Development of Personal Relationships
Early Social Life 5
Classical Developmental Theory 5
Psychoanalytic Theory 5
Evolutionary Theory 5
Attachment Theory 5
Social Learning Theory 5
Cognitive-Developmental Theory 6
Behavioral Genetic Theories 6
An Alternative Perspective: Social Systems Theories 6
The Social Meaning of Infants’ and Toddlers’ Peer Relations 6
Infants and Toddlers as Members of Peer Groups 8
Early Peer Relations in Relation to Other Interpersonal Relationships 8
Links Between Other Interpersonal Relationships and Infants’ Peer Relations 8
Other Sources of Influence on Early Peer Relations 9
New Directions 10
Changes in Social Networks Across the Lifespan 11
Social Network Changes and Life Events Across the Life Span 11
Different Types of Social Networks 11
Changes of Social Networks Over the Life Course 11
Age-Related Differences and Change in Social Networks 12
Life-Event Related Change in Social Networks 13
Comparing Age-Related and Life-Event-Related Network Change 13
Conclusion regarding the two theories 14
Close Social Ties and Health in Later Life: Strengths and Vulnerabilities 14
Areas of Strength in Older Adults’ Social Relationships 15
Areas of Vulnerability in Older Adults’ Social Relationships 15
How Parents Affect Children’s Social Lives 17
Socialization in the Family: Ethnic and Ecological Perspectives 17
Contemporary Theoretical Approaches to Socialization in the Family 17
Parent-Child Subsystem: A Tripartite Approach 17
Beyond the Parent-Child Dyad: The Marital Subsystem as a Contributor to Children’s
Socialization 22
A Multiple Sources Model of Socialization 23
Determinants of Family Socialization Strategies 23
, Social Change and Family Socialization 24
How Parents Contribute to Children’s Psychological Health 25
Basic Psychology Needs and Children’s Psychosocial Adjustment 25
The Nurturing Role of Parents in Children’s Development 25
The Interplay Between the Three Dimensions of Parental Need Support 26
The Role of Cultural, Developmental, and Individual Differences 27
Summary: Parenting theories 27
Friendship Across the Lifespan 28
Friendship 28
Friendships in Childhood 28
Distinguishing Friendship from Peer Acceptance 28
A Social Tasks Perspective on Friendship 29
Research Settings and Methods 29
Provisions and Processes of Friendship 30
Friendship in Social Context 31
Friendship Across the Life Span: Reciprocity in Individual and Relationship Development 31
A Life-Span Developmental Perspective on Friendship 31
Friendship Across the Life Span 33
Friendship Research Methods 35
Research Limitations 35
Measures of Friendship 35
Loneliness Across the Lifespan 36
Loneliness: Clinical Import and Interventions 36
Definitions of Loneliness 36
Who Can Feel Lonely? 36
Dimensions of Loneliness 36
Measuring Loneliness 38
Common Sources of Loneliness 38
Consequences of Loneliness 38
Interventions to Reduce Loneliness 39
Loneliness Across the Lifespan 41
Sources of Transient and Prolonged Feelings of Loneliness Across Ontogeny 42
Motivation to Reconnect Across Development 43
Intervention Strategies Across Development That Address Faults in the RAM 44
Overview 45
Social Status, Selection and Influence 47
, Peer Influence 47
Peer selection 47
Defining Influence 47
Main Issues 47
Theoretical Considerations 48
How is Peer Influence Measured? 50
Central Research Findings 50
Peer Status and Psychopathology 51
Main Issues 51
Theoretical Considerations 52
Central Research Findings 52
Conclusion and Interventions 54
Changes in Peer Relations in Early and Young Adulthood 55
A Longer Road to Adulthood 55
What Is Emerging Adulthood? 55
Research on the Five Features 56
Who Needs Emerging Adulthood? 57
The Cultural Context of Emerging Adulthood 57
Emerging Adulthood: Developmental Stage, Theory, or Nonsense? 58
Emerging Adulthood as Nonsense 58
Stage vs. Process: A Long-Standing Debate in Developmental Science 59
Is Emerging Adulthood A Theory? 59
Changes in Peer Relations 61
Negative Peer Relations 61
Peer Relations and Developmental Psychopathology 61
Social Withdrawal 61
Peer Status 63
Peer-Perceived Popularity 64
Peer Victimization 64
Friendship 66
Bullying and Victimization 68
Main Issues 68
Theoretical Considerations 68
Measures and Methods 69
Central Research Findings 69
Workplace Bullying 72
, Bullying in Older Adults 73
Parent-Offspring Relations Beyond Childhood 73
Developmental Changes in Adolescents’ Perceptions of Relationships with Their Parents 73
Development of Support, Conflict, and Power 73
From Inequality to Equality: An Interlinked Process 74
Development Towards More Equality of Power 75
Communication 75
Intergenerational Transmission 76
Characteristics Likely to be Transmitted Intergenerationally 76
Mechanisms of Intergenerational Transmission 77
Testing the Cycle of Maltreatment Hypothesis 79
Theoretical Considerations 79
Methodology of Studies About Intergenerational Transmission of Child Abuse 79
Meta-Analysis Results 80
Discussion 80
Online Peer Relations 81
Social Media and Peer Relations 81
Theoretical Considerations 81
Measure and Methods 82
