Socialization and Developmental Change

Author(s): E. E. Maccoby
Source: Child Development , Apr., 1984, Vol. 55, No. 2 (Apr., 1984), pp. 317-328
Published by: Wiley on behalf of the Society for Research in Child Development

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1129945

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Society for Research in Child Development and Wiley are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,
preserve and extend access to Child Development

This content downloaded from

158.195.4.7 on Fri, 02 Dec 2022 10:35:40 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Presidential Address

Socialization and Developmental Change

E. E. Maccoby
Stanford University

MACCOBY, E. E. Socialization and Developmental Change. CHILD DEVELOPMENT, 1984, 55,

317-328. This paper considers the divergent paths that have been taken by research in cognitive
development and research in social-emotional development, and notes that cognitive studies
have dealt primarily with normative developmental change, while studies of social behavior in
childhood have focused on individual differences and the socialization factors that bring them
about. It is argued that studies of socialization need to become more developmental. 2 meanings
of development are distinguished: sequentially dependent steps that may or may not be taken by
individual children, and developmental changes that occur in predictable order in nearly all
children. The way in which both these kinds of changes may affect the socialization process is
discussed. The question is raised as to whether, and how, developmental change and individual
differences can be brought into the same conceptual framework; the possibility of distinctive
self-stabilizing developmental trajectories is discussed in relation to the degree and kind of
parental socialization pressure and reciprocation that is likely to be effective at different points
along these trajectories.

In developmental psychology, we havegiven age and turned instead to the analysis

been following two rather divergent paths. of changes in intellectual competencies that
Work on cognitive development and work onall children could be expected to undergo as
social-emotional development have con- they progressed from one age to another.
tinued to be mostly separate enterprises, and
The research on social-emotional and
it has been surprisingly difficult to integrate
personality development has undertaken a
them. Students of cognitive development
have been mainly concerned with age-very different agenda. There has been very
linked changes that occur in most children. little emphasis on charting the normative
They have asked, What develops in cogni-
developmental changes that occur in se-
tive development? and, What brings the age
lected aspects of interpersonal behavior.
The study of variation within and between
changes about? A good portion of the work
has been descriptive. That is, researchersindividuals of a given age has been the heart
and soul of the field. While students of both
have been at pains to discover what children
cognitive and social development have been
of different ages can do-what thought pro-
cesses they can command. Part of the effortconcerned with process, research in cogni-
tive development has looked for the proces-
has been to uncover competencies in young
children that have been masked by situa-ses that are involved in children's progress-
tional and task factors, and it has been ing up the age ladders to new levels of com-
petency, while students of social-emotional
widely found that under optimal circum-
stances, young children are smarter than wefunctioning in children have been interested
primarily in the processes that determine
thought. In general, students of cognitive
whether a child of a given age will behave in
development have been only marginally
concerned with individual differences. In- one way rather than another.
telligence was for a time their major individ- Students of socialization are concerned
ual difference variable, but under Piaget'swith how children acquire the motives,
influence, the study of intelligence lost itsvalues, knowledge, and behavior patterns
emphasis on differences among children of athat are needed to function adequately in the

Presidential address, Society for Research in Child Development meeting, Detroit, April
1983. During the preparation of this paper, the author served as Fellow in the Center for Studies
in Youth Development, Stanford University. Requests for reprints should be sent to E. E. Mac-
coby, Department of Psychology, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305.

[Child Development, 1984, 55, 317-328. ? 1984 by the Society for Research in Child Development, Inc.
All rights reserved. 0009-3920/84/5502-0001$01.00]

This content downloaded from

158.195.4.7 on Fri, 02 Dec 2022 10:35:40 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
318 Child Development
ways we have conceptualized the socializa-
society in which they will live as adults. The
process of socializing the growing childtion process, and will argue that neither the
takes place through a number of avenues, in-traditional unidirectional models, nor the
more recent interactive ones, are develop-
cluding schools, television, and contact with
playmates; but the family has been consid- mental in the strong sense of that word. (For
more detail on the studies and theories
ered the primary arena for socialization, par-
ticularly with young children, and it is mentioned
on below, the reader is referred to
family socialization that I want to focus Maccoby
in & Martin, 1983.)
this paper.
Traditionally, we have either selected a
child outcome variable for study, and then
Research on familial socialization has
looked for variations among parents inlooked
the for the different patterns of parental
behavior that are associated with the differ-
techniques of discipline they use, their
ences among children on this variable, or we
selection of behaviors to reinforce or punish,
their teaching styles, their affectivehavere- selected some specific dimension of
sponses, and occasionally the content of parental
the variation and then examined a
values they are trying to transmit. Theserange of possible child behavior outcomes.
Initially, some of the parental variables we
have been seen as the major factors whereby
children become differentiated from one thought ought to be important to study were
those emerging from animal learning labo-
another in personality, interests, social mo-
ratories, for example, the contingency and
tives, and social skills. In some instances,
variations in parental behaviors are pro- timing of reinforcements and punishments.
duced experimentally, through interven- The Baldwin group, drawing on Lewinian
tions that constrain or change the way an theory,
ex- contributed an emphasis on demo-
perimental group of parents behave. Some- cratic versus autocratic parenting. From
times experimental analogues of parenting psychoanalytic theory came a concern with
have been created in the laboratory, with the
re- process of identification. A central theme
of socialization work based on psychoanaly-
searcher or teachers, or even puppets, func-
tioning as surrogates who display a varietytic
oftheory was that certain parental behaviors
parent-like behaviors. Most commonly, led children to identify with their parents,
however, researchers have simply measured and that identification then brought about
children's acceptance of parental values,
preexisting variations among parents and
related them to individual differences in feelings of guilt over transgressions, and the
children's characteristics. adoption of sex roles. The research utilizing
this theory, done mainly in the 1950s and
The distinction between experimentalearly 1960s, therefore looked for aspects of
and correlational approaches to the study of parenting that ought to foster or impede the
socialization is an important one, and thereprocess of identification (Sears, Rau, &
is continuing debate about the strengths andAlpert, 1965). In subsequent years, the con-
weaknesses of the two approaches. For the cept of identification began to be treated as
moment, however, I am going to put them though it were synonymous with imitation,
both into the same bin. I do this because for and a powerful set of experiments were
the most part, students of individual differ-undertaken, many by Bandura and his stu-
ences regard the personality characteristics dents, on the characteristics of models that
of individuals as the cumulative outcome of made them especially imitable (see Ban-
the very kind of experiential variations that dura, Ross, & Ross, 1963). Although these
the experimentalists are trying to manipu-experiments did not involve parents, they
late. The two groups have been primarily were intended as analogues for socialization
concerned with the same kind of process processes occurring within the home.
variables and the same kinds of outcomes,
either momentary or enduring. My objective In the 1960s and 1970s, the work of
is to consider the way we have thought about Ainsworth, Bell, and Stayton (1971), Baum-
socialization within the family and to ask in rind (1973), Coopersmith (1967), Hoffman
what way age-linked developmental changeand Saltzstein (1967), and many others fo-
cused attention on new variables and new
may be implicated in socialization. In so
doing, I will attempt not to lose the focus onpatterns of variables. Concepts of parental
individual differences. I want to see whether control and regulation became more differ-
both points of view can be put into the same entiated, and firm rule enforcement was
framework. differentiated from capricious restrictive-
ness or authoritarian practices. Child-rearing
I will begin by describing some of thetechniques that had previously been lumped

