Object Permanence.

According to psychologist, Jean Piaget, there is a concept known as "object permanence" which can be a term to describe a child's ability to understand that an object or person exist, even when they aren't in their presence. This ability does not come along until after the time between birth and two years of age, and can be known as the "lack" of object permanence. At this time, infants can only acknowledge the presence of an object or person through motor abilities such as, sight, touch, movement, and taste. This concept was experimented on by Piaget, in which he used a toy to be visibly seen and held by the young child, and then clearly hidden. For the older children who searched for the child, it was clear that they developed object permanence. And for the younger children, they became sad and distraught with the missing toy and seemed to perceive that the toy had just magically vanished.

blog.lib.umn.edu

When my little sister was about 1 years old, she became very attached to me. Although I only lived with her on weekends, I was able to understand her perception of me in terms of object permanence. It's this idea of "out of sight, out of mind" in which during week days, her big sister would sort of disappear. Sometimes she would cry when I left, and when I returned was always extra excited to see me. Now, 7 years old, my little sister has completely developed object permanence. Living states away, and away at college, her understanding of our relationship and object permanence is very accepted. She knows that when I leave, she'll always see me again, but struggles with this emotionally because that timing I come and go is highly unstable. I remember leaving the house in the morning when she was asleep, and she called me the next day saying, "Kayla please don't leave when I wake up, I looked everywhere and you were gone." Even though I didn't want to upset her and see her cry, I learned that she prefers me to explain to her when I'm leaving in advance, and where I'm going. She constantly reminds me, "Kayla, your school is so far, you have to sleep there!" Over time she has grown accustom to the distance, and my permanence in her life even though I can't be directly with her. I called to speak with her today and she told me she was busy reading, and when I asked her if she could spare me 5mins, she said "Speak to me already, I'm listening." I call her my crazy sister, but I love the permanent place she holds in my heart, no matter how far away she is.

Industry vs Inferiority

At around 6-11 years of age, also known as middle childhood, according to Erikson's Psychosocial stage of development, we enter his 4th stage known as Industry vs. Inferiority. If we are grown into a trusting environment in which we learn how to explore freely, we move away from this isolating inferiority when entering the stage for schooling. This speaks to how we socially adapt and interact with our new peers, and how we make an industry of friends. This stage tells us how our development allows for us to work with others, and when this is successful we have breached the appropriate industry side of the psychosocial stage. Yet, when negative influences of the atmosphere and those around us at home, or school, than we are forced to feel incompetence atmost this being the inferiority aspect of the stage.

As school age children, we seek peer acceptance and research shows that most of us fall into one of the four following categories: popular children, rejected children, controversial children, and neglected children.

• Popular children, are those children who are well liked, and get highly positive votes. But, there are two types of these popular children. The first is the popular-prosocial kind who is both socially and academically competent, and show cooperation, kindness, and sensitivity to peers. The other is popular-antisocial who enhance their popular status by aggressive behavior, and also defy authority to be seen as the "tough kid."
• Rejected children are those who are disliked, and receive many negative votes from peers, there are also two types of this category. One is the rejected-aggressive children who show high rates of conflict and aggression. Then the other type is rejected-withdrawn, who is more socially incompetent around peers.  
• Controversial children are those who receive both negative and positive votes by peers, being both liked and disliked. They often appear disruptive, but will also engage in positive behavior.
• Neglected Children are not really mentioned a lot, and they engage in minimum rates of interaction. They tend to prefer to be on their own, yet can withdraw from that pattern whenever they choose.

Learning about peer acceptance and the different categories, I most consider middle school and the different attitudes we held as developing pre-teens, and I can think of someone for each category above.  I remember this really nice girl, who got along with everyone, was very pretty, and she would fall into the popular-prosocial type. And then, there was another kid who was very aggressive yet gained his popularity for being able to come up with the best disses for those who were less popular, and he would be considered popular-antisocial. Although many of us feared him, we respected his "mucho" attitude in a sense, in which he gained popularity. In considering the rejected type, I could name a number of students in my grade who were either really aggressive or socially awkward, in which they received high ratings of being disliked all around. I myself would say that I fell into the controversial role, I understood the importance of doing my work and even being nice to others, but I often acted out sometimes when I was bored or seeking attention. What my teachers and parents later realized, was that I was more advanced in my work load and became bored with the "easy" teachings to my peers, so I benefitted more in gifted classes. I also remember a couple kids that would fit the neglected type, who seemed mysterious and kept to themselves, yet once in a while would step out of their shell and intrigue us. While these stages aren't exactly set in stone, they do speak volumes to the way we being to socially interact with peers and it shows how past experiences and home life contribute to our psychosocial growth into adulthood. 