Central Research Findings 83
Dangers of Social Media 84
Health Risk 84
How We Present Ourselves Online is Fake 85
Online Relationships are Superficial 85
Do Online Relationships Prevent Real Relationships? 85
Romantic Relationships Across the Lifespan 86
The Romantic Relationships of Youth 86
Main Issues 86
Theories of Romantic Relationships 87
Methods 87
Key Findings 87
How Much Does Love Really Hurt? 92
Break-Ups and Divorce 92
The Association Between Relationship Measures and Mental Health 93
Social Relations and Health Across the Lifespan 93
Interpersonal Mechanisms Linking Close Relationships to Health 93
, Social Connection: Processes that Protect and Promote Health 95
Social Disconnection: Processes that Undermine Health 97
Individual Difference and Contextual Influence 98
Potential Mediating Mechanisms 98
Social Relationships and Physiological Determinants of Longevity Across the Human Life Span 102
Social Integration 102
Perceived Social Support and Strain 103
Conclusion 103
Early Social Life
Considering that peer relations begin in the first weeks of life, when infants notice each other and
respond to each other’s cries, there are three key developmental questions that have to be
empirically investigated.
• What is the social meaning of early peer relations?
• What are the developmental origins of early peer relations?
• Are early peer relations consequential for later development?
Classical Developmental Theory
Psychoanalytic Theory
Psychoanalytic theory emphasizes the emotional limitations of infants and the prevalence of the
mother-infant relationship. There is no expectation that infants’ peer relations are significant for
development.
Evolutionary Theory
Evolutionary theories focus on the transmission of inherited characteristics from one generation to
the next and therefore on the parent-offspring relationship and conflict. Within the discipline of
human ethology, infants’ peer relations were deemed unnatural because in small hunter-gatherer
groups, there would have been few opportunities for infants to meet up with peers. Studies with
primates have, however, shown that in comparison with social isolation, being reared with peers
provides a protective function for social development.
Attachment Theory
In Bowlby’s attachment theory, the parent-child relationship is emphasized in early life and it
assumed that infants only gradually turn their attention to peers. Because infants are believed to be
biologically prepared to form an asymmetrical attachment to primary caregivers, it is less likely that
they form more equal relationships with peers.
Social Learning Theory
Within social learning theory, parents are seen as an important influence on their children’s social
development, through processes like modeling and social reinforcement. In later childhood and
adolescence, peer models are thought to contribute to children’s subsequent behavior. However,
only imitation has been identified as a social skill that develops over the first two years of life and
plays a role in infants’ peer interactions.
,Cognitive-Developmental Theory
Piaget thought that peer influences begin to operate in later childhood and that infancy is all about
individual discovery of the physical world. The quantity and quality of earlier peer relations are
constrained by young children’s cognitive development so that communication with peers develops
gradually, starting with verbal arguments. Other cognitive-developmental theorists pay even less
attention to the possible importance of early peer relations.
Behavioral Genetic Theories
Behavioral Genetic Theories emphasize the role of genes and inborn temperament. Some of these
theories downplay the contribution of parents and emphasize the role of peers or draw attention to
children’s unique experiences (outside of their family) but do not focus on peer influence in
particular.
An Alternative Perspective: Social Systems Theories
Most major developmental theories hold that (1) infants’ capacities for true social interactions are
limited, (2) the ability to engage in peer relationships develops later in childhood and derives from
earlier relationships with caregivers, and (3) later peer relationships are consequential for
development but early ones are not.
A few developmental theorists argue that human infants are already members of broader society,
where they take an active role in social interactions with siblings, peers, and other people. This social
systems perspective emphasizes:
• The sociable nature of infants
• Infants abilities to engage in multiple relationships
• The complex social networks in which infants and their families are embedded
It is believed that infants may be biologically prepared for social relationships in general, rather than
for attachments to one primary caregiver. Evidence for that is derived from the scrambled face
paradigm, in which a newborn is presented with a real face, to different degrees scrambled faces and
an empty face. The newborn child is more interested in the real face than any of the others.