This content downloaded from

158.195.4.7 on Fri, 02 Dec 2022 10:35:40 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 E. E. Maccoby 319
together under the heading "psychological
taken more seriously, but the properties of
discipline" were now understood to be quite
the family as a social system are beginning to
be examined (Lewis, Feiring, & Weintraub,
distinct in their nature and effects, so that
"withdrawal of love" and "reasoning" were 1981; Parke, Power, & Gottman, 1979). We
distinguished from each other, and it are be-beginning to see that each parent be-
came evident that the content of paren- haves somewhat differently toward children
tal reasoning, not just its frequency, was in the presence of the other parent than
important. "Other-oriented induction" when alone with the children. We can also
emerged as a salient aspect of parental inputsee that the quality of the relationship be-
to children. Parental warmth, too, began to tween the parents affects how each deals
be redefined in terms of a number of aspectswith the children. Specifically, spousal
such as responsiveness or sensitivity, af- teams differ in terms of how much support
fective expressiveness, involvement, etc.each gives to the partner's child rearing. We
Perhaps the most important theme emerging so far have relatively little information on
from the socialization studies of the last 20 sibling interactions and their role in family
years is that parental characteristics do not functioning, but the relevance of siblings to
act in isolation. Parental warm responsive- the socialization process is now widely ac-
ness has a different effect when it is com- knowledged, and we may hope for progress
bined with high maturity demands and firm in our thinking about this area in the near
enforcement of rules than when it is com- future.
bined with low levels of socialization pres-
Now, it is time to ask ourselves whether
sure upon the child.
any of these traditional or recent points of
In recent years, there has been a grow- view are developmental in nature. Of
ing awareness that our earlier views of course, our answer will depend on how we
socialization were too unidirectional. We like to use the word "developmental." But
have plentiful evidence now that children regardless of our definition, it seems to me
influence parents as well as vice versa. Thethat developmental themes have been re-
interactional viewpoint is not new: in his markably absent from the socialization liter-
1951 APA presidential address, Robert Sears ature. Kohlberg (1969) tried to remedy this
called for the study of dyadic processesdeficiency
in in his remarkable chapter in the
which more attention would be given to the Goslin handbook on socialization, but his
way in which parents and children provide analysis at that time seems to have had little
reinforcement to one another (see Sears, impact. Socialization studies that had their
theoretical underpinnings in Hullian or
1951). His remarks were eminently sensible.
Just as we all could agree that children Skinnerian
do theory of course had little room
for developmental considerations. The as-
learn to do the things that will get their par-
ents to gratify their needs, so no one really
sumption of such studies was that develop-
doubted that parents are gratified when their
ment itself was the product of cumulative
children stop crying, so that parents tendlearnings,
to not a cause. It did not seem im-
adopt and repeat any technique of soothing portant, from the standpoint of such theories,
that works well with a given child. Butto inask whether a given parental practice
might have a different impact on an im-
fact for many years there was relatively little
empirical work that studied bidirectional mature than on a more mature child. Within
processes. Perhaps we had to wait for com- broad limits, what was taught by parents
puter data processing to make possible the could, presumably, be taught to a child of
analysis of moment-to-moment sequential any age. The processes involved in sociali-
probabilities. In any event, we now do have zation were presumably the same across
evidence that influence flows back and forth
ages and stages, although the content might
between parents and children. Researcherschange. Even the Fels studies were only
with an interactionist point of view have
marginally developmental in nature. In this
called our attention to cyclical processes,
work, it was noted that parents changed their
whereby either mutually benign or mutually behavior over time in ways that appeared to
aversive processes build up between a pair be linked to the changing age and abilities of
of persons interacting over time. the child (Baldwin, 1955). However, the
Current students of socialization are strong focus of the study was on democratic
versus autocratic parenting, and the effects
now bringing still another issue to the fore-
of these different patterns were not assumed
front of our attention. They are breaking
away from the focus on the mother-child to differ according to the age of the child.
dyad. Not only is the role of fathers being One would think that psychoanalytic

