Lifespan Development. Tara L. Kuther

toddlers label themselves by gender, they spend more time playing with toys stereotyped for their own gender. Applying the categorical self as a guide to behavior illustrates toddlers’ advancing capacities for self-control.

      At about the same time as toddlers display the categorical self, they begin to show another indicator of their growing self-understanding. As toddlers become proficient with language and their vocabulary expands, they begin to use many personal pronouns and adjectives, such as “I,” “me,” and “mine,” suggesting a sense of self in relation to others (E. Bates, 1990). Claims of possession emerge by about 21 months and illustrate children’s clear representation of “I” versus other (L. E. Levine, 1983), a milestone in self-definition and the beginnings of self-concept (Rochat, 2010).

      Table 6.3

      Source: Adapted from Butterworth (1992).

      Self-Control

      Self-awareness and the emerging self-concept permit self-control, as one must be aware of oneself as separate from others to comply with requests and modify behavior in accordance with caregivers’ demands. In order to engage in self-control, the infant must be able to attend to a caregiver’s instructions, shift his or her attention from an attractive stimulus or task, and inhibit a behavior. Cortical development, specifically development of the frontal lobes, is responsible for this ability (Posner & Rothbart, 2018). Between 12 and 18 months, infants begin to demonstrate self-control by their awareness of, and compliance to, caregivers’ simple requests (Kaler & Kopp, 1990).

      Although toddlers are known for asserting their autonomy, such as by saying no and not complying with a caregiver’s directive, compliance is much more common (Kochanska, 2000). Paradoxically, when parents encourage autonomous, exploratory, behavior, their children are more likely to show compliance to parental instructions in toddlerhood through early childhood (Laurin & Joussemet, 2017). Secure attachment relationships and warm parenting are associated with effortful control, likely as securely attached infants feel comfortable exploring their environment, which promotes autonomy (Pallini et al., 2018). Toddlers’ capacities for self-control improve rapidly. For example, delay of gratification tasks suggest that between 18 and 36 months, toddlers become better able to control their impulses and wait before eating a treat or playing with a toy (Białecka-Pikul, Byczewska-Konieczny, Kosno, Białek, & Stępień-Nycz, 2018; Cheng, Lu, Archer, & Wang, 2018).

      Infants make great strides in socioemotional development over the first 2 years of life, as summarized in Table 6.3. Infants’ advances in emotional expression and regulation represent the interaction of biological predispositions, such as inborn capacities for basic emotions and temperament, and experienc—particularly parent–child interactions—the contexts in which they are raised, and the goodness of fit between infants’ needs and what their contexts provide. Infants’ gains in emotional and social development and a growing sense of self form a socioemotional foundation for the physical and cognitive changes that they will experience in the early childhood years.

      Thinking in Context 6.5

      1 Provide examples of how a Western emphasis on autonomy and independence might influence infants’ and toddlers’ sense of self, such as self-awareness, self-recognition, self-concept, and/or self-control.

      2 How might non-Western cultural views that emphasize collectivism and interdependence influence infants’ and toddlers’ developing sense of self? Provide examples.

      3 Compare Western and non-Western influences on infants’ and toddlers’ sense of self.

      Apply Your Knowledge

      A friendly lab assistant escorts 12-month-old Cassie and her mother into a research playroom containing special mirrors and hidden equipment to videotape their interactions. After providing instructions, the lab assistant leaves the mother and Cassie alone, beginning a short procedure to study the security of their attachment relationship. A female stranger enters the room to play with Cassie. Soon after, the mother leaves and Cassie is alone with the stranger. The mother returns briefly, then leaves again; finally, the stranger leaves the room and Cassie is left alone. During each short separation from her mother, Cassie cries and wails. Surprised and disturbed to find Cassie so upset, her mother returns almost immediately. She cannot soothe Cassie, who alternates between clinging to her mother and pushing her away angrily, crying all the time.

      “Is Cassie upset today?” asks the lab assistant.

      “No, she’s always this way,” her mother smiled softly, “My Cassie is quite a handful. She’s what my mother calls spirited. She’s unpredictable and strong-willed. She’ll eat and nap when she’s ready—and that changes all the time. My mother says I was the same way. I love my little girl, but sometimes I look forward to her growing up.”

      What was this procedure intended to study? How? Why?

      What might Cassie’s behavior indicate about her security of attachment relationship to her mother and her emotional development? Why?

      What do we know about the stability of infant attachment? What is the likelihood that these observations will influence Cassie’s attachment in childhood? Adulthood?

      Comment on the goodness of fit between Cassie’s temperament and the parenting.

      Laboratory methods such as this are intended to place participants, infants, under distress. The parent’s behavior is the source of that distress, and the procedure also is distressful to parents. From your perspective, what do researchers learn from such research? Should researchers use procedures that elicit distress from children and parents? If you were a parent to an infant, would you be willing to participate in such an experiment?

      Descriptions of Images and Figures

      Back to Figure

       Graph 1: Fed on cloth mother

      Two sets of data are plotted: One is labeled cloth mother. The other is labeled wire mother. The mean hours per day feeding based on age are listed here. Values are approximations.

       Cloth mother:

      Age 1 to 5 days: 16 hours

      Age 6 to 10 days: 18 hours

      Age 11 to 15 days: 19 hours

      Age 16 to 20 days: 20 hours

      Age 21 to 25 days: 19 hours

       Wire mother:

      Age 1 to 5 days: 1 hour

      Age 6 to 10 days: 1 hour

      Age 11 to 15 days: 1 hour

      Age 16 to 20 days: 0.5 hour

      Age 21 to 25 days: 0 hours

       Graph 2: Fed on wire mother

      Two sets of data are plotted: One is labeled cloth mother. The other is labeled wire mother. The mean hours per day feeding based on age are listed here. Values are approximations.

       Cloth mother:

      Age 1 to 5 days: 7 hours

      Age 6 to 10 days: 8 hours

      Age 11 to 15 days: 11.5 hours

      Age 16 to 20 days: 17 hours

      Age 21 to 25 days: 17 hours

       Wire mother:

      Age 1 to 5 days: 2 hours

      Age 6 to 10 days: 1 hour

      Age 11 to 15 days: 2 hours