young children’s perceptions of social withdrawal in china and canada
TRANSCRIPT
This article was downloaded by: [New York University]On: 09 November 2014, At: 15:37Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Early Child Development and CarePublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/gecd20
Young children’s perceptions of socialwithdrawal in China and CanadaRobert J. Coplan a , Shujie Zheng b , Murray Weeks a & XinyinChen ca Department of Psychology , Carleton University , Ottawa ,Ontario , Canadab School of Psychology and Pedagogy , Ludong University , Yantai ,People’s Republic of Chinac Graduate School of Education , University of Pennsylvania ,Philadelphia , USAPublished online: 24 May 2011.
To cite this article: Robert J. Coplan , Shujie Zheng , Murray Weeks & Xinyin Chen (2012) Youngchildren’s perceptions of social withdrawal in China and Canada, Early Child Development andCare, 182:5, 591-607, DOI: 10.1080/03004430.2011.566328
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2011.566328
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to orarising out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
New
Yor
k U
nive
rsity
] at
15:
37 0
9 N
ovem
ber
2014
Early Child Development and Care
ISSN 0300-4430 print/ISSN 1476-8275 online© 2012 Taylor & Francis
http://www.tandfonline.com
Young children’s perceptions of social withdrawal in China and Canada
Robert J. Coplana*, Shujie Zhengb, Murray Weeksa and Xinyin Chenc
aDepartment of Psychology, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada; bSchool of Psychology and Pedagogy, Ludong University, Yantai, People’s Republic of China; cGraduate School of Education, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, USATaylor and FrancisGECD_A_566328.sgm(Received 21 October 2010; final version received 22 February 2011)10.1080/03004430.2011.566328Early Childhood Development and Care0300-4430 (print)/1476-8275 (online)Original Article2011Taylor & Francis0000000002011Dr [email protected]
The goal of the present study was to explore attitudes and responses to differentforms of social withdrawal in China and Canada. Participants in this study werechildren in early elementary school in the People’s Republic of China (n = 213;113 boys, 100 girls, Mage = 6.11 years) and Canada (n = 162; 60 boys, 102 girls,Mage = 6.20 years). Children were presented with hypothetical vignettesdescribing the behaviours of shy, unsociable, and socially competent peers andresponded to questions designed to assess their perceptions, attitudes, andresponses. Results indicated that Chinese and Canadian children differed in theirresponses, particularly with regard to hypothetical unsociable peers. Thesefindings shed some additional light on possible cross-cultural differences in themeaning and implications of different forms of social withdrawal.
Keywords: social withdrawal; shyness; unsociability; perceptions; culture
Social withdrawal is a process whereby children remove themselves from opportuni-ties for social interactions with peers and has been described as an ‘umbrella term’ thatencompasses different motivational processes underlying a child’s decision to playalone (Rubin, Coplan, & Bowker, 2009). For example, some children desire socialinteraction but may withdraw from social situations because of social fear and anxiety(shyness). In contrast, some children may simply prefer to play alone (unsociability orsocial disinterest).
There is growing evidence that parents (Coplan, Prakash, O’Neil, & Armer, 2004),teachers (Arbeau & Coplan, 2007), and even young children (Coplan, Girardi, Findlay,& Frohlick, 2007) distinguish between unsociability and shyness in early childhood.Moreover, whereas shyness is associated with indices of psychosocial maladjustmentacross the lifespan (Rubin et al., 2009), unsociability appears to be a comparably benignform of social withdrawal, particularly in early childhood (Coplan & Weeks, 2010a).Results from several studies suggest that shyness and social anxiety may have differentmeanings and implications in some non-Western societies (Chen, Rubin, & Li, 1995;Eisenberg, Pidada, & Liew, 2001). However, these studies focused mainly on associ-ations between shyness and adjustment variables such as peer acceptance withoutdirectly assessing children’s perceptions or reactions. Moreover, there is virtually noresearch on the distinctions between shyness and unsociability in non-Western cultures.
*Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]
Vol. 182, No. 5, May 2012, 591–607
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2011.566328
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
New
Yor
k U
nive
rsity
] at
15:
37 0
9 N
ovem
ber
2014
Developmental theorists have explored cultural influences on children’s socialfunctioning from different perspectives. Based on socio-ecological theory(Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 2006; Super & Harkness, 1986) and sociocultural theory(Cole, 1996; Rogoff, 2003; Vygotsky, 1978), Chen and colleagues (e.g., Chen &French, 2008; Chen, Wang, & DeSouza, 2006) proposed a contextual-developmentalframework that takes into account cultural values associated with different forms ofsocial withdrawal. From this perspective, it has been suggested that, in group-orientedsocieties (e.g., China), the value placed on forms of social withdrawal may depend onwhether these behaviours facilitate harmony and cohesiveness in the group. Incontrast, more self-oriented societies (e.g., Canada, USA) tend to endorse personalautonomy and self-direction, and therefore social withdrawal may not be valued if itconflicts with these societal goals. Thus, an examination of different forms of socialwithdrawal is particularly important in cross-cultural research because cultures mayplace different values on these social-behavioural attributes. Accordingly, the goal ofthe present study was to explore and compare young children’s understanding andperceptions of shyness and unsociability in China and Canada.
Social withdrawal in western societies
Shyness refers to wariness and anxiety in the face of social novelty and perceivedsocial-evaluation (Rubin et al., 2009). From a motivational perspective, shy childrenhave been described as experiencing an approach-avoidance conflict, whereby thedesire to engage in social interaction is simultaneously inhibited by fear and socialunease in the presence of peers (Coplan et al., 2004). In the presence of peers, thismotivational conflict appears to be manifested behaviourally through the display ofreticent behaviour (i.e., onlooking/unoccupied behaviours, Coplan, Rubin, Fox, &Calkins, 1994).