This content downloaded from

158.195.4.7 on Fri, 02 Dec 2022 10:35:40 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
320 Child Development
theory would have yielded some genuinely other animals-will depend on whether it
developmental hypotheses. Freud's psycho- has had the prior opportunity to play with
sexual stages were, after all, developmental
other infant monkeys. We should note that in
stages, and his ideas about fixations implythe kinds of sequences being discussed, the
that there are certain critical periods-dif-
earlier steps may or may not occur. Thus in
order to do long division a child must first
ferent periods for the oral, anal, and genital
drive systems-during which anxiety- learn to multiply and subtract, but a variety
producing experiences will produce life- of societal and individual conditions will
long effects. The early book by Whiting anddetermine whether a child acquires the nec-
Child (1953) did examine cross-cultural essary prior skills. An implication of the
sources for evidence consistent with these sequential idea is that the nature of the
interchanges that occur between a parent
theories, and some was found. But interest in
these critical period issues died out, and and child during the first year or two of life
even the concept of identification, which will have an impact on the success of later
socialization efforts.
was thought by Freud to mark an important
developmental transition, lost its develop-
The second meaning of development
mental implications. Nowhere do we find
goes beyond sequence. It refers to the fact
longitudinal studies in which children's ac-
that there are broad developmental changes
quisitions of sex-typed behavior or inter-
that occur in almost all children according to
nalized controls are linked to their transition
a fairly standard timetable. The changes I am
from the oedipal to the postoedipal phases of
referring to appear to have a powerful thrust
development. Even after identification was
of some kind behind them, such that de-
reformulated in terms of imitation, one
velopmental change would be hard to stop or
might have expected developmental themes
prevent in any individual child. The clearest
to enter in. That is, researchers might have
exemplar, of course, is physical growth;
focused on what aspects of models' behavior
another would be the acquisition of lan-
children of different developmental levels
guage. I do not mean to imply that these
would extract for copying, or how a child's
powerful changes are necessarily driven by
maturity influenced the ways in which in-
physiological maturation, although matura-
formation obtained from observing models
tion must be involved. There are, in addi-
was integrated with other information in
tion, ubiquitous learnings that come from
determining the child's goals, plans, or in-
strumental behaviors. The studies of mod- mere continued exposure to almost any envi-
ronment. All children learn that day follows
eling and imitation did not take this direc-
night, that objects fall when released from
tion, however. So, over a whole range of
the hand, that it hurts to fall from a height
socialization studies, developmental themes
upon a hard surface, etc. The cumulative ex-
were almost entirely absent.
pertise resulting from these multiple learn-
ings presumably combines with matura-
It is time for me to try to say more clearly
tional changes to produce the inevitable de-
what I mean by "developmental." There are
velopmental thrust that I am speaking of.
two meanings that I would like to distin-
While I have made a sharp distinction be-
guish. The first, which we may call the
tween such changes and those that are
"softer" meaning, is the idea of sequence.
merely necessary sequences in which later
The idea is that things must occur in a cer-
achievements need earlier ones to build
tain order. It is a kind of Guttman scale
upon, these two aspects of development are
conception-that certain early behavioral
not entirely conceptually distinct. Never-
acquisitions are necessary, though not
theless, for the moment I will take them up
sufficient, for later steps to occur. A familiar
separately. And in discussing them, I want to
example is the claim by students of moral
consider the implications of each kind of de-
judgment that children must make sub-
velopmental change for the parent-child re-
stantial progress toward mature perspective
taking before they can think about moral is- lationship and the socialization process that
is occurring within the family.
sues in more developmentally advanced
ways. We have another example from the Consider first the idea of necessary
ethological literature. Suomi (1977) argues sequential steps. From the studies of at-
that when aggressive responses emerge in tachment we can derive an excellent exam-
the repertoire of young monkeys' behavior, ple of what a sequence might be like. Let us
the way the animal manages aggression- take it as reasonably well established that
that is, the effect the onset of aggression willthe mother's responsiveness and sensitivity
have on a young animal's interaction with during the first year help to determine

This content downloaded from

158.195.4.7 on Fri, 02 Dec 2022 10:35:40 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 E. E. Maccoby 321
whether the child becomes securely orcumulating
in- burden of unsolved family issues
securely attached by the age of 12-18 further increases everyone's irritability and
months. Researchers have now shown that everyone's motivation to avoid other family
secure attachment in its turn is associated
members. Thus the deteriorating cycle con-
with the child's subsequent willingness tinues.
to Uncooperativeness or resistiveness
explore novel environments, interact posi-
in children has other implications for par-
ent-child interaction. Parents are likely to
tively with adult strangers, enter into posi-
tive relationships with age-mates, and en-use as much pressure on their children as is
gage in relatively independent problemneeded to get the desired response. They
solving. What is only beginning to be shift
in- to higher levels of pressure if their chil-
vestigated is the implications of an early se-
dren do not comply to the parent's first de-
cure or insecure attachment for the sub- mand (Minton, Kagan, & Levine, 1971;
Zahn-Waxler & Chapman, 1982). Patterson
sequent functioning of the parent-child pair.
There is some evidence that children who has noted that aggressive children do not de-
were securely attached in the 12-18-month
sist from undesired behavior as readily as
period are more likely to be cooperative with
normal children do when their parents react
negatively.
their mothers at a later time (Matas, Arend, & Thus their parents are being
Sroufe, 1978; Londerville & Main, 1981). pressed toward more and more power-asser-
Cooperativeness in a child can take several
tive techniques. The parents of a cooperative
forms. One involves being willing to comply
child, on the other hand, will be able to use
with parental prohibitions and inhibit mildun- forms of pressure. It is as though, if par-
desired behavior upon parental command.
ents can do what is necessary early in the
child's life to bring about a cooperative,
Another involves being responsive to a par-
ent who is attempting to teach a new skill.
trusting attitude in the child, that parent has
Thus a cooperative child pays attentionearnedto, the opportunity to become a
and utilizes, a parent's demonstrationsnonauthoritarian
of parent. In addition, the
how things should be done. And a thirdparent as- whose child pays attention to demon-
pect of cooperation involves entering, strations will be a more successful teacher,
cheerfully and with interest, into joint ac-will feel more efficacious as a parent, and
tivities and learning quickly the turn-taking will succeed in transmitting skills that will
or other routines that are needed for effec- enable the child to function more in-
tive participation in a joint task. It is a rea- dependently and thus ease the subsequent
sonable supposition that a securely attached demands upon the parent.
child would be more likely to become
cooperative in all these senses. On the otherI do not want to overstress the impor-
hand, we may assume that insecurely at-tance of the quality of early attachment. I
tached children, as they move into the 2-4have used it as an example because we do
age range, are either more clingy, more de- have some information concerning its
manding, more resistive, more whiny--orsequelae, but surely there are other aspects
some combination of these-than other chil- of the parent-child relationship that deserve
dren of their age (Sroufe, Fox, & Pancake, consideration as building blocks for later
1983). socialization steps. The Japanese concept of
the amae-amayakasi relationship-which is
In what way would these characteristics related to, but not identical with, mutual
of children influence the way their parents attachment--is a promising candidate (see
react to them? If a child is whiny and lacks Azuma, in press). As a further caveat, I do not
the amount of independent competence that mean to imply that once a family interaction
might be expected for a child of its age, par- pattern has been set on a particular path that
ents are likely to become irritable. We know these upward or downward spirals must
from some of the work of the Patterson group continue indefinitely, or that there are no
(Patterson, 1982) that when parents are irrit- means by which the trajectory can be
able, the level of their children's aversive changed or corrected. Of course there must
behavior rises. Furthermore, the quality of be means whereby families can restore the
problem solving between family members equilibrium of a system that has gotten out of
declines. One manifestation of this is that balance. But we have not really con-
individual family members will either burstceptualized what these restorative processes
out in anger during the discussion of a familyare in terms of the sequential dependencies
disagreement, or turn silent and walk away of events. Very urgent questions arising from
from the discussion. In either case, theour lack of knowledge about sequence are
problem remains unsolved, and the ac- posed for family therapists. Must the family

