When I first read the article, I couldn’t help thinking on this infamous Little Britain clip. But true, if a kid has strong bonds to his parents, the child is likely to be a positive, responsive playmate, and he’ll be able to adapt to a difficult peer by asserting his needs, according to a new study published in Developmental Psychology.
From the press release:
“Securely attached children are more responsive to suggestions or requests made by a new peer partner. A child who has experienced a secure attachment relationship with caregivers is likely to come into a new peer relationship with positive expectations,” said Nancy McElwain, a U of I professor of human development.
In the study, the researchers assessed the security of child-mother attachment relationships for 114 children at 33 months, and parents reported on their child’s temperament, including anger proneness and social fearfulness. At 39 months, children of the same gender were randomly paired with one another and observed over three laboratory visits in a one-month period.
Securely attached kids were more responsive to a new peer partner the first time they met, even if the new child was prone to anger. Kids with secure attachments continued to respond favorably on the second and third visits when the peer partner’s anger was low — but not when the other child’s anger was high, the researcher said.
When a child is paired with a peer who is quick to become frustrated or angry, the positive social expectations of a child with a secure attachment are likely not met. The securely attached child may then adapt to the situation and dampen his responsiveness to the challenging partner, McElwain said.
“A more securely attached child was also likely to use suggestions and requests rather than commands and intrusive behavior (such as grabbing toys away) during play with an anger-prone peer during the first two visits. By the final visit, a child with a secure attachment had adjusted to the controlling assertiveness of her anger-prone partner by becoming more controlling herself,” she said.
The study showed that a child’s level of attachment security, their partner’s tendency to become angry, and how well the children knew each other (earlier vs. later visits) combined to predict a child’s behavior.
“Behavior toward a peer partner depended on the partner’s temperament as much as the child’s own attachment. Consideration of both factors in combination is needed to understand a child’s behavior toward a new peer,” McElwain said.
The child’s own temperament also played a role in understanding her behavior toward new peer partners. Children whose parents described them as socially fearful were less assertive overall, she noted.
“But don’t confuse a difficult temperament with an insecure attachment. You may have a fussy infant, but if you respond to him sensitively, he will develop a strong bond with his parents and will likely go on to enjoy positive, close relationships with others,” she said.
But there is more, scientists are also launching a groundbreaking study looking at critical periods early in a child’s life when exposure to stressors matters most. The goal is to track telomeres – a cellular marker for aging and stress – to discover the biological mechanism for how early trauma gets under the skin, potentially stealing time from a child’s biological clock. Can parents create a biological buffer that shields children decades later from disease and toxic stress? This means: can strong parental bond protect infants down to their DNA?
Abstract of the research:
Guided by a dyadic view of children’s peer behavior, this study assessed actor and partner effects of attachment security and temperament on young children’s behavior with an unfamiliar peer. At 33 months of age, child–mother attachment security was assessed via a modified Strange Situation procedure, and parents reported on child temperament (anger proneness and social fearfulness). At 39 months, same-sex children (N = 114, 58 girls) were randomly paired, and child dyads were observed during 3 laboratory visits occurring over 1 month. Actor–partner interdependence models, tested via multilevel modeling, revealed that actor security, partner anger proneness, and acquaintanceship (e.g., initial vs. later visits) combined to predict child behavior. Actor security predicted more responsiveness to the new peer partner at the initial visit, regardless of partner anger proneness. Actor security continued to predict responsiveness at the 2nd and 3rd visits when partner anger was low, but these associations were nonsignificant when partner anger was high. Actor security also predicted a less controlling assertiveness style at the initial visit when partner anger proneness was high, yet this association was nonsignificant by the final visit. The findings shed light on the dynamic nature of young children’s peer behavior and indicate that attachment security is related to behavior in expected ways during initial interactions with a new peer, but may change as children become acquainted.