In western cultures, shyness is concurrently and predictively linked to indices ofmaladjustment across the lifespan, particularly along the internalising dimension(Rubin et al., 2009). For example, as compared to their non-shy peers, shy preschool-ers are more anxious, display deficits in social and academic competence, report lowerself-esteem and greater loneliness, and tend to be rejected and excluded by peers(Bohlin, Hagekull, & Andersson, 2005; Coplan, Arbeau, & Armer, 2008; Coplan,Closson, & Arbeau, 2007; Gazelle & Ladd, 2003). Shyness in boys also appears to beviewed more negatively by parents (e.g., Radke-Yarrow, Richters, & Wilson, 1988)and peers (e.g., Coplan et al., 2008). It has been suggested that shyness is less sociallyacceptable for boys than for girls because it violates gender norms related to malesocial assertion and dominance (Rubin et al., 2009).
Unsociability (or social disinterest) refers to the non-fearful preference for engag-ing in solitary activities. Although unsociable children are thought to have lowerapproach motivations (i.e., the lack of a strong desire to engage in social interactions),they are also conceptualised as having lower social avoidance motivations (i.e., do notfear or seek to actively avoid social interactions). As such, unsociable children maylike to play alone but would not be expected to have difficulties interacting compe-tently with their peers when called upon to do so (Coplan et al., 2004).
It has been suggested that unsociable children more often display solitary-passivebehaviours (i.e., quiet exploration and solitary-constructive play), which are regardedas relatively benign in childhood (Rubin & Asendorpf, 1993). In adolescence andadulthood, engagement in solitary activities is thought to have potential benefits for
R.J. Coplan et al.592
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
New
Yor
k U
nive
rsity
] at
15:
37 0
9 N
ovem
ber
2014
well-being (e.g., Larson, 1997; Long & Averill, 2003). However, given the impor-tance of peer relations in children’s development (Rubin, Bukowski, & Parker, 2006),it has also been suggested that unsociable children’s lack of interest in social interac-tion may lead to increasingly maladaptive outcomes for older children (Rubin &Asendorpf, 1993).
There have been only a few studies where researchers have specifically attemptedto assess unsociability as a separate construct from shyness in childhood (e.g., Harrist,Zaia, Bates, Dodge, & Pettit, 1997; Spangler & Gazelle, 2009). Compared to shyness,unsociability appears to be relatively benign, particularly in early childhood (seeCoplan & Weeks, 2010a for a recent review). Coplan et al. (2004) reported thatpreschool-aged unsociable children made comparatively fewer social initiations topeers, were rated by teachers as behaviourally withdrawn (but not anxious), and weremore likely to be excluded by peers. It was speculated that peers may be ‘put off’ byunsociable children and interpret their behaviours as being unfriendly or aloof. In alater study of children in middle childhood, Coplan and Weeks (2010b) reported thatunsociable boys, but not girls, were more prone to experience difficulties with peers,suggesting that peers may also be more accepting of unsociable behaviour in girls thanboys.
Perceptions of social withdrawal
Although it has been previously suggested that young children do not possess a well-developed social schema for social withdrawal (Younger, Gentile, & Burgess, 1993),results from later studies indicated that young children may have a better understand-ing of social withdrawal than originally concluded (e.g., Goossens, Bokhorst,Bruinsma, & Boxtel, 2002; Graham & Hoehn, 1995). Most recently, researchers havedemonstrated that young children even make distinctions between different types ofsocially withdrawn peers (e.g., Galanaki, 2004; Gavinski-Molina, Coplan, &Younger, 2003). For example, Coplan, Girardi, et al. (2007) reported that 5–6-year-old children characterised hypothetically depicted unsociable children as having alesser desire to play with others than shy children. Children also expressed greaterliking, a greater desire to play with, and more sympathy towards the hypothetical shypeer as compared to the unsociable peer.
Social withdrawal in China
Shyness and unsociability may have different functional meanings in Chinese chil-dren. Specifically, inconsistent with the results from North American samples, shynesshas been found to be associated with positive peer relationships, school competence,and psychological well-being in China (e.g., Chen, Chen, & Kaspar, 2001; Chen,Rubin, & Sun, 1992). Shy Chinese children tend to be accepted by peers, viewed ascompetent by adults, and well adjusted to the social environment. Moreover, shy chil-dren do not feel lonely or depressed, or develop negative perceptions of their compe-tence (Chen et al., 1995a, 2004). The social and psychological adjustment of shychildren may be due to the endorsement of socially wary behaviours in the society. Intraditional Chinese society, wariness and behavioural restraint are positively evaluatedand encouraged, indicating social maturity, mastery, and understanding (Chen, 2010).In this environment, shy children may obtain social approval and support, which inturn help them form social relationships, achieve in school, and develop positive feel-
Early Child Development and Care 593
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
New
Yor
k U
nive
rsity
] at
15:
37 0
9 N
ovem
ber
2014
ings about their self and others. It should be noted that as Chinese society is changingtowards a market-oriented economy, the adaptive value of shy behaviour has declined,and shy children in urban areas are starting to experience various adjustment problems(e.g., Chen, Cen, Li, & He, 2005; Chen, Wang, & Wang, 2009).
In contrast to shyness, unsociability may be related to negative peer and adult atti-tudes in China. Chinese society has traditionally been collectivistic (or group-oriented), emphasising interdependence and group affiliation (Greenfield, Suzuki, &Rothstein-Fisch, 2006; Triandis, 1995). During socialisation, children are encouragedto develop a sense of social belongingness and integration, concern for others, andcommitment to the group. There may be pressure put upon children to identify withthe group, function in a group context, and contribute to collective well-being (Chen& French, 2008; Sharabany, 2006). A preference for solitude (which may also encom-pass striving for personal autonomy and independence) may be perceived as being inconflict with such a group orientation (Ho, 1986) and children who prefer alonenessand distance themselves from the group may be viewed as anti-collective, selfish, anddeviant (Chen, 2008; Chen & Wang, in press). As a result, unsociability in China maybe more strongly associated with peer rejection and indices of socio-emotional malad-justment.