This content downloaded from

f:ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff on Thu, 01 Jan 1976 12:34:56 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
322 Child Development
of a deviant, resistive 4-year-old go back- 2. Language development: We take for
granted the tremendous spurt in language
ward in time and attempt to relive the period
in which a secure attachment should have competence that takes place between the
been established? Must they cuddle and ages of 2 and 4. But we should be aware that
soothe and imitate facial expressions and the acquisition of language is by no means
play baby games until mutual trust andcompleted
re- during the preschool years; addi-
sponsiveness have been established? Or tional steps, such.as the understanding of the
must one rely upon interventions that are passive voice, the mastery of double nega-
geared to the child's current developmentaltives, etc., occur at a later time.
level?
The child's acquisition of language
You will surmise from the way I pose opens up a whole new world of communica-
the question that I think the forces of de-tion between parents and children. The
velopmental change are too powerful ever tomore the child is able to understand lan-
permit a replay, later in childhood, of par-guage, the more the parent can use verbal
ent-child scenarios that normally charac-guidance, explanations, and reasoning in
terize an earlier phase of family interaction. place of physical manipulation and gestures.
It is time to consider what some of these The more the child can speak intelligibly,
major developmental changes are, and what the more efficient can the parent become in
role they may play in the kinds of socializa- responding to the child's bids for attention or
tion tasks that can be undertaken and the help. During the prelinguistic period, chil-
kinds of socialization techniques that are dren are very closely tied to their re-
needed and likely to be effective. I want lationship
to with familiar caregivers, since it is
remind you briefly about a number of with these people that the child has de-
changes that are undoubtedly already veloped a mutually understood signal sys-
familiar to you all, so that we can consider tem and a set of shared scripts. These may be
their implications for socialization. fairly unique to a given parent-child pair.
With the acquisition of language, the child
1. Physical growth: Perhaps the mostgraduates into the signal system shared by
spectacular developmental changes that the larger culture and is enabled to function
children undergo are those in physical size outside the family as well as more effectively
and strength. Though these changes are within it.
most rapid early in life, they continue to be
substantial through childhood and into 3. Impulsivity: There is a fairly steady
adolescence. While not so obvious as the decline, from early childhood into the
gains in height and weight, the gains school-aged
in years, in impulsivity. There are
motor coordination are also very great. progressively fewer angry outbursts and an
increasing ability to postpone gratification
Some of the implications of these and tolerate frustration. The increasing abil-
growth patterns for parenting are obvious. ity to regulate bodily activity in relation to
Small children can be physically moved out situational demands means less and less
of the reach of trouble, or spanked, or held restless motion and "wild" running around.
and cuddled more easily than large ones. Children become progressively more able to
Larger children can be taught skills that callfocus their attention on task-relevant in-
for a certain minimum level of size and formation and carry out exhaustive searches
strength, and developments in physical for such information and events (see Lane &
coordination also determine when the child Pearlson, 1982, for a review).
is ready for new learnings. We know that There is evidence from several studies
parents' use of physical punishment and
(Barkley & Cunningham, 1979; Chapman,
their physical manipulation of children de-
1979; Halverson & Waldrop, 1970) that par-
cline with age, and that physical displays of
ents respond to impulsive behavior in chil-
affection such as hugging and caressing tend
dren with negative commands and increased
to be replaced by more distal forms of affec-
imperative control efforts. We can see then
tionate display. Also, of course, the content that if older children are less impulsive than
of physical skills being taught by parents
younger ones in all the above-listed ways,
changes greatly. We may assume that these
parents should be progressively freed to
changes in parenting have much to do with
move away from power-assertive methods of
the child's physical growth, although of
control toward a greater reliance on induct-
course parents differ greatly in their ive methods.
sensitivity to the changes in their children's
physical capacities. 4. Children's conceptions of others:

This content downloaded from

158.195.4.7 on Fri, 02 Dec 2022 10:35:40 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 E. E. Maccoby 323
During the 6-12 age period, there is an move in- into the middle-childhood phase of
crease in children's ability to adopt the authority concepts. We know that parents in-
perspective of other persons (Selman, 1976, crease their use of withdrawal of privileges
1983). Their knowledge about other people's as a form of discipline during this period,
agendas, expectations, and probable re- and this may reflect in part their children's
actions grows rapidly, and so does their increasing appreciation of reciprocal obliga-
understanding of the cause-and-effect con-tions.
nections between the successive segments
of social scripts (Collins, 1983; Collins, 5. Children's conceptions of self: At
Berndt, & Hess, 1974). There is a shift, be- about the time of entrance into school, chil-
tween the ages of 4 and 10, in the con- dren begin to acquire the ability to stand off
ceptions children have about authority andand view the self from an outside (other-
the basis for their parents' rights to exerciseperson) perspective. During this time, chil-
authority (Damon, 1977). While preschool-dren also begin to define themselves more in
ers tend to think that parental authority reststerms of their psychological attributes-
on the power to punish or reward, the be-being a "good" person, being smart-rather
than in terms of objective attributes such as
ginning of an exchange relationship can be
seen in older children, in that they say theyappearance, possessions, or activities.
ought to obey because of all the things their It has been shown that between the ages
parents do for them. Usually some time afterof 5 and 8, there is an increase in children's
the age of 8, also, children begin to think thatsusceptibility to attributional appeals such
authority is legitimated by persons' expert
as "I can see that you are the kind of person
knowledge or craftsmanship. who likes to help" (Grusec & Redler, 1980),
and it is a reasonable inference that the in-
What are the implications of increasing creased responsiveness to such appeals is
social-cognitive maturity for the nature oflinked to the changes in self-concepts. We
the socialization processes parents can em-may suspect, too, that the growing under-
ploy? For one thing, children who have ac-standing of how one looks in the eyes of
quired higher levels of social understanding others would upgrade children's respon-
are more competent in communicative inter-
siveness to reminders by their parents that
changes and in bringing to bear mature important other persons will not think well
negotiating strategies in cooperative/task
of them if they behave in certain ways.
encounters with peers (Selman, 1983). However, the fact that children are begin-
There is no reason to doubt that social-cog- ning to be able to see themselves as others
nitive maturity is similarly important in see them means that they can begin to tailor
cooperative and problem-solving inter- their behavior and emotional expressions
actions with the parents. In addition, chil- according to the impression they want to
dren's increased perspective-taking skills make on a given audience. Along with in-
should mean that parents will find that creased self-consciousness, then, we get the
other-oriented induction is increasingly ef- possibilities of dissimulation and Machia-
fective. While there is evidence that such
vellian manipulation of others. Some parents
induction does support prosocial behavior
report that when their children have entered
even in very young children (Zahn-Waxler,
this more sophisticated stage, it becomes
Radke-Yarrow, & King, 1979), it is also true
harder to know what they are thinking and
that within the age range 7-11, thinking feeling, and hence more difficult to monitor
about the consequences of their behavior for
and guide them (Newson & Newson, 1976).
others is a more powerful deterrent to
"selfish" behavior for older children than 6. Cognitive executive processes:
younger ones (LaVoie, 1974). As far as I There are major developments in the so-
know, there is no research that examines the called executive functions as children
effect of children's concepts of authority on moved from the preschool to the school-aged
their willingness to be governed by it, or on years (Sternberg & Powell, 1983). When
the kinds of appeals for their cooperation children are asked to solve a problem, there
that they are most willing to listen to. We can is a regular increase with age in the extent to
only assume that appeals based on "fair- which they adopt a goal or plan for their ac-
ness" and exchange of services, or reminders tivity. I gather that we still cannot be sure
about a parents' greater knowledge, would whether there is an increase with age in
be increasingly persuasive, and parents children's memory capacity; what we do
would less often have to resort to promises of know, however, is that children become
reward or threats of punishment as children progressively more efficient in utilizing the

This content downloaded from

158.195.4.7 on Fri, 02 Dec 2022 10:35:40 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
324 Child Development
working memory capacity at their disposal.doubt, the Vygotskian conception concern-
In part, this becomes possible because many
ing the zone in which social interaction fos-
subroutines become automated (Brown ters & the acquisition of new elements of com-
DeLoache, 1978). In addition, children be- petence will become more and more in-
come more and more able to monitor their fluential as we begin to take the develop-
own state of knowledge and their progressmental changes in parent-child relationships
toward goals (Flavell, 1978), and so are bet-more seriously.
ter able to know what information they need
7. Autonomy: There is a final aspect of
to obtain in order to carry out a plan. They
improve in coordinating goals and subgoalschildren's functioning that may or may not
into action hierarchies, so as to decide whichchange with age but that pervades all aspects
of a set of subroutines is to be run off first,
of children's response to socialization pres-
sure. This is their strong effort to be in con-
which second, etc. They improve in theirtrol of their own actions and outcomes. We
ability to break set and adopt a new prob-
lem-solving strategy when an earlier one hascan think of the 2-year-old who indignantly
refuses help and says, "Me do it." And then
not been productive. The sheer accumula-
tion of knowledge is important, too, since we
think of the 13-year-old, leaving the house
for school in the morning, whose mother
now know that a solid knowledge base per-
mits the "expert" to apply more advancedsays, "Have a good day, honey," to which
the child replies," Don't tell me what to do!"
forms of cognitive processing than are possi-
ble for the novice. At these ages and in all the 10 years between
the child strives for autonomy.
What are the implications of these cog-
These autonomy strivings mean that the
nitive-developmental changes for parent-
character of the parent-child relationship is
child interaction? Once again, we must
speculate in the absence of data. Surely, always a contrapuntal one. Parents attempt
to set limits, guide, monitor, teach, and im-
children's increasing knowledge of social
pose discipline. Children attempt to fend off
scripts, along with their growing ability to
some of these pressures and to exert coun-
adopt plans governing their own action
terpressures of their own so as to achieve
sequences, must mean that they can more
control over what their parents will demand
readily coordinate their plans and activities
of them and how firmly demands will be
with those of their parents. Also, their in- enforced.
creasing skills at self-monitoring must mean
that parents can drop some of their monitor- To summarize some of the implications
ing activities. Thus the parent need no of developmental change for the interaction
longer ask, "Did you brush your teeth?" of parents and children: in infancy, the par-
This parental monitoring can be replaced by ent's function is mainly one of caregiving,
the child's own question, "Did I remember and this includes helping the infant to reg-
to brush my teeth?" or by an automated ulate its own bodily functions. During the
routine that requires no monitoring from preschool years, children are learning to
anyone. To my knowledge, we have no re- regulate their own affective states, and par-
search on the changes that occur in parental ents are contributing to this, partly through
monitoring with children's increasing age. their direct dealings with the child's emo-
This is a serious gap. We can only assume tional outbursts, but also by regulating the
that there is a transition as the child grows rate at which the child is exposed to new
older, from moment-to-moment monitoring experiences. In this period, parents do a
by parents to more distal forms of parental great deal of monitoring of the child's mo-
control that involve coregulation by parent ment-to-moment activities and provide
and child jointly. It may be that parents shift much direct feedback. During the school-
to intervening only at the higher nodes of aged years, the amount of direct contact
hierarchical processes while children between parent and child diminishes
monitor their own subroutines. Current greatly; parental monitoring is more distal.
work on the "zone of proximal develop- In a sense, much of it involves monitoring
ment" (Wertsch, 1979; Ragoff, Gilbride, &
the child's self-monitoring. The child must
Malkin, Note 1; Saxe, Filardo, Gearhart, now join the family system as a contributor, a
Guberman, Imperiale, & Sicilian, Note 2)
cooperative interactor. In simpler societies,
indicates that parents adapt the level of their this middle-childhood period is the time
interventions to signals they get from the which children begin to participate
during
child concerning the child's readiness to in family survival enterprises: caring for
take over segments of a task. But these mat- domestic animals, doing some work in the
ters are only beginning to be explored. No fields, getting wood and water, caring for

