 month old children described above in, Maccoby's 1984 article. The parents of the study were interviewed at home, with questions about the gender of their child's preferred playmates, their children's interest in certain sex-stereotyped toys, what television programs they watched, and what fantasy role-playing they enjoyed.

The parents of girls were asked if their daughters were interested in jewelry, dresses, hair, and clothes. It was found that the children's degree of sex-typing, as assessed by either the toy-preference test or the sex-typing of play activities with the parents, was unrelated to subsequent playmate choice for either sex (Maccoby and Jacklin 1987). There was no evidence that children who were more strongly sex-typed at 45 months were the ones who most strongly preferred same-sex playmates the following year in nursery school (Maccoby and Jacklin 1987). The authors found no "shaping" effect of parental pressure, that is, children choose their playmates irregardless of the sex-typing influences of their parents. This conclusion is in agreement with Maccoby's earlier findings from studies of parent-child interactions.

It is empirically clear that children prefer to play in same-sex groups, but why that is so is still unclear. The above experiment rules out the notion that parental pressure affects sex-stereotypical behavior and play choices. In Maccoby and Jacklin (1978) confront the issue of cross-sex dominance and control as a source of children's sex-segregation. The authors took 33 month old, unacquainted children, and placed then into same-sex and mixed-sex groups.

Each 10-second display of the interaction was coded as: "aggress-assert" (attempting to take a toy), "passive (holding toy without playing with it), "social withdrawal" (going to mother), "positive social behavior" (touching other child's toy without attempting to take it), "total social behavior" (imitating other child, taking other child's toy, and "joint positive" (interactive play). Maccoby and Jacklin (1978) found that social behavior was reduced when playing with a child of the opposite sex, particularly for girls. Though girls playing with girls show a high rate of social behavior, and boys playing with boys have nearly as high a rate. Thus, children tend to interact much the same way with others of the same sex, regardless of sex, but interact much differently when paired with a child of the opposite sex (Maccoby and Jacklin 1978).

Children of both sexes are more likely to cry or remain close to their mothers when paired with a boy. The effect of being paired with a boy is much stronger for a girl; they tend to be more passive, yet when paired with other girls, they show less passivity than any other pairing (Maccoby and Jacklin 1978). Boys almost never reacted to girls' prohibitions, but did so to other boys' (Maccoby and Jacklin 1978). From this information Maccoby and Jacklin (1978) argue that a child's behavior is a function of the sex of the child's partner, regardless of the child's own sex. They question why, in general, it is that same-sex pairs exhibit more social behavior than mixed-sex pairs do. The authors affirm that there must be some sort of sex recognition (one's own and another's) in children even younger than 33 months, or that children at this age are taught what is expected in their behavior according to their sex.

In looking at the question of why girls are more passive when with a boy, the authors conclude that it is her inability to control the situation, to influence the partner, and then they withdraw from the situation altogether. Maccoby and Jacklin (1978) argue that physiology and cognition play important roles in children's sex-segregation. The physical differences in primary sex characteristics are definitive separators of the different sexes, while being universal within each sex (Maccoby and Jacklin 1978). The authors argue that certain social arrangements, which sharply divide the sexes, result directly from the primary sex characteristics (e.g. separate boys' and girls' bathrooms at school), but more important, as the result of gender labeling.

All girls know they are girls and know which other children are girls; boys similarly know their own and others's ex identity (Maccoby and Jacklin 1978). From this knowledge alone emerges a set of group processes which bind the members of one sex and differentiates them from another (Maccoby and Jacklin 1978). From the information collected on child interactions, whether with their parents, or each other, Maccoby and Jacklin (1978) conclude that gender segregation results from the combination of dominance relations between the sexes and gender labeling. Maccoby (1990) argues that the segregated and cross-sex experiences of children have implications for how the two sexes will cope with mixed-sex situations they encounter as adults.

Adult Interactions Maccoby (1990) asks what happens to the interactive styles children develop in their largely segregated childhood groups as they move into adolescence and adulthood. She first notes that despite the powerful attraction to members of the opposite sex in adolescence, gender segregation by no means disappears. Young people, she states, continue to spend a good portion of their social time with same-sex partners. In adulthood, there is extensive gender segregation in workplaces and in some societies and some social-class or ethnic groups, leisure time also is largely spent with same-sex others even after marriage.

Maccoby (1990) argues that segregated playgroups are where children learn their interaction skills with same-sex partners, and that the characteristics acquired at this age affect the relationships of adolescents and adults. Males and females do interact differently, boys play in somewhat larger group and their play is rougher, whereas girls tend to form close, intimate friendships with one or two other girls, and these friendships are marked by the sharing of confidences (Maccoby 1990). The patterns that arise in children playgroups can be attributed and applied when looking at adult interactions (Maccoby 1990). In finding a way to distinguish how interaction differs based on sex, Maccoby (1990) uses Fable and Peplau's (1980) definitions of "restrictive and enabling styles"A restrictive style is one that tends to derail the interaction-to inhibit the partner or cause the partner to withdraw, thus shortening the interaction or bringing to an end" (as cited by Maccoby 1990).

Maccoby says men exhibit this "restrictive style", just as the boys in the playgroups did. "Enabling or facilitative styles are those, such as acknowledging another's comment or expressing agreement, that support whatever the partner is doing and tend to keep the interaction" (as cited by Maccoby 1990). This definition is similar to the behavior shown by the girls in the playgroups, and Maccoby (1990) says is descriptive of women. Carli (1989, as cited by Maccoby 1990) found that in discussions between pairs of adults, individuals are more easily influenced by a partner if that partner has just expressed agreement with them. In this work, women were quite successful in influencing one another in same-sex dyads, whereas pairs of men were less so. The sex difference was fully accounted for by the fact that men's male partners did not express themselves as often.

Early (1987, as cited by Maccoby 1990) summarized data from a large number of studies on women's and men's susceptibility to influence and found women to be somewhat more susceptible. Carli (1989, as cited by Maccoby 1990) suggests that this tendency may not be a general female personality trait of "suggestibility" but may reflect the fact that women more often interact with other women who tend to express reciprocal agreement. When adults from both sexes interact, women do not receive the reciprocity they do with other women, and men find themselves with a partner who isn't trying to display her dominance. Maccoby (1990) applies these characteristics to the task groups that West and Zimmerman (1985) spoke of, and her research agrees with their findings of male domination within these groups. Conclusion Maccoby (2002) argues that since the same patterns that exist in children's mixed and same-sex interactions are prevalent in adult interactions, it is not sufficient to only look at the interaction styles of adults, but that researchers must start with examining those of young children. This review traces those steeps that Maccoby has taken in her research.

She began her research with parent-child interactions, studying the affect parents have on the sex-typing behavior of their children, in hopes of establishing where children learn about gender identity. Maccoby then took that information and combined it with research on children's interactions in play groups, which led her to believe that parental sex-typing is inconsequential in children's decisions to play in sex-segregated groups. Maccoby (1987) argues that it is the combination of dominance and control with gender labeling that drives children to interact in same-sex groups. Maccoby then ascertains the importance of the interaction skills learned in these same-sex-segregated groups in affecting adult behavior, and illustrates the many parallels that exist between the interactions of the two different age groups.