Girls are Cool & Boys Drool!

Because my little sister is a princess...

Jojo: Kayla can you do my nails?

Me: Of course love, what color?

Jojo: Pink, Red, Purple...not black, thats a boy color.

::Paints nails::

Jojo: I'm a princess, and princesses have to be pretty and have pretty nails. Because I'm a girl, I have to sit still so my nails don't get messy. I can't play rough games like Dave, because my nails can't get messed up. Kayla!... let me blow my nails to dry them!!!

Since the age of two, my little sister has always been particular about the things she wears, how her hair is fixed, and very stern about acquiring a "girly" behavior. My other sisters aren't as vain as my  6 year old little sister, but her behavior speaks volumes to the societal and cultural gender expected norms and roles of girls and boys. From very young ages we are often taught what behaviors are appropriate for what gender. And often times, when we go against such norms we are told by our peers and other on lookers, that we aren't "normal" and sometimes face possible mistreatment and bullying. At the young age of school, and especially by the time young kids begin pre-school, they have a high understanding of what's appropriate behavior for the gender and can easily stereotype what boys can do vs what girls can do. My sister speaks about being able to wear dresses and playing with dolls, while our young male cousin her same age can play video games and go outside without a shirt. It almost intrigues her about the different things girls can do but boys cant.

The biggest advocates for structuring gender roles in our societies, are fathers. Many fathers baby their daughters, and allow them to express their feelings and most always comforts them when needed. Yet for young sons, they tell them not to cry, and to play rough. Nowadays it is a lot more acceptable for a little girls to play with toy trucks or even aspire to be firefighters, doctors, or anything else they dream to be. Yet still, boys are often scold for picking up a toy doll, and rarely are tolerated when they dress in any type of female wear. Little girls can wear shorts, the color blue, and play all types of sports. But our society is so against young males showing sensitive behavior, that they grow up ready to resort to violence than talk about their feelings. Boys are also most likely to tease another boy for "acting feminine" while accepting to the "tom boy" girls as good friends. Gender roles are so rooted into our society that it would be quite difficult for us to step away from them. The best thing we can do as parents and adults, is to step away from the gender stereotypes and accept our children for how they wish to express themselves.

The Cohort Effect.

More than just our ages alone, we are able to identify with people our age groups not just because we share a similar birth year, but more because of the experiences and events that have occurred throughout our lives which became a major part in how we live our lives, experience things, and relate to people through such experiences. This can be known as the cohort effect, in which particular major and or common events define a particular groups of ages who can share an understanding of these events and thus relate to it more. While birth year can represent a particular cohort, traumatic world events, music and tv shows, can also be of the most impacting effects. Even without truly knowing someone close to your age group, a lot of times sharing a cohort can help spark conversations in which common experiences can be expressed, and we tend to grow more fond to these people in our cohort. When I first met my roommate we barely knew anything about each other, but we found that when we would play old N'sync songs, we could sing all the words and talk about which N'sync member we loved the most. Other older or younger cohorts may not be able to relate to N'sync because it might not have been of their time, but they can relate to other artists that were the most popular within their lifespan. 

I have a sister whose only 4 years younger than me, and the similarities and differences in our cohorts can be easily perceived. Both being 90's babies, we can relate on some level to popular events or trends that we both shared, but in particular world events I've found that are cohort are completely distinct. Recently in school, my sister was asked how being from New York (she know attends high school in Georgia) she was impacted by the attacks on september 11th. I always considered the event to be as traumatic for me as it was for my sister, but really she expressed that it was difficult to identify with that event, and felt that it had no overall impact on her life. Then I recalled that although I was emotionally truamatized by that event at 9 years old, my sister was only 5 years old and can only remember getting to leave kindergarden early that day. She told me how other kids her age also felt un-impacted by that day but her cohort shares knowledge of later events like witnessing the historical event of having a black president.