This content downloaded from

:ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff on Thu, 01 Jan 1976 12:34:56 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 E. E. Maccoby 325
rather hoped that we might get some clues
younger children. In our own society, chil-
dren's labor is not needed, and their taskfrom
is students of cognitive development
to become educated. Nevertheless, they concerning
are how this might be done. But I
confess to disappointment here, because it
able to contribute to the functioning of the
seems to me that cognitive developmen-
family. In adolescence, the child is becom-
ing heavily involved in the larger societytalists have essentially evaded the issue by
claiming
outside the family, but the family still has a that no issue exists. They have as-
function in providing both guidance and sumed that changes with age and variation
support for the child's entrance into these
among children of the same age amount to
larger spheres. the same thing. Forty years ago, Quinn
McNemar (1942) concluded that the varia-
While we may speak of these successive
tions in intelligence among children of the
phases of the parent-child relationship, I do
same age are quantitatively and qualitatively
not mean to imply discontinuous stages. I
similar to the variations from one age to
assume that the phases merge into one
another. In other words, an exceptionally
another gradually.
bright 7-year-old thinks like a 10-year-old. In
You will recognize that in talking about their important new integrative chapter on
how children's development might affectthe development of intelligence, Sternberg
parental behavior, I have been looking at and Powell (1983) are pleased to discover
things from a reverse perspective, comparedthat the work on the structure of intelligence
to the usual views of socialization. Histori-
that comes out of the psychometric studies of
individual differences accords very well
cally, most students of social and personality
development have assumed that (except for with the structural picture that has emerged
physical growth) the developmental changes from the study of age changes. So once again,
we are told that the increasing skills that
I have outlined were themselves largely the
products of socialization pressures. That is,children
if develop as they grow older in
children are becoming less impulsive asmetacognitive processes, hierarchical or-
they grow older, this must be primarily dueganization of problem solving, and other as-
pects of executive intellectual processes de-
to the fact that parents have restrained their
children's temper tantrums and demanded scribe quite well the differences between
(and rewarded) quiet, controlled behavior.bright and dull children of a given age. If
And improved perspective taking would this is true, then students of individual dif-
ferences and students of developmental
presumably reflect the constant instruction
from parents concerning how a child's be- change are laboring in the same vineyard,
havior affects others and how a child's be- and we need not fear that our 20-year preoc-
cupation with normative cognitive de-
havior looks to others. While it is surely true
that parents can and do facilitate these de-
velopment has amounted to a neglect of in-
velopmental changes to varying degrees,dividual
I differences.
would like to suggest that within large limits
I am afraid we will not be able to get by
these changes are surprisingly independent
so easily with respect to social-emotional
of the way parents treat their children. If this
and personality development, however.
is so, then we must be very aware of the way
in which developmental change in children (The cognitive developmentalists may find
constitutes a force that requires change that in they cannot get by with it either.
both the content of the messages parents Although many have been disappointed in
the cognitive-styles approach to individual
transmit and the means whereby they in-
differences, the current emphasis on exper-
fluence the growing child. Parents can func-
tise may offer a more promising approach.)
tion effectively primarily within that
To be sure, students of certain aspects of so-
changing region of susceptibility that Vy-
cial development have made the same sort of
gotsky pointed to (Vygotsky, 1978).
claim that has been made for intelligence.
So far, my argument has amounted to a Thus it has been argued that aggressive
plea to students of socialization to shift away children in middle childhood are displaying
from their exclusive preoccupation with in- patterns of behavior that would be normative
dividual differences toward a more de- for younger children: hyperaggressive chil-
velopmental orientation. However, I dodren,
not it is claimed, have simply failed to
want us to abandon our concern with indi- learn self-control at the normal age for doing
vidual differences. The issue becomes one
so. Thus they can be seen as developmen-
of how, and whether, we can incorporate tally delayed. Perhaps the same thing could
both individual differences and develop-be said of impulsive or hyperactive children.
mental change within the same framework.Certainly
I there are some ways in which this