The present study
The primary purpose of the current study was to compare young children’s under-standing and perceptions of social withdrawal in China and Canada. Samples ofkindergarten children in both countries were presented with vignettes describinghypothetical peers displaying shy, unsociable, and socially competent (for comparisonpurposes) behaviours, and asked to respond to questions assessing their attributions,understanding, and responses to these different behaviours.
Overall, it was expected that children in both countries would: (1) attribute greaterintentionality to the hypothetical unsociable peer than the shy peer, (2) perceive thatunsociable children have a lower social approach motivation than shy peers, (3)express a greater desire to affiliate with shy versus unsociable children, and (4)perceive unsociable children as having a greater negative impact than shy children.Finally, given the previous research of gender differences, we speculated that childrenwould express more negative attitudes towards hypothetical shy and unsociable boysas compared to shy and unsociable girls.
Hypotheses regarding cross-cultural differences were more speculative in nature.We postulated that as compared with Canadian children: (1) Chinese children wouldexpress a relatively greater desire to affiliate with shy children and a lesser desire toaffiliate with unsociable children and (2) Chinese children would judge shy childrento have a lesser negative impact and unsociable children to have greater negativeimpact.
Method
Participants
Participants in this study were 375 children in early elementary school in the People’sRepublic of China and Canada. The Chinese sample included n = 213 children (113boys, 100 girls, Mage = 6.11 years, SD = .79) in Kindergarten and Grade 1 classes inYantai, Shandong province. Approximately 9% of mothers and 8% of fathers had not
R.J. Coplan et al.594
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
New
Yor
k U
nive
rsity
] at
15:
37 0
9 N
ovem
ber
2014
completed high school, 25% of mothers and 22% of fathers had completed highschool, 59% of mothers and 61% of fathers had a college/university degree, and 6%of mothers and 8% of fathers had at least some post-graduate training.
Children in the Canadian sample1 (n = 162; 60 boys, 102 girls, Mage = 6.20 years,SD = .72) were attending Kindergarten and Grade 1 classes in Ottawa, Canada. TheCanadian sample was primarily Caucasian (approximately 90%). Approximately 3%of mothers and 6% of fathers had not completed high school, 20% of mothers and 25%of fathers had completed high school, 62% of mothers and 44% of fathers had acollege/university degree, and 12% of mothers and 24% of fathers had at least somepost-graduate training.
Measures
Child interviews
Children in both samples were interviewed individually and presented with a series ofvignettes depicting hypothetical same-sex peers displaying different forms of socialand nonsocial behaviours. This measure was developed by Coplan, Girardi, et al.(2007), adapting from previous assessments that employed hypothetical vignettesdescribing children’s aggressive and socially withdrawn behaviours (e.g., Goossens etal., 2002; Graham & Hoehn, 1995). Results from these previous studies have providedstrong evidence of the reliability and validity of this assessment protocol in westerncultures. This includes high internal consistency among items, as well as a pattern ofconceptually consistent inter-associations between subscales that mirror relationsfound between teacher and peer reports.2
Procedure
Interviews were conducted with each child individually by trained research assistants.The interviews were conducted in a quiet location (typically outside of the classroom)and generally lasted about 10 minutes. The interview assessment included the presen-tation of three hypothetical vignettes describing the behaviour of a same-sex peer (i.e.,shy, unsociable, and socially competent). The complete English text of each vignetteis displayed in Table 1. For the Chinese version, the interview was first translated intoChinese and then back-translated to English to ensure accuracy.
After having read each vignette, children were asked a series of questions to whichthey responded by pointing to different sized circles representing a three-point scale(no, maybe/sometimes, yes). One question assessed children’s attributions of behav-ioural intentionality for the hypothetical peer (‘Do you think ___ acts that way on
Table 1. Hypothetical vignettes (boys version) depicting shy, unsociable, and sociallycompetent children.
ShyThis is name. Name is afraid to talk to other kids. When other kids are playing, he just watches them.
UnsociableThis is name. He likes to play on his own. When other kids are playing, he plays by himself.
Socially competentThis is name. Name is really nice. When he plays with other kids, they have lots of fun.
Early Child Development and Care 595
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
New
Yor
k U
nive
rsity
] at
15:
37 0
9 N
ovem
ber
2014
purpose?’). A separate question more specifically assessed children’s understandingof the hypothetical peer’s social motivations (‘Does ___ want to play with otherkids?’).
The next question was related to children’s affiliative preference towards thehypothetical peer (‘Would you want to be ___’s friend?’). Finally, one questionassessed children’s perceptions of the potential negative impact of these behaviours inthe classroom (‘Do kids who act like ___ cause a problem in your class?’).
Results
Preliminary analyses
The first set of analyses explored the equivalence of socio-demographic variablesacross the two samples. Results indicated that children across the Chinese andCanadian samples did not differ significantly in terms of age, (t(373) = 1.18, ns).Parental education was significantly lower among Chinese parents (M = 2.65, SD =.68, on a five-point scale) than Canadian parents (M = 2.86, SD = .68, t(362) = 2.96,p < .01). Preliminary analyses indicated that parental education did not have signifi-cant effects on the variables in the study.
Responses to hypothetical vignettes
The goal of these analyses was to examine/explore differences in children’s attitudesand responses to different types of hypothetical peers. Data were analysed with aseries of Mixed Repeated Measures ANOVAs, with Behaviour (shy, unsociable,socially competent) serving as a within-subjects variable, and both Country (Canada,China) and child Sex (boy, girl) as between-subjects variables.
Intentionality
The first of these analyses concerned children’s perceived intentionality of the hypo-thetical peers (i.e., child acts on purpose). Results are summarised in Table 2. Resultsindicated significant main effects of Behavior and Country, but not Sex. Results from
Table 2. Summary of mixed-repeated measures ANOVA for behavioural vignettes.