On the other hand, my experience of 9/11 was a lot more different and traumatic for me. Other than attending school close to the twin towers, I can recall every detail of what happened and what I  did before and after the towers were hit. When events are as traumatic and newly felt for an individual, they are better able to recall every single moment of it. My sister can only remember leaving school early, but I remember gathering my belongings to evacuate the school, running with my classmates from the dark clouds following us, and walking from downtown manhattan to uptown hoping my mother would be able to find me. When I speak to other New York friends who were attending school this same day as me, we can all share our different experiences, but the impact it had on our lives is such a common place for us that it is a meaningful part of our history, lives, and memories to this day. Even 2 or 3 years after the attack, my group of friends shared that same fear or terrorism and un-comfortability of understanding what war truly was. I'm apart of many cohorts of my time, but the attack on 9/11 will forever remain a major and common experience for the young lives within my cohort. 

Emotional Intelligence

Perhaps the most adorable thing that I have ever witnessed, is the affection show between two young siblings. I have seen several accounts where when one sibling is sad or crying, the other will respond to ensure to them that "it'll be ok" and mostly this is followed by a caring hug. I know sometimes to get my little sisters attention I would pretend to cry, and when she was about 2 or 3 she would easily fall for it, and hug and pat me down saying "don't cry kaywa." Now 6 years old, she can tell a sincere cry from that of a fictitious one, and instead says "Kayla, your just being a silly sister, your not really sad!" From infancy, every human has empathy. You enter into a room in a hospital filled with infants, and once one cries so does the whole bunch. And studies have proved that when infants hear their own cries on re-cording it doesn't affect them, until they hear recordings over other babies crying. At such young ages, it is important to foster this feeling of empathy, in order for the child to be an emotionally stable individual, as well as a very social being.

Infants don't like seeing others sad or distressed, and without any actual vocal dialogue to interpret feelings, they can see the facial expressions as well as body language of others to sense their emotions. Experiments like the stony face paradigm, show that as infants, babies can understand the emotional expressions of the parent through joyous interactions, and when their parents put on a emotionless face in the experiment, the infants experience immediate discomfort. So while infants don't begin to take perspectives until a little further into childhood, they can show very empathetic gestures and emotions to those surrounding them, having a close relationship to that individual or not. They sense this distress, and want to make it stop, so as infants they cry, until they are old enough to comfort others through their words or even gestures. Empathy is the ability to recognize, accept, and understand other's emotions. Such empathy is built on self awareness which can be defined as recognizing , accepting, and expressing one's own emotions.

Although we are born with these empathetic emotions and feelings, it is the job of the parent or caregiver to continue to foster these feelings. Attunement, which is the parent's recognition, acceptance, and reciprocation of an infant's emotions, is the key factor in continuing to foster empathy. What parent's should not take part in is, ignoring the feelings of the infant when their expressing themselves, showing contempt for the child's emotions, and not intervening in the child's interactions at all. When children are sad, or get into fights, or just need comfort, it never helps to just yell and automatically discipline them. If they're sad, boy or girl, they should be aloud to cry, you should hear them out when their discussing how a situation makes them feel, and you should always help them understand why fighting is not appropriate (rather than immediate scolding). Empathy comes from being emphasized with, and such feelings support a happier and more stable development, as well as a good social life in the future.

Trust vs. Mistrust

A psychologist, Erik Erikson, is well know for his theory of eight stages of psycho-social development. This theory delves into the psychological and social development of all individuals throughout their lifespan. The stages focus in on important and events from birth throughout a person's life to the very end, such as feeding, potty training, exploring, school, social relationships, relationships, work and parenthood, and then finally reflections on life. The stages goes as follows: infancy (trust vs. mistrust), early childhood (autonomy vs. Shame and doubt), preschool (initiative vs. guilt), school age (industry vs. inferiority), adolescence (identity vs. role confusion), young adulthood (intimacy vs. isolation), middle adulthood (generativity vs. stagnation), and lastly, late adulthood (integrity vs. despair). As someone falling within the stage of young adulthood, I can simply look to the years and stages before and self reflect on which role of development influenced my psychological as well as social being, environment, and life style.  Within this blog, I would like to focus on the first and probably most vital stage of Erikson's theory of psycho-social development, and that is Trust vs. Mistrust.

Trust vs. Mistrust the first stage of Erikson's psycho-social development begining at infancy onto 18 months of age. This important event is surrounded by the "feeding" of infants in which they relay on their caregivers to feed and above all care for them. The caregiver(s) should be the one who takes care of the babies needs most and not only care and give forth to the babies essential needs, but also provides affection and love for the baby. This stage is the answer to whether the baby can in the end gain the trust of those around them, giving them a sense of hope for the future yet to come. When a parent or caregiver provides basic food, cleanses, and shows emotions (through hugs, kisses, and smiles), the baby understands that that person is a reliable person to their needs, and prepares themselves to explore their environment through 'autonomy' in the next stage of autonomy vs. shame and doubt. On the other hand, even if parent does or doesn't properly care for their child, also not showing them affection (picking up, holding) or even allows them to cry all the time without any sort of reassurance, the child fosters a sense of mistrust. This mistrust can lead to the shame and doubt in the next stage of development, though nothing is ever set in stone. The baby always has the ability to grow and change whether that means later on in development by caregivers, or later in lives on their own or by surrounding peers.

My mother often tells me of how "spoiled" I was when I was a baby, and how much I still am spoiled to this day. As told to me from my grandparents, my mom often over fed me, which was why I became such a chubby baby. She didn't ever allow me to cry for long, which was very different in how she was raised by our Caribbean culture. Anytime I cried I was fed, and she also never allowed me to cry through the night, although that was suggested by other family members because they feared I wouldn't have any independence. My mom talked about how when I woke in the night, rather than crying I would look at her for some type of reassurance and go back to sleep. She says, "you we're the perfect baby, never cried just slept a lot...oh and you were very chubby." Despite what my family thought about my becoming a spoil and dependent person, my mother always being there fostered trust within me. This allowed me to feel safe and secure in my world, and now into my young adulthood stage of intimacy vs. isolation, I'm very intimate with my peers surrounding me, and my moms very proud of my independence as a college student.

It's Cool... I'm attached :)

As a last semester student of  the course, Child Development and a current student of Human Development and Family Studies, I have been given the opportunity to re-learn about the childhood attachment theory. This theory all evolves from the early infant stages in which a child learns "trust vs. mistrust" in being able to trust their outside environment from having close care and protection from their very start within their homes. A child who has been given close care, was tended to when necessary, and comforted often, will not become a "spoiled child" but a trusting child their toddler stages and perhaps later on in life. Created by a child researcher by the name of Mary Ainsworth in 1978, she discovered what she called the three styles of attachment: secure attachment, ambivalent insecure attachments, and avoidant insecure attachment. When considering the many children in my family, including those who were placed in the foster care system, I have gained a better understanding of the attachment theory.

I have a little sister by the age of 6 years old, and immediately I consider her to be a product of secure attachment as an infant. Once my sister was 3years old, we all went to Coney Island and unfortunately she could not par-take in the days full events. As her older sisters, when we left her with my mother to go on particular rides, she often cried when we first left, but we were easily able to comfort her when we returned. She was also to be comforted by other adults who she knew, but held no relation to them. When we later went to the beach that same day, even though no one was holding her as my other little cousins cried about, she was comfortable in her environment because of the trust she held for her older sisters, understanding that we would always be there to comfort her when she needed. The youngest kid amongst the group and without any fear, she walked straight into the water wanting to explore and enjoy her environment independently. In the attachment theory, it defines a securely attached child as one that feels distressed at first when care givers leave, and then happily comforted once they return. While many consider my sister spoiled in the way we rush to her very needs, I'm just glad that she feels trusting in her environment as I know it will help her positively progress in life.

Two of my little cousins both brother and sister, have faced many struggles so early in life starting at the ages of 6 months and 1 years old. Five years later, and having suffered neglect, abuse, and the life of being foster care children, their attachments styles are quite damaged in compared to my little sister. Still, I could differentiate the different theories of attachment between the two. While brother and sister, not only does their ages and sex have an influence of their sense of attachment, but also their personality and temperament have added affects to it as well. The youngest sibling, the boy I would say would fall under the "ambivalent" attachment theory. This theory describes children who become distressed when a parent leaves, and even among their return cannot be comforted. Often times this is due to the parent unavailability to the child. Still not understanding the whole foster care process, the brother was quite distressed every time his mother left him, mostly because he couldn't understand what was happening. Yet even with her return, he still cried because he wasn't trusting in her availability that he wanted her to have with him. Being the older child, his sister was profoundly more distressed than her brother. She hated having visits with her mother, and most times ignored her mother when she came around, even hitting the social work who she felt mistrust from because she brought her mother to meet her. I would classify her as the avoidant- insecure attachment, in which it is defined as children who avoided their caregiver as well as would choose a complete stranger over their parent. Although this expresses signs of abuse or neglect from a caregiver, sadly both children have been exposed to such from an early stage on and are equally insecurely attached. While the secure and insecure attachments styles are on opposite spectrum's, we must work together as a society to influence caregivers to always and continue to comfort their children and help to foster trusting environments for them to grow.