This content downloaded from

158.195.4.7 on Fri, 02 Dec 2022 10:35:40 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
326 Child Development
is a reasonable interpretation of individual to expect that others are set to be hostile to-
differences in social behavior, but it cannotward them, and this justifies further hostile
be the whole truth. A predelinquent 10-acts, and so on. Although the mutual cogni-
year-old who is mistrustful of adults and
tions of family members have hardly been
skillfully evades their socialization efforts studied,
is we cannot doubt that the same
not merely acting like a 2- or 4-year-old. Andkinds of circular processes occur within
we can think of other respects, more within families, so that family members develop
the normal range, in which children differ reputations
in with one another that come
their style of interacting with others while to guide their interaction in these same
they are all behaving at levels of maturity
prophesy-fulfilling ways. Thus families
that are appropriate for their age. maintain themselves in equilibrium along
benign or mutually destructive paths. Fam-
It seems to me that the reasonable way
ily therapists commonly report how difficult
to look at the development of children in the
personality-social realm is that there areit is to bring about changes in patterns of
family interaction. Not only do parents find it
fairly distinct developmental paths that chil-
difficult to adopt new attitudes and new
dren take, and that developmental change is
modes of interaction with a deviant child,
occurring along each path. What are the im-
but the children resist their parents' efforts
plications of such a point of view? Certainly
to adopt new child-rearing techniques; they
not that the directions of such paths are un-
try to goad parents back into their old pat-
changeable. But the metaphor of a develop-
terns of behavior; and older deviant children
mental trajectory does imply that there is a
certain momentum that leads children to bring to bear a remarkable battery of skills in
avoiding or deflecting their parents' efforts at
continue along a path, once they are
control. Presumably, on the other side of the
launched upon it.
coin, competent, cooperative children
A related implication is that the family,
maintain their parents' supportive behavior
as a system, also carries its own momentum, in a variety of ways. All of this means that
so that family members tend to continue in families
a can be a fairly conservative force
given style of interaction once they have with respect to socialization.
adopted it. We can assume that the family
system, like any system, has self-stabilizing I have been stressing two themes. One
properties. If any family member moves out- is that families tend to stabilize around
side the boundaries of the usual pattern of habitual patterns of interaction; thus there is
interaction, forces are brought to bear to
continuity over time in the familial forces
bring that person back into his or her familiar
that support the distinctive personality pat-
family role. Evidence is now beginning to terns of individual children. The other
appear that parents react to children not sotheme is that the development of the child
much in terms of what the child is actuallyconstitutes a powerful force, enabling or
doing at the moment, but in terms of whateven requiring parents and children to take
on new joint agendas and to adopt in-
the parent expects the child to do-that is, in
terms of the cumulative cognitions the par- creasingly mature forms of interaction with
ent has developed about this child's habitualone another. Are these two themes compati-
modes of behavior. Thus Paton reports (in ble? I think so, at least to some degree. It is
Bell & Harper, 1977) that when a hyperac- true that if we were to turn to the analogy of
tive child's actual behavior changes in re- physical growth, we might think that rapid
sponse to drug therapy, there appears to bedevelopmental
a change is inimical to indi-
period in which the mother's behavior lags vidual stability. We know that the heights of
behind the child's change: she continues to
a sample of 8-year-old children correlate
treat the child as though he were behaving
more strongly with their heights at 18 than
hyperactively, even when he is not, and only
with their heights at 13. The fact that indi-
gradually readjusts her behavior to the vidual children undergo their pubertal
child's new behavioral characteristics. The
growth spurt at different ages means that the
rank order of height is rearranged during
recent interesting work by Dodge on aggres-
sive boys (Dodge, 1980) has shown that such
early adolescence and then reestablished. It
boys come to be locked into their antisocial
is likely that the age of maximum gains in
impulse control or executive processes will
behavior by a cycle of self-fulfilling proph-
esies, in which boys develop a reputation foramong children, bringing about similar
vary
being aggressive, so that their peers treat
disturbances in the rank order of a group.
them as though they were being aggressive
However, not all developmental change is
destabilizing
even in situations where they actually do not in this sense. Many of the de-
have aggressive intent. The boys then velopmental
come changes we have been talking

This content downloaded from

158.195.4.7 on Fri, 02 Dec 2022 10:35:40 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 E. E. Maccoby 327

about (e.g., more efficient self-regulation velopment?

and I recommend this as an issue
more mature self-concepts) have to do with that is worthy of our collective attention.
the formation of the child's own gyroscope.
They mean that children are developing
Reference Notes
more and more powerful ways of maintain-
ing personal stability through the selection
1. Ragoff, B., Gilbride, K., & Malkin, C. Inter-
of activities, partners, and settings that are
action with babies as guidance in develop-
compatible with self-concepts and previ-ment. Paper presented at the biennial meet-
ously developed skills and motives. ing of the Society for Research in Child De-
Development does, however, create op-velopment, Detroit, April 1983.
portunities for change. Behavior that was2.ac-
Saxe, G. B., Filardo, E., Gearhart, M., Guber-
ceptable from a young child may becomeman, S., Imperiale, G., & Sicilian, S. Some
unacceptable in an older child, and familyaspects of the social organization of early
number development. Paper presented at the
pressures are exerted to bring the child
within the range of behavior that is tolerablebiennial meeting of the Society for Research
for a more mature child. Also, there is alwaysin Child Development, Detroit, April 1983.
a region in which a child needs and accepts
scaffolding by more experienced partners.
References
Within this region, a child is especially
sensitive to external influence. I believe we Ainsworth, M. C. S., Bell, S. M., & Stayton, D. J.
are ready now, in the field of socialization Individual differences in strange situation
studies, to consider more closely just what behavior of one-year-olds. In H. R. Schaffer
this region is for children who are at differ- (Ed.), The origins of human social relations.
ent developmental levels and on divergent London: Academic Press, 1971.
developmental paths. What this means is Azuma, H. Psychology in a non-Western country.
that we must give more attention to diag- International Journal of Psychology, in press.
nosing the child's state of readiness forBaldwin,
a A. L. Behavior and development in
given socialization input and take into ac- childhood. New York: Dryden, 1955.
count the skills and motivation the child has Bandura, A., Ross, D., & Ross, S. A comparative
for either resisting or cooperating with a par- test of the status envy, social power, and the
ent or a teacher. secondary reinforcement theories of iden-
tificatory learning. Journal of Abnormal So-
The relationship between the parent
cial Psychology, 1963, 67, 527-534.
and child inevitably changes during the
child's development, but the nature of the Barkley, R. A., & Cunningham, C. C. The effects
of methylphenidate on the mother-child
change depends on the prior history of the
interaction of hyperactive children. Archives
relationship. The family may or may not re-
of General Psychiatry, 1979, 36, 201-208.
main a strong source of influence into
Baumrind, D. The development of instrumental
adolescence. Haim Ginott (1967) discussed
competence through socialization. In A. D.
the difficulties faced by parents who, in his
terms, have been "fired" by their children. Pick (Ed.), Minnesota Symposium on Child
The children engage in evasive and decep- Psychology (Vol. 7). Minneapolis: University
of Minnesota Press, 1973.
tive maneuvers, and the parents are no
longer in a position to find out enough about Bell, R. Q., & Harper, L. V. Child effects on
their children's lives to exercise effective adults. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum, 1977.
Brown, A. L., & DeLoache, J. S. Skills, plans and
guidance or play a role in the child's deci-
sions. Thus we can say that the period ofself-regulation. In R. Siegler (Ed.), Children's
socialization by the family can be either thinking: What develops? Hillsdale, N.J.:
Erlbaum, 1978.
short or long. Developmental change always
functions to move children out of the family Chapman, M. Listening to reason: Children's at-
orbit to some extent, but there are large indi-tentiveness and parental discipline. Merrill-
vidual differences in the degree to which aPalmer Quarterly, 1979, 25, 251-263.
child continues to function within this orbit Collins, W. A. Social effects of children's
processing of televised social narratives. In E.
while also entering others.
T. Higgins, W. Hartup, & D. N. Ruble (Eds.),
We have seen that the quality of the Developmental social cognition: A socio-
mother-infant bond probably provides an cultural perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge
important key to the child's receptiveness to University Press, 1983.
socialization inputs early in life. What we Collins, W. A., Berndt, T., & Hess, V. Observa-
need to know now is, What are the keys to a tional learning of motives and consequences
child's receptiveness at later points in de- for television aggression: A developmental