Source df F η2
Dependent variable: intentionalityBetween subjects
Country 1 20.81*** .053Sex 1 1.29 .003Country × Sex 1 <1 .000Error 371
Within subjectsBehaviour 2 159.50*** .301Behaviour × Country 2 19.71*** .050Behaviour × Sex 2 1.11 .003Behaviour × Country × Sex 2 <1 .001Error 742
R.J. Coplan et al.596
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
New
Yor
k U
nive
rsity
] at
15:
37 0
9 N
ovem
ber
2014
follow-up simple effects analyses indicated that overall, the behaviour of the hypo-thetical shy peer was viewed as least intentional, followed by the unsociable peer, andthen the socially competent peer (see Table 3). As well, overall, Chinese childrenrated the behaviour of hypothetical peers as less intentional than Canadian children.
Table 2. (Continued).
Source df F η2
Dependent variable: social motivation
Between subjectsCountry 1 <1 .000Sex 1 <1 .000Country × Sex 1 <1 .000Error 371
Within subjectsBehaviour 2 159.83*** .301Behaviour × Country 2 10.74*** .028Behaviour × Sex 2 1.92 .005Behaviour × Country × Sex 2 1.63 .004Error 742
Dependent variable: affiliative preferenceBetween subjects
Country 1 16.56*** .043Sex 1 1.96 .005Country × Sex 1 <1 .003Error 371
Within subjectsBehaviour 2 18.14*** .047Behaviour × Country 2 1.58 .004Behaviour × Sex 2 2.42+ .006Behaviour × Country × Sex 2 5.07* .014Error 742
Dependent variable: negative impactBetween subjects
Country 1 <1 .000Sex 1 3.07+ .008Country × Sex 1 <1 .001Error 371
Within subjectsBehaviour 1 11.27*** .020Behaviour × Country 1 <1 .001Behaviour × Sex 1 1.02 .003Behaviour × Country × Sex 1 <1 .000Error 371
+p < .10; *p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001.
Early Child Development and Care 597
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
New
Yor
k U
nive
rsity
] at
15:
37 0
9 N
ovem
ber
2014
However, these main effects were subsumed by a significant Behaviour × Countryinteraction. Relevant means for the Behaviour × Country interaction are displayed inFigure 1. Whereas children in China and Canada did not differ significantly in theirratings of intentionality for the shy peer (t(373) = .314, ns), Chinese children rated thebehaviours of both the unsociable (t(373) = −7.53, p < .001) and socially competentpeer (t(373) = −2.04, p < .05) as significantly less intentional than Canadian children.Figure 1. Mean intentionality scores by Behavior and Country.
Social motivation
The next analyses involved the inferred social motivation of the hypothetical peers(i.e., child wants to play with others). Results indicated a significant main effect ofBehaviour, but not Country or Sex (see Table 2). Follow-up simple effects analysesindicated that overall, the hypothetical unsociable peer was attributed the lowest socialmotivations (i.e., wanting to play the least with others), followed by the shy, and thenthe socially competent peer (see Table 3).
Table 3. Means and SDs of child interview responses for each vignette.
Vignette
Shy Unsociable Socially competentInterview responses mean (SD) mean (SD) mean (SD)
Intentionality 1.52a (.80) 2.01b (.92) 2.53c (.79)Social motivation 2.44b (.80) 1.87a (.90) 2.78c (.55)Affiliative preference 2.71b (.64) 2.59a (.71) 2.83c (.51)Negative impact 1.34a (.68) 1.50b (.77) N/A
Note: All responses measured on a three-point scale. Means with different subscripts differ significantly atthe .05 level.
Figure 1. Mean intentionality scores by Behaviour and Country.*Means differ at the .05 level.
R.J. Coplan et al.598
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
New
Yor
k U
nive
rsity
] at
15:
37 0
9 N
ovem
ber
2014
However, there was again a significant Behaviour × Country interaction. Relevantmeans for the Vignette × Country interaction are displayed in Figure 2. Children inChina and Canada did not differ significantly in their ratings of the social motivationsfor the hypothetical shy peer (t(373) = 1.00, ns). However, Chinese children rated theunsociable peer as having significantly higher social motivations (i.e., wanting to playmore with others) than Canadian children (t(373) = −2.07, p < .05). As well, Chinesechildren rated the socially competent peer as having significantly lower social moti-vations than Canadian children (t(373) = −4.66, p < .001).Figure 2. Mean social motivation scores by Behavior and Country.
Affiliative preference
The next analyses involved affiliative preference expressed towards the hypotheticalpeers (i.e., want to be friends with child). For this variable, there were significant maineffects of Country and Behaviour, but not sex (see Table 2). Overall, children fromCanada expressed a greater preference for befriending the hypothetical peers thanchildren from China. As well, overall, children expressed the greatest desire to befriends with the socially competent child, followed by the shy children, and then theunsociable child (see Table 3).
The results for the Behaviour × Sex interaction approached significance. However,these effects were all superseded by a significant three-way Behaviour × Country ×Sex interaction. Results from follow-up simple effects and post hoc analyses indicatedthat for Canadian children, affiliative preference expressed towards the sociallycompetent, shy, and unsociable peer did not differ by child sex. For Chinese children,a significant Vignette × Sex interaction was observed, with Chinese children express-ing a greater desire to be friends with the hypothetical shy girl as compared to the shyboy, and the hypothetical unsociable girl as compared to the unsociable boy (see
Figure 2. Mean social motivation scores by Behaviour and Country.*Means differ at the .05 level.
Early Child Development and Care 599
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
New
Yor
k U
nive
rsity
] at
15:
37 0
9 N
ovem
ber
2014
Figure 3). There was no sex difference in the Chinese children’s affiliative preferencefor the hypothetical socially competent peer.Figure 3. (a) Mean affiliative preference scores by Behavior for Canada. (b) Mean affiliative preference scores by Behavior and Sex for China.
Negative impact
The final analyses in this section involved the perceived negative impact of thehypothetical peer’s behaviours (i.e., child causes a problem in your class). For these
Figure 3. (a) Mean affiliative preference scores by Behaviour for Canada. (b) Mean affilia-tive preference scores by Behaviour and Sex for China.*Means differ at the .05 level.
R.J. Coplan et al.600
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
New
Yor
k U
nive
rsity
] at
15:
37 0
9 N
ovem
ber
2014
analyses, data from the socially competent vignette were not included (since almostall children indicated that socially competent peers did not cause any problems inclass). Results indicated a significant main effect of Behaviour (see Table 2). Over-all, unsociable children were described as having a greater negative impact in classthan shy children (see Table 3). The main effect of Sex approached significance.Overall, both types of hypothetical socially withdrawn boys (M = 1.48, SD = .60)were perceived to cause more problems in class than socially withdrawn girls (M =1.37, SD = .56). There was no significant main effect of Country, and none of theinteraction effects were significant.
Discussion
The primary goal of the present study was to compare young children’s understandingand perceptions of social withdrawal in China and Canada. Results indicated overalldifferences in the reactions to and perceptions of vignettes depicting different types ofsocially withdrawn behaviours. However, for the most part these main effects werequalified by interaction effects involving the type of behaviour depicted in thevignette, the sex of the hypothetical child, and the country of the respondent.
Conceptualisations of different types of social withdrawal
Results from the current study suggest that Canadian and Chinese children shared simi-lar views on some aspects of social withdrawal subtypes, but seemed to differ partic-ularly with regards to conceptualisations of unsociability. Overall, children in bothcountries characterised the hypothetical unsociable child as behaving more intention-ally (i.e., ‘act this way on purpose’) and explicitly as having lower social motivations(i.e., ‘want to play with others’) than the shy child. These findings are consistent withtheoretical conceptualisation of unsociability as representing a non-fearful preferencefor solitude, as compared to shyness arising from an ‘approach-avoidance conflict’between the desire for social interaction and fear/wariness in the face of social situa-tions (Coplan et al., 2004). Moreover, both Chinese and Canadian children reported amore positive overall response to the shy peer as compared to the unsociable peer. Thiswas consistent with the findings of Coplan, Girardi, et al. (2007), who also reportedthat Canadian children were more sympathetic towards hypothetical shy peers thanunsociable peers. Thus, in the current study, Chinese and Canadian children appearedto have similar understanding of shyness, although it has been reported that Chinesechildren tend to display a higher level of shyness because it is regarded as more accept-able and even desirable in social interactions (e.g., Chen et al., 1998, 2009).
Nevertheless, there were differences between Chinese and Canadian children intheir interpretations of the behaviour of the unsociable child and the socially compe-tent child in terms of intentionality and social motivation. Compared to their Canadiancounterparts, Chinese children viewed the behaviours of the unsociable child as lessintentional and characterised that unsociable child as having a greater desire to playwith others. Chinese also viewed the behaviour of the socially competent child as lessintentional but the socially competent child as having a greater desire to play withothers.
The different understandings of unsociable behaviour in Chinese and Canadianchildren may be related to cultural values of this behaviour. Chinese society hastraditionally been collectivistic or group-oriented, emphasising interdependence and
Early Child Development and Care 601
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
New
Yor
k U
nive
rsity
] at
15:
37 0
9 N
ovem
ber
2014
group affiliation (Chen, 2010; Oyserman, Coon, & Kemmelmeier, 2002). Duringsocialisation, children are encouraged to develop a sense of social belongingness andintegration and concern for others and to display prosocial and cooperative behav-iours. There is great pressure in Chinese than western societies on children to func-tion in group context and to contribute to interpersonal relationships (Chen & French,2008). Thus, unsociability or preference for solitude might be construed as a rejec-tion of group orientation in Chinese culture, and thus unsociable behaviours might bemore actively discouraged (Chen, 2008; Ho, 1986). Children who prefer alonenessand maintain distance from the group may be viewed as anti-collective, selfish, anddeviant in China (Chen, 2008). Given the social pressures to engage in affiliative andcollectivistic activities, it may be more difficult for Chinese children to believe thatany child would display socially disinterested behaviours intentionally. If this is thecase, it may be conceivable that Chinese children believe the unsociable peer mightstill desire to play with others and their socially disinterested behaviour might be lessintentional.
The differences between the two groups in the interpretations of the behaviour ofthe socially competent (or ‘really nice’) peer may also be due to different culturalvalues of prosocial and cooperative behaviour. It has been argued that prosocial/cooperative behaviour is often seen in Western cultures as a personal intentional deci-sion based on such factors as how much one likes the target person (Greenfield et al.,2006). In societies that emphasise group harmony and social relationships, there isgreat pressure on children to regard prosocial-cooperative behaviour as obligatory.According to Miller (1994), whereas individuals in western societies attempt to main-tain a balance between prosocial concerns and individual freedom of choice, individ-uals in group-oriented societies view being ‘nice’ to others as a fundamentalcommitment. Indeed, it has been found that, compared with western children, Chinesechildren tend to display more prosocial and cooperative behaviours (e.g., Orlick,Zhou, & Partington, 1990). Therefore, it is possible that the relatively low intention-ality (i.e., the child displays the behaviour on purpose) and social motivation (i.e.,because the child wants to play with others) in Chinese children reflect their thinkingthat prosocial behaviour should be more spontaneous and obligatory and less utilitar-ian or instrumental in nature. Of course, these arguments are highly speculative andfurther research is clearly needed on this issue.
Implications of different types of social withdrawal
A similar pattern of results was evident in terms of Canadian and Chinese children’sexpectations concerning the outcomes of different types of social withdrawal. Thepotential social repercussions of shyness and unsociability were assessed by askingchildren how much they would want to affiliate with each hypothetical peer (i.e., ‘befriends with’) and to what degree the peer’s behaviour might have a negative impact(i.e., ‘cause problems’) in class.
Overall, children in both countries reported wanting to befriend hypothetical shypeers more than unsociable peers, and indicated that shy peers would cause less of aproblem in class than would unsociable peers. These results are consistent with previ-ous findings suggesting that unsociable children might be less preferred playmatesthan shy children (Coplan, Girardi, et al., 2007). In both countries, children mightregard unsociable peers as being unfriendly or aloof, and are more sympathetictowards shy children (Coplan et al., 2004).
R.J. Coplan et al.602
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
New
Yor
k U
nive
rsity
] at
15:
37 0
9 N
ovem
ber
2014
Both Chinese and Canadian children also reported that socially withdrawn boys(both shy and unsociable) would cause more of a problem in class than would sociallywithdrawn girls. This provides further support for the greater peer difficulties thathave been observed in both shy and unsociable boys in early childhood (e.g., Coplanet al., 2004; Coplan & Weeks, 2010b) and is consistent with the notion that sociallywithdrawn behaviours are less socially acceptable in boys than in girls because theyviolate gender stereotypes and norms (Chen et al., 1995; Rubin et al., 2009).
A closer examination of the direct assessment of affiliative preference revealed amore complicated pattern of results. Canadian children reported wanting to befriendhypothetical socially competent children the most, followed by shy, and then unsocia-ble children – and these findings did not vary as a function of child sex. For Chinesechildren, although the overall pattern of preferred play partners was the same (i.e.,socially competent > shy > unsociable), some sex differences also emerged (asevidenced by the significant three-way interaction between Country, Behaviour, andSex). Children in China (but not Canada) reported a lesser desire to befriend sociallywithdrawn (both shy and unsociable) boys than girls. If differential responses to shyand unsocial boys are indeed partially attributable to societal norms regarding genderstereotypes, then these findings suggest that such gender stereotypes may be morepronounced in China. There has been some empirical support for this notion (e.g.,Chang, 1999; Chen et al., 2004), but more extensive exploration of Chinese gendernorms and stereotypes regarding different types of social behaviours is clearlywarranted.
Interestingly, Chinese children reported a lesser desire overall to befriend thehypothetical peers depicted in the study than did Canadian children. Again, thisbetween-country difference was not expected and appeared inconsistent with theprevailing notion that Chinese children are expected to feel more social pressure toinclude playmates. It is possible that since Chinese children display more shybehaviours than Canadian children, particularly in unfamiliar situations (e.g., Chenet al., 1998; Rubin, Hemphill, et al., 2006), the lower affiliative tendency of Chinesechildren reflects the higher level of shyness. Again, future research should furtherexplore this issue.
Caveats, future directions, and implications
This study was among the first to specifically compare young children’s conceptionsand attitudes towards different types of social withdrawal in Canada and China.Results indicated several cross-cultural differences, particularly with regards to theconstruct of unsociability. Notwithstanding, our findings must be considered as apreliminary first step, and various caveats must be considered in the interpretation ofour results.
To begin with, there are shortcomings associated with the use of hypotheticalvignettes to depict different types of withdrawn behaviours. The scenarios used in thecurrent study have been useful predictors of attitudes and behaviours in previous stud-ies of young children in western cultures (e.g., Coplan, Girardi, et al., 2007).However, additional validation of such vignette measures in China is clearlywarranted. Moreover, the use of vignettes should be complemented in future researchwith alternative methods such as naturalistic observations, where attitudes and prefer-ences regarding certain types of children can be assessed ‘in vivo’ (e.g., Chen,DeSouza, Chen, & Wang, 2006).
Early Child Development and Care 603
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
New
Yor
k U
nive
rsity
] at
15:
37 0
9 N
ovem
ber
2014
Future research should also attempt to clarify some of the gender-related issuesthat arose from our results. For example, because children in the current study onlyresponded to hypothetical vignettes depicting the behaviours of same-sex peers, it isnot possible to discern whether gender differences emerged due to the sex of the hypo-thetical peer or the sex of the child participant. It is also necessary to more specificallyexplore possible cross-cultural differences in children’s perceptions of gender rolesand gender stereotypes as they might apply to different forms of social and sociallywithdrawn behaviours.
As well, the current study focused on young children’s perceptions of social with-drawal in Canada and China. It would be interesting to extend this research to furtherexplore such attitudes among parents and teachers, and as they pertain to children ofdifferent ages. It has been suggested that all forms of social withdrawal becomeincreasingly maladaptive in later childhood and into adolescence (Rubin & Asen-dorpf, 1993). Accordingly, we might expect to see different perceptions (particularlywith regards to negative implications) among peers, teachers, and parents whenconsidering the ‘costs’ of social withdrawal in older children. Moreover, given thepaucity of previous empirical research on unsociability in China, longitudinal studies(employing multiple source assessments) are needed to better understand the socio-emotional adjustment trajectories of unsociable children over time.
Finally, our results have some potential implications for early education. To beginwith, it is important for educators across cultures to better understand the socio-emotional and academic implications of different forms of social withdrawal in theclassroom. Such knowledge will inform the development of educational ‘best-practices’ in promoting successful school adjustment among withdrawn children.Moreover, even nuanced cultural differences in social perceptions and attitudes mayhave an important impact on social dynamics during interactions between childrenfrom different cultural backgrounds. Raising awareness of such differences amongparents, teachers, and children could help to facilitate the social climate in earlyeducational settings that are becoming increasingly multicultural in composition.
AcknowledgementsThis research was partially supported by a Social Science Research Council of Canada researchgrant to Robert J. Coplan and doctoral award to Murray Weeks.
Notes1. Partial data from a subset of this sample was reported in Coplan, Girardi, et al. (2007).2. In terms of indices of reliability, Graham and Hoehn (1995) reported r’s of .66–.68 for chil-
dren in Grades 1–6 for responses to similar items asking whether the hypothetical child isseen as behaving this way ‘on purpose’. Also, Goossens et al. (2002) found a similar patternof social acceptance ratings between hypothetical socially withdrawn children and childrenidentified by teachers as socially withdrawn, supporting the ecological validity of thisvignette protocol.
Notes on contributorsRobert J. Coplan is a professor in the Psychology Department at Carleton University (Canada)and author of The development of shyness and social withdrawal (Guilford) and Socialdevelopment in childhood and adolescence: A contemporary reader (Wiley-Blackwell).
R.J. Coplan et al.604
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
New
Yor
k U
nive
rsity
] at
15:
37 0
9 N
ovem
ber
2014
Shujie Zheng is in the School of Psychology and Pedagogy at Ludong University (People’sRepublic of China).
Murray Weeks is a doctoral student in the psychology department at Carleton University.
Xinyin Chen is a professor in graduate school education at the University of Pennsylvania. Heis author of Socioemotional development in cultural context (Guilford), Social change andhuman development: Concepts and results (Sage) and Peer relationships in cultural context(Cambridge).
ReferencesArbeau, K.A., & Coplan, R.J. (2007). Kindergarten teachers’ beliefs and responses to
hypothetical prosocial, asocial, and antisocial children. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 53(2),291–318.
Bohlin, G., Hagekull, B., & Andersson, K. (2005). Behavioral inhibition as a precursor of peersocial competence in early school age: The interplay with attachment and nonparentalcare. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly: Journal of Developmental Psychology, 51(1), 1–19.
Bronfenbrenner, U., & Morris, P.A. (2006). The bioecological model of human development.In W. Damon (Series Ed.) & R.M. Lerner (Vol. Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol.1. Theoretical models of human development (pp. 793–828). New York, NY: Wiley.
Chang, L. (1999). Gender role egalitarian attitudes in Beijing, Hong Kong, Florida, andMichigan. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 30, 722–741.
Chen, X. (2008). Shyness and unsociability in cultural context. In A.S. LoCoco, K.H. Rubin,& C. Zappulla (Eds.), L’isolamento sociale durante l’infanzia [Social withdrawal in child-hood] (pp. 143–160). Milan: Unicopli.
Chen, X. (2010). Shyness-inhibition in childhood and adolescence: A cross-cultural perspec-tive. In K.H. Rubin & R.J. Coplan (Eds.), The development of shyness and social with-drawal (pp. 213–235). New York, NY: Guilford.
Chen, X., Cen, G., Li, D., & He, Y. (2005). Social functioning and adjustment in Chinesechildren: The imprint of historical time. Child Development, 76(1), 182–195.
Chen, X., Chen, H., & Kaspar, V. (2001). Group social functioning and individual socioe-motional and school adjustment in Chinese children. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 47(2),264–299.
Chen, X., DeSouza, A., Chen, H., & Wang, L. (2006). Reticent behavior and experiencesin peer interactions in Canadian and Chinese children. Developmental Psychology, 42,656–665.
Chen, X., & French, D.C. (2008). Children’s social competence in cultural context. AnnualReview of Psychology, 59, 591–616.
Chen, X., Hastings, P.D., Rubin, K.H., Chen, H., Cen, G., & Stewart, S.L. (1998). Child-rearing attitudes and behavioral inhibition in Chinese and Canadian toddlers: A cross-cultural study. Developmental Psychology, 34(4), 677–686.
Chen, X., Rubin, K.H., & Li, B. (1995). Social and school adjustment of shy and aggressivechildren in china. Development and Psychopathology, 7(2), 337–349.
Chen, X., Rubin, K.H., & Sun, Y. (1992). Social reputation and peer relationships in Chineseand Canadian children: A cross-cultural study. Child Development, 63(6), 1336–1343.
Chen, X., & Wang, L. (in press). Shyness-sensitivity and unsociability in rural Chinesechildren: Relations with social, school, and psychological adjustment. Child Development.
Chen, X., Wang, L., & DeSouza, A. (2006). Temperament and socio-emotional functioning inChinese and North American children. In X. Chen, D. French, & B. Schneider (Eds.),Peer relationships in cultural context (pp.123–147). New York, NY: Cambridge Univer-sity Press.
Chen, X., Wang, L., & Wang, Z. (2009). Shyness-sensitivity and social, school, and psycho-logical adjustment in rural migrant and urban children in China. Child Development, 80,1499–1513.
Chen, X., Zappulla, C., Coco, A.L., Schneider, B., Kaspar, V., De Oliveira, A.M., …DeSouza, A. (2004). Self-perceptions of competence in Brazilian, Canadian, Chinese and
Early Child Development and Care 605
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
New
Yor
k U
nive
rsity
] at
15:
37 0
9 N
ovem
ber
2014
Italian children: Relations with social and school adjustment. International Journal ofBehavioral Development, 28(2), 129–138.
Cole, M. (1996). Cultural psychology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Coplan, R.J., Arbeau, K.A., & Armer, M. (2008). Don’t fret, be supportive! Maternal charac-
teristics linking child shyness to psychosocial and school adjustment in kindergarten.Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 36(3), 359–371.
Coplan, R.J., Closson, L.M., & Arbeau, K.A. (2007). Gender differences in the behavioralassociates of loneliness and social dissatisfaction in kindergarten. Journal of ChildPsychology and Psychiatry, 48(10), 988–995.
Coplan, R.J., Girardi, A., Findlay, L.C., & Frohlick, S.L. (2007). Understanding solitude:Young children’s attitudes and responses toward hypothetical socially withdrawn peers.Social Development, 16(3), 390–409.
Coplan, R.J., Prakash, K., O’Neil, K., & Armer, M. (2004). Do you ‘want’ to play?Distinguishing between conflicted shyness and social disinterest in early childhood.Developmental Psychology, 40(2), 244–258.
Coplan, R.J., Rubin, K.H., Fox, N.A., & Calkins, S.D. (1994). Being alone, playing alone, andacting alone: Distinguishing among reticence and passive and active solitude in youngchildren. Child Development, 65(1), 129–137.
Coplan, R.J., Weeks, M. (2010a). Unsociability and the preference for solitude in childhood.In K.H. Rubin & R.J. Coplan (Eds.), The development of shyness and social withdrawal inchildhood and adolescence (pp. 64–83). New York, NY: Guilford.
Coplan, R.J., & Weeks, M. (2010b). Unsociability in middle childhood: Conceptualization,assessment, and associations with socioemotional functioning. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly,56(2), 105–130.
Eisenberg, N., Pidada, S., & Liew, J. (2001). The relations of regulation and negative emotion-ality to Indonesian children’s social functioning. Child Development, 72(6), 1747–1763.
Gazelle, H., & Ladd, G.W. (2003). Anxious solitude and peer exclusion: A diathesis-stressmodel of internalizing trajectories in childhood. Child Development, 74(1), 257–278.
Goossens, F.A., Bokhorst, K., Bruinsma, C., & van Boxtel, H.W. (2002). Judgments ofaggressive, withdrawn and prosocial behavior: Perceived control, anger, pity and sympa-thy in young Dutch children. Journal of School Psychology, 40(4), 309–327.
Graham, S., & Hoehn, S. (1995). Children’s understanding of aggression and withdrawal associal stigmas: An attributional analysis. Child Development, 66, 1143–1161.
Greenfield, P.M., Suzuki, L.K., & Rothstein-Fisch, C. (2006). Cultural pathways throughhuman development. In K.A. Renninger, I.E. Sigel, W. Damon, & R.M. Lerner (Eds.),Handbook of child psychology: Vol 4. Child psychology in practice (6th ed., pp. 655–699).Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Harrist, A.W., Zaia, A.F., Bates, J.E., Dodge, K.A., & Pettit, G.S. (1997). Subtypes of socialwithdrawal in early childhood: Sociometric status and social-cognitive differences acrossfour years. Child Development, 68(2), 278–294.
Ho, D.Y.F. (1986). Chinese patterns of socialization: A critical review. In M.H. Bond (Ed.),The psychology of the Chinese people (pp. 1–37). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Larson, R.W. (1997). The emergence of solitude as a constructive domain of experience inearly adolescence. Child Development, 68(1), 80–93.
Long, C.R., & Averill, J.R. (2003). Solitude: An exploration of benefits of being alone. Jour-nal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 33(1), 21–44.
Miller, J.G. (1994). Cultural diversity in the morality of caring: Individually oriented versusduty-based interpersonal moral codes. Cross-Cultural Research, 28, 3–39.
Orlick, T., Zhou, Q.Y., & Partington, J. (1990). Co-operation and conflict within Chinese andCanadian kindergarten settings. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Sciences, 22, 20–25.
Oyserman, D., Coon, H.M., & Kemmelmeier, M. (2002). Rethinking individualism andcollectivism: Evaluation of theoretical assumptions and meta-analyses. PsychologicalBulletin, 128, 3–72.
Radke-Yarrow, M., Richters, J., & Wilson, W.E. (1988). Child development in a network ofrelationships. In R.A. Hinde & J. Stevenson-Hinde (Eds.), Relationships within families:Mutual influences. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Rogoff, B. (2003). The cultural nature of human development. New York, NY: OxfordUniversity Press.
R.J. Coplan et al.606
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
New
Yor
k U
nive
rsity
] at
15:
37 0
9 N
ovem
ber
2014
Rubin, K.H., & Asendorpf, J.B. (1993). Social withdrawal, inhibition, and shyness in child-hood: Conceptual and definitional issues. In K.H. Rubin & J.B. Asendorpf (Eds.), Socialwithdrawal, inhibition, and shyness in childhood (pp. 3–17). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Rubin, K.H., Bukowski, W., & Parker, J. (2006). Peer interactions, relationships, and groups.In N. Eisenberg, W. Damon, & R.M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 3.Social, emotional, and personality development (6th ed., pp. 571–645). Hoboken, NJ:Wiley.
Rubin, K.H., Coplan, R.J., & Bowker, J.C. (2009). Social withdrawal in childhood. AnnualReview of Psychology, 60, 141–171.
Rubin, K.H., Hemphill, S.A., Chen, X., Hastings, P., Sanson, A., Lo Coco, A. … Cui, L.(2006). A cross-cultural study of behavioral inhibition in toddlers: East–west–north–south.International Journal of Behavioral Development, 30, 219–226.
Sharabany, R. (2006). The cultural context of children and adolescents: Peer relationships andintimate friendships among Arab and Jewish children in Israel. In X. Chen, D.C. French,& B.H. Schneider (Eds.), Peer relationships in cultural context (pp. 452–478). New York,NY: Cambridge University Press.
Spangler, T., & Gazelle, H. (2009). Anxious solitude, unsociability, and peer exclusion inmiddle childhood: A multitrait-multimethod matrix. Social Development, 18(4), 833–856.
Super, C.M., & Harkness, S. (1986). The developmental niche: A conceptualization at theinterface of child and culture. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 9,545–569.
Triandis, H.C. (1995). Individualism & collectivism. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes
(M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman, Eds.). Cambridge, MA: HarvardUniversity Press.
Younger, A., Gentile, C., & Burgess, K. (1993). Children’s perceptions of social withdrawal:Changes across age. In K.H. Rubin & J.B. Asendorpf (Eds.), Social withdrawal,inhibition, and shyness in childhood (pp. 215–235). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Early Child Development and Care 607
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
New
Yor
k U
nive
rsity
] at
15:
37 0
9 N
ovem
ber
2014