The Social Meaning of Infants’ and Toddlers’ Peer Relations
Are Infants Capable of “True” Social Interaction?
Evidence suggests that a rudimentary capacity for peer interaction is present in the first months of
life. On the basis of nonverbal criteria, social interaction has been identified when infants’
encounters with peers include:
• Mutual engagement of attention
• Explicit communicative acts
• Sensitivity to the behavior of the partner
• Coordination of actions with the partner’s actions
In the first year of life, infants show interest in one another when they look at, gesture toward, and
touch their peers. Even though this interest in their peers may stem from a general attraction to
other human beings, studies show that they tend to be more interested in peers than unfamiliar
adults.
At around the age of 6 months, infants begin to communicate with and share toys with their peers,
which is parallel to the shift of infant-parent interactions from mutual gaze and vocalization to
interactions that are focused on objects. Contingency is a central factor in maintaining peer
,interaction because it succeeds when it is flexible and creative, not predictable, repetitive and
inflexible.
Do Infants’ Peer Interactions Resemble Social Interactions at Older Ages?
Three important forms of social interaction are commonly studied in childhood and later life:
• Prosocial exchanges
• Social conflict
• Social influence
The foundations of prosocial exchanges can be traced to the earliest days of life, when infants cry in
response to the cry of other infants. Infants’ responsiveness to peers’ distress continues to develop
during the next 2 years, when they begin to show attention, problem solving, aggression, and
amusement. In a study it was found that 8-month-olds were most likely to respond to another baby’s
distress with a gaze, followed by affect (e.g., smiling), a physical response (e.g., waving) and self-
distress. This order indicates that even at a young age, babies first and foremost try to elevate stress
in others. By the age of one year, infants show early forms of sharing. Cooperative problem solving
with peers is possible at around the age of two, when individual differences also start to become
apparent.
Sharing, a form of prosocial exchange, appears to already exist to a limited extent at 12 months old
but the focus remains on non-sharing. At 18 months, infants are able to share when requested to do
so and require an understanding of ownership. A better understanding of ownership is related to
sharing more. From 24 months old, children start to share spontaneously and reciprocally and
sharing behavior can be predicted by sensitivity to distress. At around 4 years of age, sharing
increases even further and can be connected to a child’s theory of mind.
Simple cooperation can be seen in infants as young as 12 months old. However, from the age of 2
years onwards, cooperation becomes more complex.
Conflicts are functional because they enable the development of certain social skills. Conflicts over
toys and intrusions on physical space emerge in the last quarter of the first year but infants often
avoid conflict. Especially at a young age, this is characterized by resistance without force, like hard
hits. The use of physical force against their peers starts shortly before their first birthday but occurs
at low rates. At the age of 2 years old, language becomes a common mean to resolve conflicts and
retaliation of conflict (comparable to reciprocity) is not uncommon. Gender differences in conflict
behavior do not become apparent until the age of 3 years, indicating that socialization is a driving
force behind gender-specific conflict behavior. The amount of conflicts in infants and young children
usually stays the same and only the content of the conflicts changes in accordance with the
development of the child.
Social influence between young peers can be detected in the context of prosocial exchanges (e.g.,
reciprocity in sharing) and conflict (e.g., retaliation in conflict). Imitation plays an important role in
early peer interactions, although infants’ games with peers contain complementary as well as
imitative actions. The effectiveness of peer versus adult models seems to depend on the age of the
observer: In a study, 15-month-olds were more likely to imitate adults, whereas 24-month-olds were
more likely to imitate peers.
Do Infants and Toddlers Form Unique Peer Relationships?
Studies indicate that the interactions infants engage in, differ across peer dyads. Already at 6 months
old, members of dyads are similar to each other in the extent to which they touch each other, and
,they are different from members of other dyads. When presented with a new partner, infants
respond differently than to familiar peers.
When infants spend time together on a daily basis, they develop distinct preferences for particular
companions. The principle of homophily (= preference for people like oneself) may originate in
infancy: The infants’ social preferences are not only influenced by the peer’s sex and individual traits
but possibly also by the peer’s stage of development.
As soon as infants start to acquire language, toddlers begin to gossip about their peers. Parents’
reports of the names of children their toddlers talked about predicted the extent of their children’s
interaction with different peers. Toddler peers can also be a source of encouragement and comfort,
facilitating each other’s exploration of new environments.
Infants and Toddlers as Members of Peer Groups
The developmental course of triadic interaction is not known. However, when 2-year-olds were
tested in groups of three, approximately one-fifth of their interactions were actively triadic. It was
more common for two toddlers to be actively engaged, while being closely monitored by the third.
Status and dominance are already a part of infant peer groups: clear structures are visible in 11- to
15-months-old children, which are related to tenure, development and gender. The following graphs
show the results of a study that investigated the dominant and submissive behaviors of the highest
and second-highest ranking infants with regards to the other members of the groups:
Early Peer Relations in Relation to Other Interpersonal Relationships
In most major developmental theories, the caregiver-infant relationship is a prerequisite to the
infant’s subsequent relations with other people. Social systems approaches, however, see the
beginnings of peer relations as a parallel development, not requiring an earlier relationship with a
caregiver as a prerequisite. The few studies that have been conducted yield contradicting results.
Links Between Other Interpersonal Relationships and Infants’ Peer Relations
Parents
The question of maternal influence on early peer relations goes beyond the debate about the
prerequisite versus parallel development models: Individual differences in mothers may be linked to
differences in their infants’ peer relations. Additionally, depending on the quality of attachment, the
mother-infant relationship may influence peer relations in different ways. The evidence for a
relationship between attachment and infant-peer relationships is mixed. Studies also suggest that
fathers, as well as the parental relationship, may also influence early peer relations.
,Siblings
Even though sibling relationships influence the peer relations of older children, there is little
evidence for sibling influence in young peers.
Other caregivers
Many infants grow up with other infants from a very early age, where adult caregivers discourage
interactions among peers. This behavior may suppress children’s sociability with their peers over
time. But caregivers can also foster children’s peer competence.
Other Sources of Influence on Early Peer Relations
Genes
It is not certain whether twin studies are an appropriate mean for studying genetic influences on
peer relations because having siblings at the same age may have an effect on the frequency and
quality of peer interactions. However, conducted twin studies have indicated genetic as well as
environmental influence on toddlers’ behavior in early peer interaction – including aggression,
empathic concern, and prosocial behavior.
The Child’s Sex
Although sex differences might influence the content of play with peers, there is little evidence for
striking sex differences in prosocial behavior or conflict with peers before the second birthday. Sex
differences in aggression and conflict with peers have been reported to emerge between 2 and 4
years of age. Rather than showing a pattern of consistent sex differences in actual behavior with
peers, the child’s sex often serves as a moderating variable of the impact of other factors.
Temperament and Emotion Regulation
Temperamental differences in infants’ activity levels and ability to regulate their emotions influence
early peer relations. An example of this is inhibited temperament in infancy, which predicts later
shyness with peers. Proneness to anger and low tolerance of frustration influence the extent to
which toddlers become involved in interaction with peers and take part in aggressive conflict.
Furthermore, there is a difference between adult and peer situations: Infants tend to regulate their
emotions more, when they are in a peer group and seem to use their home as a safe place to
practice emotion regulation.
Joint Attention
Joint attention is the ability to coordinate attention with another person and starts at around 6
months of age. It is one of the basic for theory of mind.
Imitation
Imitation also starts at the age of 6 months and is an essential prerequisite for harmonious play with
peers. Studies in different age groups show, that we imitate people we like and we like people more,
when they imitate us. Additionally, imitation is a learning tool for social skills.
Causal Understanding
For causal understanding to be developed, the child needs to understand that the other is an
intentional social agent, that their own actions affect others, and that others can do things by
accident.
Cognition and Language
With regards to cognition and language, it can be said that the games which toddlers play with peers
indicate shared meaning. As soon as language develops, toddlers speak to their peers and later
engage in structured conversations. Toddler’s verbal ability is positively correlated with prosocial
behavior with peers and negatively correlated with aggressive behavioral problems.
, The degree of social understanding that toddlers acquire in the first years of life influences their
dealings with peers. For example, the emerging understanding of the relationship between people
and objects is associated with both sharing and the use of force 6 months later. Social understanding
alone does not invariably predict either aggression or prosocial behavior, but draws children’s
attention to opportunities for different sorts of social responses.
Language fosters the development of theory of mind and is an essential component of pretend play
from children aged 2 years and older.
The Broader Culture
Key features of interaction, like cooperative games and conflict, between young peers are evident
across cultural settings. Even though the themes of games may differ by culture, the requisite skill of
reciprocal imitation facilitates game playing in all cultures. It might be possible that early
developmental processes that influence the quality of peer relations differ across cultures, which
requires further examination.
New Directions
It is important to study early peer relations directly, if we are to understand the developmental
processes that underlie social development. Several fundamental questions need to be answered:
• What cognitive and learning mechanisms underlie interactions with peers?
• Why do peer relations become intentional and what intentions do young peers have?
• When do infants attain intersubjectivity (the meaning of communication) with peers?
• When do toddlers begin to identify social groups?