This content downloaded from

158.195.4.7 on Fri, 02 Dec 2022 10:35:40 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
328 Child Development
study. Child Development, 1974, 45, 799- later competence. Child Development, 1978,
802. 49, 547-556.
Minton, C., Kagan, J., & Levine, J. A. Maternal
Coopersmith, S. The antecedents of self-esteem.
San Francisco: W. H. Freeman, 1967. control and obedience in the two-year-old.
Damon, W. The social world of the child. San Child Development, 1971, 42, 1873-1894.
Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1977. Newson, J., & Newson, E. Seven years old in the
Dodge, K. Social cognition and children's aggres- home environment. New York: Wiley, 1976.
sive behavior. Child Development, 1980, Parke,
51, R. D., Power, T. G., & Gottman, J. M. Con-
162-171. ceptualizing and quantifying influence pat-
Flavell, J. H. Metacognitive development. In J. M. terns in the family triad. In M. E. Lamb, S. J.
Scandura & C. J. Brainerd (Eds.), Structural- Suomi, & G. R. Stephenson (Eds.), Social
process theories of complex human behavior. interaction analysis: Methodological issues.
Alphen a. d. Rijn, The Netherlands: Sijthoff & Madison: University of Wisconsin Press,
Noordhoff, 1978. 1979.
Ginott, H. G. Between parent and child. NewPatterson, G. R. Coercive family process. Eugene,
York: Macmillan, 1965. Oreg.: Castalia, 1982.
Grusec, J. E., & Redler, E. Attribution reinforce-
Sears, R. R. A theoretical framework for personal-
ment and altruism: A developmental analysis. ity and social behavior. American Psychol-
Developmental Psychology, 1980, 16, 525- ogist, 1951, 6, 476-483.
534. Sears, R. R., Rau, L., & Alpert, R. Identification
Halverson, C. F., & Waldrop, M. F. Maternal be- and child-rearing. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford
havior toward own and other preschool chil- University Press, 1965.
dren: The problem of "owness." Child De-Selman, R. The development of interpersonal rea-
velopment, 1970, 41, 838-845. soning. In A. Pick (Ed.), Minnesota Sym-
Hoffman, M. L., & Saltzstein, H. D. Parent disci- posium on Child Psychology (Vol. 10). Min-
pline and the child's moral development. neapolis: University of Minnesota Press,
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1976.
1967, 5, 45-47. Selman, R. A naturalistic study of children's social
Kohlberg, L. Stage and sequence: The cognitive- understanding. Developmental Psychology,
developmental approach to socialization. In 1983, 19, 82-102.
D. A. Goslin (Ed.), Handbook of socialization Sroufe, L. A., Fox, N. E., & Pancake, V. R. Attach-
theory and research. Chicago: Rand McNally, ment and dependency in developmental
1969. perspective. Child Development, 1983, 54,
Lane, D. M., & Pearson, D. A. The development 1615-1627.
of selective attention. Merrill-Palmer Quar-Sternberg, R. J., & Powell, J. S. The development
terly, 1982, 28, 317-337. of intelligence. In J. Flavell & E. Markman
LaVoie, J. C. Cognitive determinants of resistance (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology (4th
to deviation in seven-, nine-, and eleven- ed., Vol. 3). New York: Wiley, 1983.
year-old children of low and high maturity of Suomi, S. J. Development of attachment and other
moral judgments. Developmental Psychology, social behaviors in rhesus monkeys. In T.
1974, 10, 393-403. Alloway, P. Pliner, & L. Krames (Eds.), At-
Lewis, M., Feiring, C., & Weintraub, M. The tachment behavior. New York: Plenum, 1977.
father as a member of the child's social net- Vygotsky, L. S. In J. S. Cole, J. Steiner, S.
work. In M. E. Lamb (Ed.), The role of the Scribner, & E. Souberman (Eds.), Mind in so-
father in child development (2d ed.). New ciety. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University
York: Wiley, 1981. Press, 1978.
Londerville, S., & Main, M. Security of attach-Wertsch, J. V. From social interaction to higher
ment compliance and maternal training psychological processes: A clarification and
methods in the second year of life. Develop- application of Vygotsky's theory. Human De-
mental Psychology, 1981, 17, 289-299. velopment, 1979, 22, 1-22.
Maccoby, E. E., & Martin, J. A. Socialization inWhiting, J. W. M., & Child, I. L. Child training
the context of the family: Parent-child inter- and personality: A cross-cultural study. New
action. In E. M. Hetherington (Ed.), Hand- Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1953.
book of child psychology (4th ed., Vol. 4). Zahn-Waxler, C., & Chapman, M. Immediate an-
New York: Wiley, 1983. tecedents of caretakers' methods of disci-
McNemar, Q. The revision of the Stanford-Binet pline. Child Psychiatry and Human De-
scale: An analysis of the standardization velopment, 1982, 12, 179-192.
data. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1942. Zahn-Waxler, C., Radke-Yarrow, M., & King, R. A.
Matas, L., Arend, R. A., & Sroufe, L. A. Continuity Child-rearing and children's prosocial in-
of adaptation in the second year: The re- itiations toward victims of distress. Child De-
lationship between quality of attachment and velopment, 1979, 50, 319-330.

This content downloaded from

158.195.4.7 on Fri, 02 Dec 2022 10:35:40 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms