• Positive Youth Development (PYD) is a framework that focuses on factors that help youth (from adolescence through early adulthood) actively contribute to their own development and that of their community.
• Youth thrive when they have access to and take advantage of a nurturing environment, which provides resources and opportunities at home, in school, in the neighborhood, and in local and global contexts.
• Youth who report more positive developmental outcomes (like confidence, competence, character, caring, and connection, i.e., the 5Cs of PYD) are said to be thriving; they are also more likely to report fewer problem behaviors and emotional difficulties than their non-thriving peers.
• Across contexts and countries, youth who are thriving also tend to contribute to their families; schools; and local, community, and global activities.

Most caregivers want their youth to thrive, refrain from risky behaviors, be emotionally stable, and participate actively in their community. However, the primary goal of many initiatives for youth is often preventive in nature, focusing on how to avert problems and negative development rather than how to leverage young people’s strengths and support their positive development.

Positive Youth Development: A new way of seeing youth

Positive Youth Development is a developmental framework that guides research, policy, and practice through an emphasis on adolescents’ and young adults’ strengths and potential.  This perspective focuses on promoting resources and opportunities that align with youth’s strengths to empower them to actively contribute to their own development and that of their community.

Photo by Judd Mauricio from Pexels

In our research across many countries, several desirable youth outcomes were linked to both youth’s strengths and the contextual resources and opportunities available to them. We refer to these strengths, resources, and opportunities collectively as developmental assets.

Developmental assets can be internal or external

The collection of strengths, resources, and opportunities that support youth’s development are interconnected and include both internal and external developmental assets. Internal assets represent youth strengths, like commitment to learning (e.g., achievement motivation, school engagement), positive values (e.g., integrity, responsibility), social competencies (e.g., planning and decision-making skills), and positive identity (e.g., self-esteem, sense of purpose).

External assets are resources and opportunities available to young people through their environment. These assets can include support (e.g., family support, caring school climate), empowerment (e.g., communities that value youth), boundaries and expectations (e.g., family and school boundaries, adult role models), and constructive use of youth’s time (e.g., creative activities, youth programs).

The 5Cs of Positive Youth Development and a 6^th C

The presence of both internal and external assets facilitates youth thriving or positive development, which has typically been measured using the 5Cs of PYD:

1. Competence (academic, physical and social),
2. Confidence (self-worth, appearance, and positive identity),
3. Character (behavioral conduct, social conscience, personal values, and diversity of values),
4. Caring (empathy and sympathy), and
5. Connection (healthy relationships with school, family, community, and peers).

Theoretically, thriving youth (i.e., those scoring high on the 5Cs of PYD) are more likely to contribute to their own development and to their family, school, local community, and global affairs than are their non-thriving peers. Contributions in these areas include developing skills that can be used to get a better job, helping family members, participating in school committees, volunteering to make one’s community a better place, and making efforts to conserve energy and protect the environment. Within PYD, contribution is referred to as the 6^th C.

Our cross-national research: Cross-National Positive Youth Development Network (CN-PYD)

Over a decade ago, an international group of experts in related fields formed a collaborative network to study how developmental assets support youth in various contexts. With a comprehensive approach, we bring expertise in multiple areas of psychology (e.g., health psychology, developmental psychology, cross-cultural psychology, and social psychology), sociology, public health, environmental science, and family studies, among other disciplines.

Most of the youth in our research are adolescents and young ethnic-majority adults (ages 16 to 29) in more than 40 countries across Africa, Asia, Australia, Europe, the Middle East, and North and South America.

Photo by William Fortunato from Pexels

In our work, we seek to investigate how access to developmental assets is related to thriving and community engagement, as well as to other developmental outcomes across countries and different groups of youth. Our studies are mainly cross-sectional, which means that we collect data at a single point in time from participants of different ages.

This method provides insights relevant to patterns over time. But it is difficult to establish a clear cause-and-effect relationship using this approach because differences between individuals in different age groups might be due to factors other than age or the passage of time.

The power of developmental assets: The more the better

In our research across countries, we have found evidence of the positive associations of developmental assets with thriving and other positive developmental outcomes, as well as negative links with problem behaviors and emotional difficulties. Regardless of age, gender, and parents’ level of education (e.g., whether they went to school for a few years or earned college or professional degrees), having more developmental assets related to having better outcomes (in terms of both the increase in desirable outcomes and the reduction of less desirable outcomes).

More developmental assets relate to more positive outcomes

Numerous findings across countries suggest the promotive role of both internal and external developmental assets. For example:

• Albanian youth (12- to 19-year-olds living in Albania, Kosovo, Macedonia, and Serbia) who reported a stronger commitment to learning (internal asset) or better support from their family, school, and neighborhood (external asset) also reported higher levels of academic achievement than youth without those assets.
• Slovenian 15-year-olds who reported a stronger commitment to learning (internal asset) also reported higher levels of academic achievement than their peers who did not demonstrate that asset.
• Among high school students (15- to 19-year-olds) in Norway, stronger commitment to learning and positive values (internal assets) and stronger empowerment and more constructive use of time (external assets) were associated with thriving. In this self-report survey, thriving was measured as a combination of good physical health and leadership, and the ability to delay gratification, overcome of adversity, value diversity, achieve school success, and help others.
• Adolescents and young adults (mean age of 22 years) living in Chile who had a stronger positive identity (internal asset) reported healthier psychological well-being than their peers with a weaker positive identity.

More developmental assets relate to fewer negative outcomes

Developmental assets also appear to have a protective role for behavioral and emotional difficulties across different countries. For example:

• Among high school students (15- to 19-year-olds) in Norway, fewer developmental assets (i.e., each of the internal and external assets described earlier, except for constructive use of time, an external asset) was associated with emotional difficulty (prolonged sadness or attempted suicide).
• Adolescents and young adults (17- to 30-year-olds) in Colombia and Peru who reported fewer developmental assets were more engaged in problematic substance use than peers with more of these assets.

Internal and external assets are interrelated and depend on the context

In our studies, we have often found that internal assets predict youth outcomes more than external assets. While this could indicate that internal assets are more important for development than external assets, the two types of assets are consistently linked, with higher levels in one associated with higher levels in the other. This pattern suggests that internal and external assets may reinforce each other.

Young people from countries with better economic and political stability (e.g., Norway) generally reported higher levels of the assets (commitment to learning, social competencies, support, empowerment, boundaries and expectations) than did youth from developing contexts (e.g., Ghana).

For example, among 16- to 20-year-olds in Norway, support (an external asset) in three contexts (family, neighborhood, and school) was positively related to positive identity (an internal asset) after accounting for demographic variables like age, gender, and parents’ level of education.

In addition, developmental assets can depend on the conditions or contexts in which youth grow up. For instance, we found that young people from countries with better economic and political stability (e.g., Norway) generally reported higher levels of the assets (commitment to learning, social competencies, support, empowerment, boundaries and expectations) than did youth from developing contexts (e.g., Ghana). Socio-economic status impacts the developmental assets that are available.

Moreover, in societies in which youth were marginalized (e.g., Roma and Egyptian communities in Albania), our findings indicated fewer and lower levels of each of the internal and external assets among the youth from these communities than among youth living in a majority context. 

PYD stance: Thriving youth are more likely to contribute to their communities

As we noted earlier, youth who are thriving (i.e., scoring high on the 5Cs of PYD) are also more likely to contribute to their own development and that of their communities. The PYD perspective considers the 5Cs to be building blocks of contribution.

For example: young people with greater confidence, caring, and/or connection to their communities are likely to be more ready and willing to work actively towards self-improvement and the betterment of their environments. High competence may be linked to greater ability to effectively grow individually and contribute positively to community changes. Lastly, youth reporting a high sense of character may be more motivated to work harder towards positive change.

Our research findings support connections between 5Cs and engagement in several countries

For example, among 16- to 20-year-olds in Norway, we found character (an indicator of thriving) to be important for engaging at the local, community, and global levels. Engagement at these levels included helping friends and neighbors, making community a better place, and making efforts to conserve energy and protect the environment, respectively.

Similarly, in Ghana, among university students (ages 16 to 27 years), we found significant associations between four of the 5Cs (all but connection) and indicators of environmental concern (i.e., attitudes toward pollution, intention and behavior regarding environmental conservation, and environmental responsibility), although associations with environmental responsibility were not significant.

In Spain, among university students (ages 18 to 28 years), we found that several components of the 5Cs (character, connection, and caring) were associated with social contribution and pro-environmental behaviors. Thus, while more empirical evidence is needed, our network’s general findings across different countries link youth’s thriving to youth’s contributions.

Indicators of thriving are not always adaptive: A caveat about caring

Within the PYD movement, there is a theoretical assumption that like the other Cs, caring (a combination of empathy and sympathy) protects against problem behaviors and emotional difficulties. But in our research, greater caring was associated with more emotional difficulties (e.g., anxiety, depression) in Slovenian youth, as well as among adolescents and young adults in Spain and Peru. One possibility is that caring often draws on high empathy, which can cause people to absorb or mirror others’ distress and become increasingly anxious themselves. Based on these findings, we are working to identify different groups of youth that may be at risk for problem behaviors or emotional challenges, and designing interventions to address these difficulties.

Facilitating thriving and contribution in youth: What can communities do?

Most of our research findings have come from cross-sectional studies, making it difficult to identify causal relationships. The connections between assets and outcomes may be caused by factors we have not explored.

Photo by Vitaly Gariev from Pexels

However, our findings align with the theoretical assumption of PYD that developmental assets promote thriving and ultimately, contribution. Thriving might also contribute to increased assets and contribution. For example, feeling competent may support higher self-esteem (an internal asset) and elicit more support from family and friends (external assets).

Therefore, our findings have implications for programs and initiatives for young people. We recommend that policymakers, program designers, educators, parents, and other caregivers utilize the following strategies for promoting positive youth development and contribution:

• Ensure that youth have access to resources and opportunities (i.e., external assets) to develop personal skills. Home, school, neighborhood, and local community are immediate contexts where youth live, work, study, and play. What happens in these contexts has significant consequences for young people’s future roles as responsible adults. Ensuring a nurturing environment with access to adequate assets for skills development is crucial.
• Collaborate among youth contexts. To maximize youth’s access to developmental assets, families, schools, and local communities need to collaborate to provide resources and opportunities.
• Remember that youth are diverse and may require different assets to thrive. Youth may require a combination of different assets to thrive. However, all youth will thrive better when they experience more assets within and across both internal and external categories of assets.
• Engage youth. Work together with youth to provide developmental assets. Create arenas for open discussion about young people’s needs and ways of interacting with the community.
• Provide opportunities to connect and contribute. Youth need to rely on their personal strengths to actively engage with their contexts. But these strengths do not develop automatically. They tend to develop and are further sharpened in healthy relationships with caring adults and significant others who can widen youth’s opportunities and possibilities not just to connect but also to contribute.

The PYD framework and related research offer helpful perspective that shifts the focus away from preventing undesirable outcomes and, instead, targets the promotion of healthy outcomes. With this approach, communities can strive for a glass half full, instead of trying to avoid a glass half empty. Stakeholders can help adolescents and young adults leverage their internal and external assets to reach their fullest potential both as individuals and as citizens of their community.

The post A nurturing environment supports positive youth development and community engagement during adolescence and young adulthood appeared first on Child and Family Blog.

• Cultural shifts change what adults try to foster in children. In locations that are moving from collectivistic to more individualistic values (e.g., many urban areas in China), parents are increasingly balancing two goals: encouraging independence (autonomy) and continuing to encourage connection and caring (relatedness).
• Kindness and parental goals show two-way links over time.​ In our study, Chinese parents’ greater focus on autonomy predicted later increases in their preschooler-aged children’s kind actions (e.g., sharing toys), and children’s frequent kind actions predicted later increases in parents’ focus on autonomy. Parents’ relatedness goals also predicted children’s later kindness.
• These findings matter beyond China: Teaching both autonomy and relatedness helps children adapt as their cultural settings shift.

This blog is based on research originally published in Song, Y., & Yuan, Q. (2025), Exploring the autonomous-relatedness model: Parental goals and preschoolers’ prosocial development during cultural shifts. Advance online publication. International Journal of Behavioral Development.

A common playground moment

Picture this: Your four-year-old is playing happily on the only swing at the park. Another child is waiting politely and quietly. Do you step in or wait to see if your child offers a turn? How long do you wait before saying something, and what do you say?

This scenario reflects opportunities parents often navigate. In these moments, parents may grapple with questions about emphasizing the importance of children’s autonomy and personal choice versus the importance of connecting with other people.

Autonomous and relatedness goals: Two complementary paths to navigating one’s place in society

Autonomous goals focus on supporting children’s self-directed independence, including their confidence, assertiveness, and strong sense of self. Relatedness goals involve promoting children’s social connectedness, including their concern for others, helping, and obedience to authority.

Traditionally, parents in individualistic cultures (e.g., the United States, Canada, Australia, Western Europe) prioritize autonomous goals, which align with their cultural emphasis on independence, achievement, and decision making at the individual level.

In contrast, in traditionally collectivistic cultures (e.g., China, Japan, India, Mexico), parents emphasize relatedness goals, which align with their cultural values of group harmony, shared responsibility, consideration of others’ needs, and social cohesion.

Different experiences can lie beneath children’s behaviors

The child in the opening scenario might offer the swing to the waiting child because they feel capable of helping that child and actively choose to do so (autonomy) or because they feel it is their duty to share with another child (relatedness). The reasons parents give children for helping others can affect how children see themselves as they navigate social situations.

Photo by Vincent Tan pn Pexels

Parents pursue both goals: Changes in dynamic, shifting cultures

Autonomy and relatedness are both important. Some cultures have historically focused on one set of goals more than the other, but many parents today try to support both. Children may need both sets of skills to find their place in different situations.

Starting in the 1990s, scholars promoted the need to capture parents’ support for both sets of goals. This shift from purely autonomous or relatedness models came amid ​rapid socioeconomic change in many traditionally collectivistic cultures.

For example, in research in the early 2000s, urban parents from traditional collectivistic cultures (e.g., India, China) valued autonomy just as much as did parents in individualistic cultures. Meanwhile, these parents’ focus on relatedness was retained but at an intermediate level – lower than the levels indicated by parents still immersed in more purely collectivistic cultures but higher than the levels reported by parents in individualistic cultures.

In our recent research, my colleague and I asked two main questions: When parents value both sets of goals, do they support them equally or favor one over the other? Are there common patterns in how important the goals are to parents?

Children shape parental priorities

Parenting is not a solo, independent act performed by the parent with children passively absorbing parental values and goals.

For instance, a compliant but shy child may be afraid to initiate helping others (e.g., hesitating to offer their swing to a waiting child). That child’s parents may shift their goals to cultivate the child’s feelings of autonomy, satisfied that the child has already internalized a sense of responsibility to share.

In our research, we also asked: Is there a two-way, cyclical relation in which parents’ autonomous and relatedness goals predict their preschoolers’ later prosocial (e.g., kind) behaviors and the children’s prosocial behaviors also predict parents’ later goals?

Parental goals and preschoolers’ prosocial behavior in Chinese families

To address these three questions, we conducted an online study with ​336 Chinese families​ of preschool-aged children (ages three to six). One parent from each family participated in the study; just over half were mothers and the average parental age was about 30 years old. More than 80% of the parents had a bachelor’s degree or higher, indicating a highly educated sample, and families tended to be in the middle or upper class economically. Most of the families lived in cities.

Parents completed online questionnaires three times over ​eight months​ (November 2022 to July 2023), with four months between the two adjacent time points. At each time, they rated the importance of various autonomous and relatedness goals in their parenting and the frequency of their child’s prosocial behaviors (e.g., sharing, comforting).

Collecting families’ responses repeatedly allowed us to examine possible two-way links between parental goals and children’s prosocial behaviors. Our study revealed three main findings:

1. Parents prioritized autonomy but still valued relatedness

Chinese parents consistently rated autonomous goals as more important than relatedness goals. This result reflects China’s cultural shift: As society becomes more individualistic, parents adapt by promoting independence.

Chinese parents tended to emphasize both types of goals more than parents in individualistic countries typically do.

But these parents have not abandoned traditional values. Relatedness goals – teaching children to care for others and respect authority – remained important. In fact, Chinese parents tended to emphasize both types of goals more than parents in individualistic countries typically do.

2. Two distinct patterns emerged in parenting goals, with links to children’s prosocial behavior

While Chinese parents valued both sets of goals and prioritized autonomy, not all parents rated the importance of the goals similarly. Two groups of parents emerged, with most parents fitting one or the other profile throughout the study:

• Profile 1 (10% to 20% of parents): These parents rated relatedness goals as somewhat important and autonomous goals as moderately important.
• Profile 2 (80% to 90% of parents): These parents rated relatedness goals as moderately important and autonomous goals as very important.

In other words, while all parents rated relative importance the same (i.e., autonomous goals were more important than relatedness goals), Profile 2 parents rated both sets of goals as more important than did Profile 1 parents.

Children whose parents fit Profile 2 showed significantly more prosocial behavior (i.e., kindness) across time than did children whose parents fit Profile 1. Profile 2 parents’ greater emphasis on both relatedness and autonomous parenting goals was linked to more frequent displays of kindness by their preschoolers.

3. There was a “kindness loop” between parents’ goals and children’s prosocial behaviors

We found a “kindness loop” – a dynamic, two-way relationship – between parents’ goals and children’s behavior over time:

• Autonomous goals predicted kindness: Parents who emphasized independence had children who became more prosocial four months later.
• Kindness predicted stronger autonomous goals: When children acted kindly, parents became even more committed to fostering independence.
• Relatedness goals also predicted kindness – but unlike autonomous goals, they did not shift after increases in children’s prosocial behavior.
• Short-term adjustments mattered: Even small, temporary increases in a parent’s emphasis on autonomy predicted more prosocial behaviors by their child four months later – and vice versa. (Our study did not address whether these increases simply tended to predict each other or whether parents’ changes in goals caused changes in prosocial behaviors and vice versa.)

Photo by Kevin Malik on Pexels

Practical implications for children’s prosocial development

While results might differ in other communities, our findings point to four implications for parents and caregivers of preschool-aged children to consider.

Parents can support both autonomous and relatedness goals while respecting their cultural contexts

Without abandoning cultural heritage, parents in traditionally collectivistic communities can integrate autonomy in ways that honor traditional relational values while also adapting to societal shifts (e.g., globalization, urbanization).

For example, instead of insisting that their children help others simply because it is expected, parents can encourage children to decide how and when to help, making kindness a personal commitment, not just a duty.

In the opening scenario, the parent could remind their child that someone is waiting for a turn on the swing or encourage their child to imagine what the waiting child might feel or think. The child might then come up with a plan for when to get off the swing and move to another part of the playground.

Parents can highlight opportunities for their young children to choose how and when to be kind ​

Parents should view autonomy and relatedness not as opposing forces, but as complementary tools. Fostering both kinds of behavior allows children to become independent individuals who can assert themselves while also connecting meaningfully with others through kindness. For example, a parent might say, “Would you like to help set the table now or after you finish your puzzle?” and “You chose to share – that was kind.”

​By promoting both autonomous and relatedness goals, parents offer children tools to understand and act on different motivations for prosocial behavior

In today’s globalized world, many children grow up navigating multiple cultural norms. They may encounter different expectations at school, at home, and in the media about how to relate to others and how to assert themselves. This makes flexibility – not rigid conformity – an essential life skill.

Photo by Norma Mortenson on Pexels

A child raised with both goals can recognize that sometimes people help others because they care about group harmony, and sometimes people help because it reflects who they are as independent moral agents. This dual understanding may foster empathy across cultural contexts and prepare children to thrive in diverse social settings.

Both parents and children contribute to children’s socialization

The results of our study suggest that changes in parents’ goals might lead to changes in children’s behaviors. That said, parenting is not a one-way transmission of values. In their everyday behavior, children can profoundly influence the way their parents think and act.

Parents should pay close attention to their children’s behavior – not only to correct or guide it, but to reflect on what it reveals about children’s emerging values in relation to themselves and the world.

In our study, increases in children’s prosocial behaviors predicted changes in parents’ goals over time. Although we did not address causality, parents may have changed because of their children’s actions.

Parents should pay close attention to their children’s behavior – not only to correct or guide it, but to reflect on what it reveals about children’s emerging values in relation to themselves and the world. These insights can inform future parenting decisions.

The post Balancing children’s autonomy and relatedness in a shifting culture: How prosocial development and parental goals are linked appeared first on Child and Family Blog.

• Today’s children and adolescents will be exposed to more extreme weather events across their lifetime than previous generations.
• When thinking about climate change, most young people experience negative emotions, such as worry, sadness, powerlessness, or anger.
• Some young people experience mental health problems that are caused or worsened by climate change, especially anxiety disorders, depression, or post-traumatic stress.
• Caregivers, as trusted sources, can play a crucial role in countering misinformation and ensuring that their children have access to honest and reliable information on climate change and its solutions.
• Caregivers can help their children cope and engage with climate change by conveying agency and hope, rather than “doom and gloom”.

This blog post is based on research originally published in Thomaes, S. (2025), Climate change and youth development: A view of an emerging field. International Journal of Behavioral Development

Climate change impacts the lives and futures of today’s youth

Due to our changing climate, today’s children and adolescents are set to live lives shaped by unprecedented environmental challenges. They will suffer more extreme heat waves, droughts, wildfires, floods, and other climate impacts than their parents’ and grandparents’ generations did. 

The United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund (UNICEF) predicted in 2021 that practically all children would experience at least one of those types of climate impacts in their lifetimes. UNICEF further estimated that one billion children, nearly half of the world’s population of children, would grow up in countries (mainly developing countries) where they face extremely high risk from the changing climate. 

Not only are these children at risk of being exposed to multiple climate impacts as they develop, but they are also vulnerable to such impacts because of uncertain access to services, such as health care and clean water, in times of crisis. 

Photo by Ahmed akacha on Pexels

Clearly, climate change poses a major public health challenge for youth around the world. In a recent article, I reviewed emerging scientific evidence of how climate change shapes young people’s psychological development and well-being, and the implications of those findings for caregivers. 

Psychological impacts of climate change

Climate change affects the psychological well-being and mental health of young people. In a comprehensive survey study on the impact of climate change, researchers studied 10,000 16- to 25-year-olds living in a diverse array of environments across 10 countries and six continents. Nearly 85% of youth said they were at least “moderately” (if not “very” or “extremely”) worried about climate change. 

Some 45% of the young people said their concerns about climate change had interfered with their daily lives and functioning, and many held pessimistic beliefs about the future.

Youth in the study also reported feeling sadness, anger, and powerlessness about climate change. Some 45% of the young people said their concerns about climate change had interfered with their daily lives and functioning, and many held pessimistic beliefs about the future (e.g., 75% said they thought the future was frightening). 

Climate change and youth’s mental health

Such responses to the reality of climate change are understandable and rational. At the same time, while we do not know the exact numbers, some percentage of youth experience mental health problems that are caused or worsened by climate change – problems such as disturbed sleep, obsessive thinking, anxiety disorders, depression, or post-traumatic stress. 

Climate change may contribute to such disturbances in youth’s mental health in at least three ways: 

• Direct effects occur when young people personally experience extreme weather-related events – such as storms or floods – that are disturbing or poignant. 

• Indirect effects occur when societal consequences of climate change – such as forced displacement or famine – affect youth. 

• Vicarious effects occur when climate change triggers youth’s feelings of existential threat – the sense that the future is uncertain or grim. 

Talking with young people about climate change

What can caregivers do to help young people cope with these stresses, navigate the realities of climate change, and protect their mental health while preparing for a challenging future?

Fostering youth’s open but critical consumption of information about climate change 

It is important for caregivers (along with teachers and other professionals working with youth) to raise awareness of climate change and help young people obtain reliable and honest information on climate change and ways to address it. 

This is especially important since young people are at risk of being exposed to misinformation (e.g., claims that nothing can be done to mitigate climate catastrophe, that climate change is a hoax, or that its impacts are exaggerated), especially on social media. For some youth, such misinformation can contribute to disruptively high anxiety; for others, it can encourage skepticism about the severity of threats from climate change. 

Photo by Artem Podrez on Pexels

Caregivers can also help children interpret and contextualize extreme weather events. For example, they could explain that it is often hard to be sure if single extreme weather events (e.g., the heavy rains that led to the flash floods in Texas in the summer of 2025) are caused by climate change, but that we do know that climate change makes such heavy rains increasingly common and that globally, floods kill thousands of people and cause millions to flee each year. 

Using facts to foster hope

It is particularly challenging for caregivers (and all of us) to communicate about climate change in a way that empowers children, rather than numbing or paralyzing them. Intuitively, adults may be inclined to emphasize the climate catastrophes that will occur if we fail to take action now, which may inadvertently fuel a sense of doom and gloom in children. 

Although such messages may be factually correct, they likely are ineffective in helping young people cope and supporting their engagement in actions to reduce climate impacts. To achieve that goal, research suggests, caregivers need to talk to children in way that allows them to experience a sense of agency or hope. 

Caregivers could emphasize that it is still possible to slow climate change with collective, collaborative action.

Hopeful messages about climate can and should be based on scientific facts and realistic analysis rather than being overly naïve or utopian. For example, caregivers could emphasize that it is still possible to slow climate change with collective, collaborative action. They could point out that there is reason for optimism because we know exactly what is needed to help address the effects of climate change: For example, reducing global greenhouse gas emissions will be hard, but at least we know what to do. 

Leveraging benefits of environmental activism and alignment with youth values

Young people are not responsible for climate change, nor can they be responsible for solving the problems associated with climate change. Still, many young people, especially adolescents, are driven to do what they can do to contribute to mitigating climate change. 

Through activism, young people can find like-minded peers and work collaboratively toward a meaningful goal. Such engagement can counter feelings of hopelessness or powerlessness, providing individual health benefits as well as broader environmental and social benefits. 

Caregivers can foster such engagement in young people by tapping into personal values and preferences and typical youth tendencies. As caregivers of teenagers know all too well, most youth prefer thinking for themselves and creating their own solutions rather than being told what to do. Encouraging young people by gently offering resources and allowing room for self-direction can be effective. 

Photo by Lara Jameson on Pexels

Focusing on the personal benefits of climate responsible behaviors

Caregivers can also point out that while protecting the climate can sometimes be costly (e.g., giving up a habit of buying affordable, trendy clothes from a fast fashion brand), it can have personal benefits. For example, caregivers can focus on conveying how climate-responsible behaviors are aligned with young people’s personal values and priorities. 

Most adolescents care about establishing autonomy and being respected by their peers. Accordingly, an engaging message for them is that climate protection is for independent-minded people who are mature enough to stand up for what they believe in, challenge authorities that fail to take action, or act on the concerns of young generations. 

Conclusion

Today’s children and adolescents are coming of age in a world that is threatened by climate change. Depending on where they live, youth may be encountering significant threats right now, but these threats are looming for nearly everyone around the globe. It can be hard for young people to understand, cope with, and act on climate change. 

Caregivers can support their children by raising awareness of climate change; providing access to reliable information; fostering agency and hope; and framing climate protection as independent, socially responsible behavior. 

The post Supporting children and youth in the face of climate change appeared first on Child and Family Blog.

Key Takeaways for Caregivers:

• Mothers who have trouble turning to their romantic partner for emotional support may face added parenting challenges that can affect their child’s emotional development.
• Mothers with higher levels of attachment avoidance – those who preferred to be self-reliant and felt uncomfortable depending on their romantic partner for emotional support – tended to show more consistent harshness in their parenting across situations. However, this parenting pattern was not associated with increased anger or distress in children one year later.
• In contrast, mothers with higher levels of attachment anxiety – those who worried about rejection from their romantic partner – tended to be unpredictably harsh with their children. This sometimes-but-not-always harsh parenting was related to more anger in children after one year.
• Helping mothers understand their own attachment needs more deeply and ensuring that they have access to emotional support may help them respond more calmly and consistently to their children. This, in turn, may contribute to a more supportive caregiving environment that fosters children’s healthy emotional development.

What are romantic attachment styles?

When people feel stressed in our everyday lives, we often seek out someone we trust—an attachment figure—who offers comfort and support during difficult times. In adulthood, that figure is often a parent, a friend, or, most commonly, a romantic partner.

According to attachment theory, a person’s bond with their own attachment figure can shape how they parent.

But some people experience what psychologists call attachment insecurity in their romantic relationships: They struggle to seek out and receive emotional support from their partners. This insecurity usually takes one of two forms:

• Attachment avoidance: when an individual feels uncomfortable relying on their romantic partner for emotional support, preferring to be self-reliant and handle tough emotions on their own, and
• Attachment anxiety: when an individual fears abandonment or rejection by the romantic partner, often seeking extra closeness and reassurance from their partner to feel more secure.

Romantic attachment insecurity and children’s emotional development

Research shows that when parents feel insecure in a romantic relationship—either by avoiding closeness or worrying about rejection—their children often experience and manage emotions differently than do children of parents who feel secure. Children may become upset more easily, suppress their negative feelings, or struggle to regulate emotions in adaptive ways.

Why might this happen? According to attachment theory, a person’s bond with their own attachment figure can shape how they parent.

Mothers’ attachment avoidance

Mothers with high levels of attachment avoidance, who feel uncomfortable depending on their romantic partner for support, may also be uncomfortable providing similar support to their children. Whether consciously or not, these mothers may try to minimize emotional closeness in the parent-child relationship through harsh parenting, using anger, threats, or coercion during parent-child interactions. Over time, children exposed to harsh parenting may learn to suppress negative emotions to avoid rejection or conflict.

Photo by Kristina Paukshtite on Pexels

Mothers’ attachment anxiety

Mothers with high levels of attachment anxiety – those who are preoccupied by their own fears of abandonment and rejection, may have trouble supporting their children’s emotional needs because they are overwhelmed by their own needs. Their parenting may be inconsistent—sometimes supportive, sometimes harsh—depending on how much emotional energy a situation requires.

When a child needs only a little support, these mothers may respond well. But when a child needs more focused emotional care, the parent’s own distress may interfere and increase their stress, leading to harsher responses.

When emotional support is inconsistent—especially during times when it is needed most—children may feel anxious. Over time, children who cannot rely on their mother’s emotional support may get upset more easily. They may also have trouble managing their negative feelings and developing healthy emotion regulation skills.

Does harsh parenting behavior explain why children whose mothers are insecure in their romantic relationship show more negative emotion?

To explore this possible role of harsh parenting, my colleagues and I studied a sample of 235 heterosexual mothers (average age of 34 years) who were currently living with a romantic partner in Rochester, New York in the United States. Most of these mothers identified as White (62%) or African-American/Black (21%), and their median level of education was an associate’s degree.

At the start of the study, children were approximately three years old and 55% were biologically female. Mothers and children visited the laboratory on two occasions, spaced one year apart.

On the first visit

• Mothers completed a survey about their romantic attachment styles.
• Mothers and children participated in three interaction tasks:
  • Forbidden toy: Mothers were asked to keep their child from playing with a tempting toy (a child-sized pit filled with plastic balls).
  • Discipline discussion: Mothers discussed a real-life rule or behavior issue with their child (e.g., bedtime routine).
  • Grocery store: Mothers helped their child follow specific rules while pretending to shop together in a miniature grocery store game.
• Trained observers rated mothers’ level of harsh parenting (e.g., anger, name-calling) during each task.
  • To capture how harsh each mother’s parenting was overall, we computed the average rating across the three tasks.
  • To explore the degree of consistency (or inconsistency) in a mother’s harsh parenting, we considered the range of scores she received across the three tasks.

On the second visit

• Children completed two tasks on their own that were designed to make them mildly frustrated or otherwise upset:
  • Puzzle box: Children attempted to retrieve a toy locked in a difficult-to-open box.
  • Marshmallow test: Children were seated with one marshmallow in front of them and told they could earn two marshmallows later if they resisted eating it.
• Trained observers rated children’s levels of anger and distress during these tasks.

Mothers’ attachment avoidance and anxiety each related to different patterns of harsh parenting

As we predicted, mothers reporting higher levels of attachment avoidance exhibited higher levels of harsh parenting across all observed interactions with their children. That is, these mothers were consistently harsh toward their children during each of the parenting interactions. This result aligns with our assumption that mothers who are highly avoidant are, on average, less able to provide appropriate support to their children.

Photo by Juan Pablo Serrano on Pexels

Meanwhile, mothers reporting higher levels of attachment anxiety showed less consistent harsh parenting across the three tasks. That is, mothers with higher levels of attachment anxiety were hostile towards their child in some interactions but not others. This result matches our prediction, based on the idea that these mothers may become overly stressed and harsh only during some interactions—ones that require them to suspend their own needs to focus on their children’s.

Inconsistently harsh parenting is most closely related to children’s negative emotions

Consistently harsh parenting, as shown more by mothers experiencing attachment avoidance, was not related to observations of children’s anger or distress one year later. This result might mean that high levels of harsh parenting is not the reason why mothers’ romantic attachment avoidance is linked to children’s negative emotions.

However, our method may not have been sensitive enough to capture subtle signs of negative emotion (e.g., pursed lips) that may be more likely to be seen in children who tend to suppress negative emotions in the face of consistent parental harshness.

Sometimes-harsh-and-sometimes-not-harsh parenting can make it difficult for children to predict when their primary source of support will be helpful and when she will be critical.

Inconsistently harsh parenting and anger in children

In our study, the more nuanced conclusion was that inconsistently harsh parenting—as shown more by mothers with high levels of attachment anxiety—was linked to more anger observed in children during the challenging tasks one year later.

Parenting that is inconsistent, that is, sometimes-harsh-and-sometimes-not-harsh parenting can make it difficult for children to predict when their primary source of support will be helpful and when she will be critical. Children in this situation might learn to stay on guard—in a heightened state of arousal—which could contribute to later difficulties regulating emotion (e.g., anger).

Possible impacts of mothers’ insecure romantic attachment and inconsistently harsh parenting on children’s development

Our study looked at how relational patterns in the romantic relationship relate to children’s emotions, but we did not determine whether mothers’ attachment style or harsh parenting causes the children’s difficulties with negative emotions. Further experimental research is necessary to address questions of causality.

Photo by cottonbro studio on Pexels

In the meantime, families may benefit from thinking about the possible impacts of mothers’ attachment. Based on our findings, difficulties in mothers’ romantic attachment relationship may spill over into the parent-child relationship to influence children’s emotional development. Specifically, mothers who worry about rejection from their romantic partners may struggle to provide consistent and nurturing caregiving that promotes children’s healthy emotional development.

The post When mom can’t lean on her partner: How romantic attachment insecurity in mothers affects parenting appeared first on Child and Family Blog.

Key takeaways for caregivers

• Children learn, and their brains grow, partially through watching and interacting with their parents.
• Prior research in various communities has revealed that children whose mothers are clinically depressed tend to develop differently than children whose mothers are not depressed. They are also at higher risk for having social, emotional, or other struggles.
• In our recent study in rural Pakistan, children whose mothers were depressed when the children were one  year old showed greater emotional and behavioral difficulties at age three than those whose mothers were not depressed.
• We explored whether parenting behaviors serve as a bridge connecting maternal depression and children’s development. We asked: Do depressed mothers show less warmth or harsher parenting than mothers who are not depressed? Could this explain why children of depressed mothers develop differently?
• In our study, mothers with depression were observed using more harsh parenting behaviors, such as looking angry or saying mean or critical things, than mothers without depression. But the mothers’ warmth toward their children did not differ.
• Parenting behaviors, including harsh parenting, did not explain the link between maternal depression and children’s development. Other factors, such as stress, division of caregiving responsibilities, living conditions, and children’s biology or behaviors, may play important roles.
• While more research is needed, supporting maternal well-being and encouraging caregiving without harshness can benefit children’s early development.

Photo by Kamaji Ogino on Pexels

Mothers’ emotional well-being and children’s development

Many caregivers and professionals wonder how a mother’s emotional well-being affects her child’s development, especially when mothers struggle with clinical depression. Distinct from the sadness that most people feel occasionally, clinical depression involves a persistent loss of interest or engagement, changes in sleep and appetite, and a level of emotional distress that interferes with daily life – often lasting for weeks or longer.

In low- and middle-income countries, roughly one in four mothers experiences postnatal depression in the year after childbirth. Mothers frequently suffer from depression in higher income countries, too.

Why maternal depression is a public health priority

Extensive research has linked maternal depression to challenges in children’s physical, cognitive, and emotional development, making it a major public health priority for families and communities worldwide. Investigating how or why mothers’ depression connects to children’s emotions, behaviors, and skills improves our understanding and can ultimately help communities provide families with more effective support.

Exploring links among mothers’ depression, their parenting behaviors, and children’s development

In a recent study, we focused on the potential role of parenting behaviors in the link between mothers’ depression and children’s development. We asked: Do mothers with a history of depression show different patterns in their parenting than mothers who have not been depressed?

Symptoms of depression can get in the way of positive parenting behaviors.For example, some mothers with depression may be more likely to withdraw from their children, show less warmth in their interactions, or express more anger and negativity. Do such differences in parenting explain the link between maternal depression and children’s development?

We focus here on children’s socioemotional development, such as symptoms of anxiety or depression or struggles with behavior or peer relationships.

Who participated in the study?

More than 840 families in rural villages in Pakistan participated in our longitudinal study. Researchers followed families from the time children were one year old through the time they were three years old. About half the children were boys and about half were girls. At the start of the study, mothers were between 18 and 45 years old (about 26 years old on average) and were married.

Most of the families lived in extended-family households, with parents and children living together with other relatives (e.g., the parents’ siblings, the grandparents), which is very common in rural Pakistani villages. In terms of formal education, mothers and fathers each had from none to 18 years, with the average being about seven to nine years. 

Photo by Albin Biju on Pexels

How did we measure maternal depression, parenting behaviors, and children’s outcomes?

Over three yearly time points, we used a combination of established, structural interviews; parent surveys; and observations of mothers interacting with their children to help us identify patterns across the families. 

Maternal depression (when children were one year old)

Researchers used a common and internationally respected interview approach to determine which mothers were experiencing clinical levels of depression. Mothers were categorized as “depressed” or “not depressed” based on their reports of specific symptoms (e.g., sadness; lack of interest in daily life; disturbances in sleeping, eating, or concentration) and the severity of those symptoms, including whether the symptoms interfered with their daily lives.

The use of a simple cut-off is valuable for dividing mothers into these two groups for clinical and research purposes. However, mothers’ experiences varied along a spectrum, and even the mothers characterized as “not depressed” could have experienced some degree of sadness and other disturbances.

Mothers’ parenting behaviors (when children were two years old)

Mothers were invited to play and talk with their young children while looking at a picture book provided by researchers. Trained observers watched mothers and noted how much they showed three specific parenting behaviors:

• Warmth: showing affection through positive physical touch, such as snuggles, and positive, encouraging talk (“Yay! You found it, Sweetie!”)
• Stimulation: challenging the child to think and engage, such as by asking questions and pointing to items in the book (“What will they do with this ball?”)
• Harshness: looking or sounding negative, such as yelling, verbally expressing anger or being critical (“Stop fooling around! We’re supposed to be looking at this book!”).

Children’s socioemotional outcomes (when children were three years old)

Mothers completed established questionnaires, rating their children’s levels of various challenges (anxiety, depression, hyperactivity, trouble behaving appropriately, and problems with peers).

What did we find?

Our main question was: Do observed parenting behaviors explain – or mediate – the links between earlier maternal depression and later children’s outcomes? In other words, do differences in parenting help account for why children of depressed mothers might show more challenges? To dig into this query, we broke it down into steps. 

Children of depressed mothers experienced more socioemotional challenges

First, we confirmed that the general patterns found in prior studies on maternal depression and children’s development were evident in our study, too. We established that just over 18% of the Pakistani mothers in our study had depression when their children were one year old. 

Also, compared to children whose mothers were not depressed, the children of depressed mothers showed more emotional and behavioral challenges at age three – such as signs of sadness or irritability, behavior problems, or trouble getting along with peers. While the mothers’ mood-related biases might have affected their reports of children’s challenges and these findings, the general pattern is consistent with research that has used measures without such possible bias. 

Just over 18% of these Pakistani mothers had depression when their children were 1 year old.

The next question was whether mothers with depression showed differences in parenting behaviors compared to mothers without depression. Could that help explain why these two groups of children showed differences in socioemotional development?

Only some parenting behaviors differed between depressed and not depressed mothers

During the play session with the picture book when children were two years old, mothers who were depressed a year earlier were more likely to show harsh parenting behaviors than mothers who had not been depressed.

However, other parenting behaviors, like warmth and stimulation, were similar across the two groups of mothers. In fact, both depressed and non-depressed mothers showed very high levels of warmth when interacting with their children.

None of the parenting behaviors were related to children’s socioemotional development

While we saw some differences in mothers’ levels of harsh parenting, none of the parenting behaviors were related to children’s later socioemotional development.

Remaining mysteries behind the link between maternal depression and children’s socioemotional challenges

Our findings confirmed the typical pattern of children having more socioemotional struggles when their mothers were depressed. In a new layer of investigation, we found that parenting behaviors did not explain the link between maternal depression and children’s socioemotional development. 

Possible limitations of the study

This result might be specific to the cultural context of our study. In rural Pakistan, caregiving is often shared by grandparents or extended family, which may lessen some effects of mothers’ depression or parenting behaviors. 

Also, the brief play period with mothers and their two-year-olds might not have provided enough of a peek into families’ typical interactions to capture stronger patterns in parenting behaviors. Differences in depressed mothers’ parenting may be more apparent when they are engaged in daily activities with their children, such as getting them dressed, feeding them, or getting them ready for bed. Thus, in different settings, parenting behaviors may play a substantial role in the link between maternal depression and children’s social and emotional health. 

What other elements of children’s own experiences, families, or communities might play a role?

We used statistical techniques to ensure that the connections we found among maternal depression, parenting behaviors, and children’s development were not due to other known differences among families, such as parents’ level of education, family wealth, or mothers’ experiences with violence in a recent relationship or traumatic situations in their childhood. 

We did not measure other possibilities that may play bigger roles – like family stress, disrupted routines, or children’s biology. Relationships between parents and children are complicated, with many factors affecting both the adults and the children. In addition, children’s personalities and behaviors affect their mothers’ parenting, too – the influence goes both ways. 

While we do not know exactly how maternal depression is linked to children’s outcomes, we do know that mothers with depression, and their children, benefit from extra support. 

Photo by Ekam Juneja on Pexels

What can caregivers and communities do while researchers keep exploring?

1. Support maternal mental health. Depression is more than sadness – it affects energy, connection, and daily life. It is a common problem that needs attention worldwide. Programs that support mothers may also benefit their children and families. 
2. Reduce harshness in caregiving. The link between harsh parenting and children’s development was not strong in our study, but other research has documented problems with these parenting behaviors. Evidence from these studies shows benefits of parenting strategies that emphasize warmth and tailored support within healthy boundaries. 
3. Recognize the many contributors that shape children’s development. This research reminds us to look beyond parenting to factors like caregiving environments, family structure, access to services, and stressors affecting the whole household. 

 

It is often helpful when other family members, friends, and neighbors lend a hand to parents, give them some time for self-care, and bond with young children.

The saying “it takes a village” captures the idea that communities can support children’s development by sharing responsibilities. It is often helpful when other family members, friends, and neighbors lend a hand to parents, give them some time for self-care, and bond with young children. 

In these ways, the impact of any one person or experience may be reduced. When children rely on a broader network of supports, these types of assistance can balance each other out as needed. 

The post How maternal depression may affect young children’s development appeared first on Child and Family Blog.

• In the context of digital media, challenges for caregivers include finding developmentally beneficial media for children and using media strategically to give caregivers a break. 

• Some helpful demonstrations of a balanced approach to digital parenting are apparent in the popular television series Bluey, which depicts a cartoon family of dogs. The parents navigate supporting the puppies’ digital media use strategically within their broader family culture. 

• Caregivers should find the best strategies for managing media use that fit their families’ needs. 

• They should choose age-appropriate games and videos with high-quality content that supports the development of important life skills such as collaboration, communication, understanding of content, critical thinking, creative innovation, and confidence (also known as the “6Cs”). 

• Technology can be a useful tool that allows adults to take breaks and refresh from parenting stress and supports warm and responsive caregiving. 

• When possible, caregivers should encourage activities that reduce children’s screen time, engage children in offline activities, and add tech-free times to the family routine. 

Modern concerns about parenting and digital media

In today’s digital age, children and adults are likely spending more time on screens than recommended. Screen media is captivating. Indeed, if given a choice, a child may choose engaging in screen time over going outside to play. 

In recent years, several studies have linked excessive or problematic media use with developmental concerns in children, including sleep problems, behavioral problems, symptoms of depression, poorer language development, overweight/obesity, lower school performance, and low self-esteem. Yet it is unclear if these outcomes are related to the amount of screen time or the kinds of media children are using. 

How and when can screen time be beneficial for children? 

Many academics have questioned the perception that all screen time is bad for children’s development. In her review of Jonathan Haidt’s popular and controversial book The Anxious Generation, Candice Odgers stated that current data do not support a strong connection between the time children spend on screens and mental illness. While excessive screen time can have negative effects, moderate use of digital tools provides children with opportunities to enhance learning. 

Photo by Tima Miroshnichenko on Pexels

Educational benefits of screen time

People often overlook these educational benefits by focusing on the possible harms of digital technology, but substantial research illustrates the benefits of digital technology. Digital media can build children’s digital literacy and lead to learning in multiple domains, including spelling and science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM). 

In fact, a recent review of media use in children and adolescents found strong positive effects of screen-based interventions on targeted learning goals, such as a game meant to improve children’s numeracy skills. However, these digital tools should extend, not replace, real-world experiences, suggesting that there is a sweet spot between taking advantage of the opportunities of digital learning and avoiding too much time on screens. Therefore, caregivers should develop strategies for making decisions about their children’s media use. 

Strategies for navigating the pros and cons of digital media 

Research can guide us in identifying techniques caregivers can use to leverage the positive effects of screen media. Adults can use a variety of strategies to make children’s screen time developmentally beneficial. 

The 5Cs of media use

Finding the right amount of media use for children is challenging, and the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends five considerations (the 5Cs of media use) when making decisions about media use: child, content, calm, crowding out, and communication. These considerations result in several strategies for navigating children’s digital world, which researchers have grouped into three types of digital parenting: enhance, resist, and balance.

Joint media engagement

In addition, joint media engagement is a strategy that involves caregivers watching or using the same media together with their child and discussing what is happening on the screen. This strategy plays a role in all three digital parenting types. A family’s full suite of strategies shapes their digital parenting approach. 

The first type, embrace, occurs when parents look for content to share with their children to foster their development of digital skills. The second, resist, is the most restrictive, with caregivers relying on rules to limit their children’s access to all or most digital media. The third type, balance, lies between resist and embrace. Parents whose strategies align with balance evaluate media experiences for possible risks and benefits on a case-by-case basis.

Evaluating good vs bad media

A recent Child & Family Blog article provides guidance on finding balance and evaluating “good” versus “bad” media. Here, we dive deeper into such evaluations and the balance type of digital parenting. What might an example of balance look like? Bluey^TM, one of the most watched shows in 2024 (with 55.62 billion viewing minutes), offers examples in an entertaining context of a cartoon family of dogs. 

The show Bluey is a popular, entertaining program, and the question of what developmental benefits children gain from watching it is beyond the scope of this blog post. Instead, because the characters frequently model digital parenting strategies for viewers, here, we use examples from the show to illustrate approaches to managing children’s digital lives. 

How Bluey represents parenting in the digital age

Bluey demonstrates strategies of parenting in the digital age and of harnessing the power of media to support, rather than hinder, children’s development. The show features two canine parents, Chilli and Bandit, and their two daughters, Bluey and Bingo (to whom we will refer as children while recognizing that they are cartoon puppies). 

Photo from Wikimedia Commons

Many episodes illustrate specific strategies for digital parenting and how technology can be used to families’ advantage, while others depict ways to go tech-free when desired. In this blog post, we highlight seven episodes to illustrate examples of the strategies caregivers can use to navigate children’s use of digital media. Some fall under the category of promoting beneficial media use and some fall under the category of ensuring that digital media does not replace or prevent other valuable experiences. 

Promoting beneficial media use 

Caregivers and children should participate in screen time together 

Active mediation is a process in digital parenting that is characterized by parental guidance and collaborative discussions between parents and children about appropriate content. Among the many features of active mediation is monitoring children’s media use, which typically involves co-viewing. Sharing a media experience with a child facilitates conversations while viewing to either support learning or respond to inappropriate onscreen content. A recent study found that Bluey was uniquely suited to encourage caregivers to watch the show with their child when compared to another popular children’s show. 

By being aware of children’s onscreen activities, caregivers can intervene when children are exposed to content that might not be beneficial for them.

Because of the proactive nature of active mediation and its focus on ongoing discussions, this strategy has been linked with children’s development of digital literacy. By being aware of children’s onscreen activities, caregivers can intervene when children are exposed to content that might not be beneficial for them. 

“FaceyTalk” (S03, E24)  

The Bluey episode entitled “FaceyTalk” exemplifies active mediation, which viewers can see when Bluey and Bingo ask to call their cousins for a video chat. Bandit negotiates that the two sisters must share the screen and take turns being in control of the device. During the video chat, Bandit monitors the screen and engages when Bingo and Bluey see their aunt and uncle get into an argument. 

Bandit asks the girls to mute the volume so the children will not overhear the argument taking place on screen. Through active mediation, parents can prepare their children for and respond to content that is inappropriate or does not offer any benefits. Caregiver-child conversations sparked by active mediation can focus children’s attention on content that targets important skill development. 

Adults should help children use devices as valuable tools

Three Bluey episodes illustrate how digital media can help children develop important life skills, such as collaboration, communication, understanding of content, critical thinking, creative innovation, and confidence (the 6Cs). Educators, psychologists, and business experts agree that these skills are necessary for children’s success as they grow up in the 21st century. In addition, scientists have called for those working in children’s media to create high-quality digital products that feature the 6Cs. Important life skills can be modelled by characters on TV. A recent study showed that nearly half of the Bluey episodes reviewed by researchers contained lessons about overcoming challenges. We similarly found strong examples, including:  

“Octopus” (S02, E40)

In the episode called “Octopus,” technology promotes three of the 6Cs: understanding of content, collaboration, and communication. Bluey and her best friend, Chloe, play an imaginary game called Octopus, in which they steal treasure from an octopus (a role played by Bandit). Chloe enjoys the game and wants to recreate it at home with her father. However, Chloe’s dad does not play the game as Bandit does, and she is disappointed. 

To cheer her up, Chloe’s dad searches the Internet to learn about octopi and other sea life. He then uses these facts in a Chloe-approved version of the game. While playing, Chloe is not just learning content knowledge about ocean life, but also how to collaborate and communicate with her father. Viewers see how her father used media as a tool to find a way to play the game that met both their needs. 

“TV Shop” (S03, E45)

In “TV Shop,” Bluey and her friends collaborate, communicate, and think critically to help Bingo make her way through a store to find their friend, Coco. Bluey’s friends work together to guide Bingo through the store to Coco’s location, which is revealed to them on the store’s network of closed-circuit televisions. 

Using screens as their medium, the children identify sections of the store and help Bingo navigate the maze of aisles. They think critically to get Bingo to Coco. This episode is a great example of how children can use technology to work with friends to solve a shared problem. 

“Grannies” (S01, E28)

This episode shows how video chat can promote understanding of content, communication, collaboration, and confidence. Bluey and Bingo video chat with their grandmother to settle a dispute about whether or not grannies can do a popular modern dance called flossing. 

When they discover that Granny cannot do the dance, Bingo is upset that she was incorrect. Bluey seeks to help her sister and uses video chat to collaborate and communicate with her grandmother to teach her the correct dance moves. While her grandmother struggles to stay in the camera’s view and learn the dance, Granny persists through these challenges to surprise Bingo by flossing. 

The episode illustrates that grandparents and grandchildren, especially when separated by geography, can harness the power of screens to connect and learn from each other. 

Caregivers can balance active engagement with children with their own needs to take a break

While media can provide benefits to children, it also gives caregivers opportunities to take breaks or get work done. Being an active participant in children’s media use can maximize educational impacts from high-quality media, but not every media experience needs to be supported by caregivers. 

Photo by Lisa from Pexels

Parenting is challenging and requires a great deal of self-regulation. Caregivers can use media as a strategy for their own regulation by letting children watch an episode of a high-quality show like Bluey while the parent takes a moment to recenter or by using media themselves to help them manage an immediate source of stress. Caregivers may find comfort from texting their friends for social support or watching a short, fun video to calm down. While these strategies should be part of a larger toolkit that also includes off-screen regulation (e.g., breathing exercises), these digital strategies can help ensure that caregivers return to their children replenished and responsive. 

“Whale Watchers” (S03, E22)

Using media to give caregivers a break is exemplified in “Whale Watchers” when Chilli and Bandit are recovering from a night out. The parents are exhausted and lack the energy to play, but Bingo and Bluey are determined to play with their parents. The girls pretend to embark on a whale-watching excursion. 

After reluctantly taking on the role of a whale, Chilli needs a moment to rest and turns on a nature documentary about whales for the girls to watch. This allows her to take a breath and regain her ability to be a warm and loving caregiver. 

Ensuring that digital media does not replace or prevent other valuable experiences 

Caregivers need to be on the lookout for technoference 

While media can help young children and parents connect in daily life, screens can also disrupt real-world experiences. Researchers have studied parent-child relationships through the lens of technoference, or the interference technology can cause during social interactions. Technoference becomes a bigger concern as screens become more integrated into our daily lives. 

“Bob Bilby” (S01, E12)

Technoference is best exemplified in the episode “Bob Bilby,” in which Bingo brings a puppet, Bob Bilby, home from pre-kindergarten class and documents Bob’s visit to their home. Early in the episode, Bluey and Bingo are eager to teach Bob about their tablet and share their cartoons with him. 

When out shopping, Chilli notices that Bob, Bingo, and Bluey’s attention is captured by cartoons on a television on display at the store. She goes to connect with them, but is also lured in by a program on a nearby television. 

During the outing and throughout the day, both parents take pictures of Bob and the girls spending time on screens. When looking at the pictures later, Bingo frets that she has shown Bob the “most boring time.” The visit with her family involved a lot of screen time and very little engagement in other exciting, off screen activities.  

Parents should incorporate tech-free time and activities

Bluey illustrates helpful ways to use screen time to support children’s development. But the show also explores children’s near-constant use of technology and the benefits of reducing screen time. Limiting screen time can increase time for physical activity, which promotes children’s health. 

Researchers have illustrated that children can become more dependent on outside sources of entertainment, like screen media, when they lose their ability to find activities when they are bored. Overcoming boredom without technology can support the development of children’s self-expression, imagination, problem solving, and creativity. 

In the final two examples we discuss, the show demonstrates the value of taking a break from screens when media use no longer adds value to an experience. Our aim is not to create added pressure on caregivers to remove technology but rather to consider the benefits of sometimes replacing screen time with non-digital experiences. 

“Bob Bilby” (S01, E12)

After realizing that they had the “most boring time” with Bob Bilby, the family decides to do something different and go tech-free by riding bikes, playing at the park, going to the library, and watching fireworks. After recognizing the role digital media has played in interrupting family interactions and displacing more exciting experiences, the family pivots toward real-world activities. 

Bluey also points out that Bob copies what the rest of the family does, just as young children learn from imitating those around them. Parents model media habits for their children, and parents’ media use predicts their children’s media use. That is why it is important for caregivers to set an example with their own media use for times when it is inappropriate to use screens, such as during social interactions or when hosting a guest. 

The characters in Bluey saw that screens made them feel bored and decided to strive for a balance between their digital and non-digital worlds. Going tech-free does not have to be something that happens every day, but finding opportunities in the family schedule to unplug can bring families closer together.  

“Roadtrip” (S02, E45) 

In this episode, the family faces the challenge of losing the children’s tablets during a car trip. Chilli begins creating games to keep Bluey’s mind occupied and provide some fun for the trip. For example, Bluey “walks” her fingers along the windowsill to jump over the cows and trees that they pass. The family talks about how being bored is okay. 

Boredom leads Bluey to take a moment to observe the car and discover that if she pulls on a certain tab near her, a little armrest and cup holders appear, which she would not have found if her eyes had been glued to a tablet. The armrest gives her the idea to play restaurant with her sister. 

 This episode highlights that caregivers can encourage children to take a break from screens, use their imagination, and embrace boredom. 

Conclusion 

Parenting in a digital age is challenging when new research, new technology, and new guidance emerges daily. Fortunately, caregivers can access many resources when seeking advice on this topic. For instance, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) Center of Excellence on Social Media and Youth Mental Health has compiled a guide for caregivers for managing the benefits and risks of media use and finding the approach to digital parenting that best fits their family. Additionally, Common Sense Media offers parents a guide to movies, shows, books, and games as they navigate digital parenting concerns.   

Screens can relieve parenting stress and caregivers should not be shamed for using technology as a regulation tool.  

Strategies of digital parenting include choosing content that is best for children, talking with children about what they see on screens, and setting rules that work for caregivers. Parents can encourage their child’s learning and development of important life skills, such as the 6Cs, by supporting the way they consume media. 

Supports include co-viewing, choosing high-quality educational games and videos, and using media as a tool to solve a problem. Screens can relieve parenting stress and caregivers should not be shamed for using technology as a regulation tool.  

Research evidence used to guide digital parenting can help increase the developmental benefits for children, while acknowledging the challenges of parenting in the digital age. Finally, too much of anything can be detrimental to children’s health, so disconnecting when technology no longer adds value to an experience can prevent some harms of excessive media use. 

Families have unique needs and require digital parenting solutions that fit best for them. The family depicted in the TV show Bluey provides just one example of finding balance with a diverse toolkit of digital parenting strategies. 

The post Bluey’s media illustration of parenting in the digital age appeared first on Child and Family Blog.

• Many children witness upsetting events. Contrary to what some adults believe, they often want to talk about these events. 

• Acknowledging children’s talk about these events is important for supporting their healthy processing and development. 

• Rather than avoiding children’s talk about upsetting experiences, caregivers should follow their children’s lead, echo what they say, and ask open-ended questions (e.g., “And then what happened?”). In this way, parents help their children make sense of those experiences. 

• Caregivers can adopt an emotion-coaching approach to help children label their emotions rather than telling children what they should or should not feel about upsetting events. 

Many children witness violence, death (of loved ones or strangers), natural disasters, abuse, and other upsetting events. Often, they want and need to talk about these events. 

Consider this conversation between a researcher and a six-year-old research participant, which occurred during a study on the linguistic structure of children’s descriptions of everyday topics. While talking about going to the beach, the young boy said, “My brother died.” The adult, a trained interviewer, responded, “Your brother what?” 

The boy continued, “My brother died. Um, he, um, was making a sandwich, and he fell, and a knife went in his heart.” Fortunately for the shocked interviewer, her protocol called for her to simply repeat the child’s words rather than evaluate what she had heard.  

How likely is it that adults will hear such talk about troubling events in everyday interactions with children? Estimates of this occurrence are hard to come by and vary widely. 

Children talk about disturbing events during spontaneous personal narratives

In a study of nearly 100 U.S. three-and-a-half to nine-and-a-half-year-olds on the developing structure of personal narratives, Carole Menig-Peterson and I found that more than half of the children who were at least six years old spontaneously produced narratives about the death of strangers, pets, and even immediate family members; such content was not as common among younger children. The interviewers had asked the children about likely events in daily life, such as whether they had ever gotten a shot at the doctor’s office or gone to a birthday party.

To our surprise, many of the older children had experienced traumatic events and even more surprisingly, seemed to want to talk to us about them.  

The children in this study were from a small town or rural area of a midwestern U.S. state and had no identified learning disabilities. All were European North American and from middle-class families, and none lived in a war zone or a high-crime area. 

Children talked about upsetting events despite the fact that the researchers did not mention death or anything approaching such a potentially traumatizing event. To our surprise, many of the older children had experienced traumatic events and even more surprisingly, seemed to want to talk to us about them. 

For children, exposure to disturbing events is not uncommon

In research on post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in eight- to 12-year-old Dutch children, scientists also found that many children had witnessed disturbing events in their lives. They defined traumatic events as those characterized by “death, serious injury, or other threat to physical integrity” (Alisic et al., 2012, p. 274), and prevalence estimates ranged from 14% to 65%. 

For children living through times of war, of course, the incidence of witnessing traumatic events would be even higher. In short, exposure to deeply disturbing events is not rare in children’s lives. 

Caregivers’ responses to children’s comments about traumatic events 

Like the interviewer mentioned earlier, parents and other caregivers are often jolted by a child’s mention of these events and confused about how to respond. In reaction, most adults turn to a variety of strategies. 

Photo by Photo By: Kaboompics.com on Pexels

Some do not respond at all, whether due to their own discomfort with the information or concerns about potential negative effects of focusing on the trauma. However, such well-intentioned efforts to protect children can backfire, leaving them without a supportive outlet for expressing and processing their thoughts and feelings about the experience.

Avoiding discussion with children about upsetting experiences can backfire

For example, in a study of 40 five- to 18-year olds (19 boys, 21 girls) who experienced a traffic accident, children who did not talk with anyone about the accident said they did not feel understood. They also experienced more symptoms of PTSD (e.g., irritability, trouble sleeping, hypervigilance) 30 weeks later than did children who spoke about the accident with trusted adults. 

In this study, the children were questioned six weeks after the accident about whether they had talked about the accident with anyone (e.g., family, friends, therapist). This is important because of what we know about the value of psychologically debriefing individuals within days of a potentially traumatic event. 

When such talk is initiated right after the accident by someone other than the person who experienced the event, it may do more harm than good, even increasing trauma rather than decreasing it. However, if a child initiates such talk soon afterwards, then parents should follow the child’s lead and listen responsively. 

Opportunities to support children’s processing of trauma 

Children’s spontaneous initiation of talk about trauma is key, and we encourage caregivers to see such initiation as an opportunity to support how children navigate their reactions to difficult experiences. Although almost all parents want to help their children do just that, not all parents are prepared to do so effectively, despite having good intentions. 

Photo by Artur Skoniecki on Pexels

Researchers have identified three general parenting styles that actually exacerbate symptoms of trauma in young children (Alisic et al., 2012): 

1. Avoidant parenting: Some parents are withdrawn and unavailable to children as a result of their own insecurity and trauma.  
2. Overprotective parenting: Out of fear that their child may be traumatized again, some caregivers are overprotective, preoccupied with fear that their child will be retraumatized by talking about a difficult event. 
3. Frightening parenting: Some parents repeatedly quiz their child on details about the trauma, frightening their child in the process. 

In contrast, consider what researchers describe as supportive parenting, beneficial parenting that occurs in response to children’s initiation of talk about trauma. These parents take care to feel safe themselves and to be in control of their emotions (though this does not necessarily mean refraining from crying). They listen to what their children say about the difficult experience. 

What caregivers can do to support their children through trauma 

Caregivers help by acknowledging children’s difficult experiences 

Of particular importance is adults’ acknowledgment of what children say by engaging in a supportive dialog about the experience. Specific strategies include: 

• Asking questions, especially open-ended questions (e.g., “What happened then?”) 

• Making follow-up statements (e.g., after a child reminisced about a parent’s fear that a tornado would take their house down, one mother replied, “You’re right, we got lucky.”)  

• Repeating the child’s words back to the child, which clarifies and ensures that they were heard. This strategy can be especially useful when a parent is caught off guard by a child’s comments. 

Caregivers help by following children’s lead 

Supportive conversations between caregivers and children about difficult experiences allow children to take the lead. If a child wants to talk about these experiences, responsive caregivers show that they are willing. If a child does not seem to want to talk about them, parents should not drill them for information. 

Some caregivers find that their child is willing to talk under certain circumstances (e.g., while on a car ride) but not others (e.g., face to face). These conversations about difficult experiences occur when children (as well as parents) feel comfortable. 

Caregivers help by respecting children’s negative emotional experiences and coaching them through these emotions 

Parents and other caregivers sometimes think they know what their children would feel about difficult experiences, but this is not necessarily true. Adults who want to support their children after challenging events should be especially careful about labeling what children feel about the events. 

Occasionally mislabeling an emotion might not enhance a child’s sense of being understood, but it probably does not do damage in the long run. However, evidence suggests that when such mislabeling is repeated often, it is not optimal for children. Instead, caregivers should let children describe their own emotions and use strategies (e.g., ask questions, follow up, and rephrase) to help check their comprehension of children’s communication. 

Photo by August de Richelieu on Pexels

As caregivers navigate emotional discussions with their children, they tap into meta-emotion philosophy, defined as “an organized set of feelings and thoughts about one’s own emotions and one’s children’s emotions” (Gottman et al., 1996, p. 243).  

Some parents develop a dismissive attitude toward negative emotions

In research with five- to eight-year-olds, some parents adopted a dismissive attitude toward negative emotions (e.g., sadness, anger), ignoring or denying those emotions out of fear that their children’s sadness or anger would upset them. They tried to distract their children from talking about their feelings. Other caregivers were intrusive, critical, and mocking of their children, which is derogatory behavior that is characteristic of parental rejection. 

In contrast, other caregivers in the same study expressed awareness of negative emotions in themselves and their children, saw their children’s expressions as opportunities to become close with or instruct their children, and validated their children’s negative feelings. These parents’ style reflects an emotion-coaching philosophy. 

As caregivers who adhered to this philosophy, these adults helped their children verbally label negative emotions correctly and assisted them in identifying resolutions to the emotional experiences. The children of these emotion-coaching parents had better emotional regulation and peer interactions three years later than did the children of adults who demonstrated dismissive or derogatory parenting.  

Caregivers help by using direct words that minimize risk of misinterpretation 

Elementary school children often ask caregivers questions about death, and it is a common impulse for adults to use terms like “went to sleep” or to explain the circumstances by saying the person or animal “was very sick.” 

However, children this age are famously literal in their interpretations of such euphemisms, perhaps leading them to believe that when they themselves go to bed or get sick, they will disappear like their pet or grandparent did. It is better for children’s comprehension to call death what it is, even if it feels insensitive due to cultural tendencies. 

Additional advice 

Of course, in extreme cases – when a deeply traumatic event occurred or when children seem excessively upset – parents may seek therapy for their children. This kind of therapy inherently involves confronting the event and talking about it. Prior to such therapy, caregivers are advised to confine themselves to asking open-ended questions (e.g., “And then what happened?”) and avoiding yes/no questions (e.g., “Did the man touch you there?”). 

Letting children take the lead is advisable and associated with children’s well-being, allowing them to begin to move past the trauma.

Based on an extensive review of evidence, researchers have devised a structured interview for children who are suspected of having been abused (Lamb et al., 2007). Such an approach is difficult for even trained interviewers to adhere to; parents will likely also find advice in this blog difficult to follow, but they are still encouraged to try using open-ended questions that encourage children to elaborate on their descriptions based on their own needs and comfort levels.

In other cases – such as when a child continually avoids mention of what happened – caregivers may want to consult their local children’s librarian for books that may help them discuss the issue. The American Psychological Association (through Magination Press) has a list of books that promote children’s mental health, including books related to trauma. 

In summary, parents and other caregivers should be prepared to talk about upsetting events with their children, ensuring that both the children and the adults feel safe. Letting children take the lead is advisable and associated with children’s well-being, allowing them to begin to move past the trauma.

The post How to talk with children about traumatic events appeared first on Child and Family Blog.

Key takeaways for caregivers

• Supportive reactions to children’s negative emotions include helping them deal with their problems, using strategies like comforting or distracting to help them feel better, and encouraging them to express their negative emotions.
• Non-supportive reactions to children’s negative emotions include using verbal or physical punishment to reduce their negative emotional expression, thinking little of their problems or painful reactions, and becoming distressed when faced with their negative emotions.
• Our research with Chinese families indicates that both mothers’ and fathers’ supportive reactions to their four- to six-year-olds’ negative emotions predict aspects of the children’s adjustment, though in different ways.
• Inhibitory control is the ability to restrain inappropriate behaviors and responses. Children with lower levels of inhibitory control have more difficulty regulating their behaviors and emotions. For those children, the positive effects of parents’ supportive reactions to children’s negative emotions were more pronounced.
• Chinese fathers’ supportive reactions to their four- to six-year-olds’ negative emotions predicted fewer externalizing problems (e.g., hyperactivity, inattention, conduct problems) six months later, but only for children who had more difficulty with self-control.
• Chinese mothers’ supportive reactions predicted more prosocial behaviors (e.g., sharing, helping, showing empathy), but only for children with low levels of inhibitory control. In contrast, Chinese fathers’ supportive reactions predicted more prosocial behaviors for children across levels of inhibitory control abilities.

Imagine a parent preparing for their five-year-old’s birthday party. The balloons are up, the cupcakes are ready, and friends are singing Happy Birthday! But instead of smiling, the child bursts into tears – overwhelmed by the attention and noise. The parent may feel frustrated and confused by this reaction to the fun celebration they planned.

Photo by KATRIN BOLOVTSOVA on Pexels

Moments like these – small, emotional crossroads – happen regularly in parenting. Whether a meltdown over a lost toy, a burst of frustration when a puzzle piece does not fit properly, or a quiet withdrawal during a noisy event, these behaviors are common, daily opportunities for caregivers to guide their children’s emotional growth.

The importance of caregivers’ reactions to children’s negative emotions: Factors to consider

Caregivers’ reactions can leave lasting impressions, especially when a child is upset, frustrated, or overwhelmed. They influence how children learn to manage and regulate their own emotions, relate to others, and handle future challenges. Reactions to children’s negative emotions might matter more than caregivers realize.

Supportive versus non-supportive reactions

Supportive reactions involve parents recognizing, validating, and constructively guiding children through their difficult emotions. For instance, think back to the birthday party scenario. When a child feels overwhelmed and bursts into tears, a supportive reaction might be kneeling down gently and offering comfort, saying, “Do you want to take a quiet moment with me?”

In contrast, non-supportive reactions typically involve dismissing or minimizing the child’s emotional expressions, or even punishing the child for their behavior. In the same scenario, a non-supportive response might be responding impatiently, “Come on, this is supposed to be fun!”

Caregivers’ reactions can leave lasting impressions, especially when a child is upset, frustrated, or overwhelmed.

Research – much of it conducted in Western countries – shows that supportive parental reactions to children’s negative emotions are linked to positive outcomes, such as better emotion regulation, fewer behavior problems, and stronger prosocial behaviors. In contrast, non-supportive reactions are generally associated with negative outcomes, including lower levels of social competence and more emotional and behavioral difficulties.

Findings from studies of Chinese families are more mixed: While supportive reactions predict better emotional regulation, the negative effects of non-supportive reactions, especially minimization, are less consistently observed, suggesting possible cultural differences.

Children’s temperament: Inhibitory control

Children have their own unique temperament – the typical way they respond to their surroundings. One important aspect of children’s temperament that is related to their self-regulation is inhibitory control, or children’s ability to restrain inappropriate behaviors and responses.

Inhibitory control develops gradually over time and with guidance. However, some children have a harder time with this aspect of temperament than others. They may act out more quickly, struggle to follow the rules, or have difficulty calming down after becoming upset.

Imagine a preschool classroom in which the teacher asks children to transition from playing to quietly listening to a story: Some children settle down quickly and calmly, while others continue to play, become restless, or find it difficult to remain seated. These behaviors reflect differences in children’s abilities to self-regulate.

Photo by ShotPot on Pexels

Children with stronger inhibitory control can manage their impulses more effectively, whereas children with lower levels of inhibitory control often find it harder to regulate their emotions and behaviors. This raises an important question for caregivers: Do parents’ supportive reactions matter more for children who naturally struggle with self-regulation?

Does a child’s ability to control impulses shape how caregivers’ responses to their negative emotions affect their behavior?

In a recent study, we examined to what extent Chinese mothers’ and fathers’ reactions to their young children’s negative emotions predicted children’s adjustment over time, and to what extent these effects depended on children’s inhibitory control. Mothers and fathers of 113 Chinese preschoolers (age range 45 to 73 months) recruited from three preschools in a small city in middle China completed two questionnaires six months apart. On average, both mothers and fathers were in their early 30s (age range 23 to 47 years), and they had an average of about 14.5 years of education. Annual household income varied between 10,000 yuan to 500,000 yuan (about $1,437 to $71,850).

Parents reported their reactions to their children’s negative emotions and their impressions of their children’s inhibitory control and adjustment. The questions about adjustment addressed children’s externalizing problems (hyperactivity-inattention, e.g., “easily distracted, concentration wanders,” and conduct problems, e.g., “often fights with other children or bullies them”), internalizing problems (emotional problems, e.g., “often unhappy, depressed or tearful” and peer problems, e.g., “picked on or bullied by other children”), and prosocial behaviors (cooperative and kind behaviors, e.g., “kind to younger children”).

Fathers’ supportive reactions predicted fewer externalizing problems, but only for children with more difficulty controlling their impulses

Mothers’ supportive reactions did not predict children’s externalizing problems, but for some children, fathers’ supportive reactions did. Traditionally, in Chinese families, fathers are seen as the main authority figures responsible for discipline, while mothers play a more nurturing and caregiving role. Supportive reactions from fathers may be particularly salient and influential when it comes to externalizing behaviors (e.g., hyperactivity, aggression, rule-breaking), which are often the focus of disciplinary efforts.

Fathers’ supportive reactions predicted externalizing behaviors for children with lower levels of inhibitory control. More specifically, the more likely fathers were to respond to these children’s emotional outbursts with empathy, patience, and guidance, the more likely these children were to show fewer externalizing problems six months later.

Parenting involves more than preventing problem behaviors; it is also about nurturing the emotional and social skills children need to thrive and flourish.

Supportive paternal reactions may help children manage their strong emotions before they escalate into problematic behaviors. In this way, fathers can serve as a supportive emotion socialization agent (i.e., someone whose interactions with children model, teach, or otherwise facilitate children’s understanding and management of emotions), particularly for children who need extra help with self-regulation.

Fathers’ supportive reactions predicted more prosocial behaviors in all children, while mothers’ supportive reactions predicted more prosocial behaviors only for children with low levels of inhibitory control

Parenting involves more than preventing problem behaviors; it is also about nurturing the emotional and social skills children need to thrive and flourish. In our study, one particularly meaningful outcome we examined was prosocial behaviors: actions like helping, sharing, cooperating, and showing empathy toward others. Parental warmth and coaching during emotionally challenging moments may provide children with a model for empathy and caring social interaction.

More supportive reactions from fathers predicted greater prosocial behavior for the children six months later. In other words, the more likely fathers were to respond with warmth, emotional validation, and constructive guidance during tough moments, the more likely their children were to be rated as thoughtful, considerate, and socially engaged. This was true regardless of the children’s inhibitory control abilities.

Maternal supportive reactions also predicted more prosocial behavior, but only for children who struggled more with inhibitory control – those who were impulsive, reactive, or easily frustrated. These children seemed to benefit most from this type of emotional coaching. For them, supportive responses from either parent might help them slow down, reflect, and engage with others more thoughtfully.

Parental reactions to children’s negative emotions did not predict children’s internalizing problems

While supportive parenting was clearly linked to children’s externalizing behaviors, we did not find a strong connection between parents’ reactions and children’s internalizing problems (e.g., anxiety, sadness, social withdrawal). One possible reason is that internalizing problems are much harder to detect, especially in young children.

Unlike external behaviors (e.g., aggression, defiance), internal struggles are often subtle. Young children may have a limited ability to recognize or express their own feelings of fear, worry, or sadness. As a result, even attentive parents may not always accurately perceive when their child is struggling internally.

Photo by Ketut Subiyanto on Pexels

Our study relied on parent-report questionnaires, which are a valuable tool but have limitations – particularly in terms of detecting emotional difficulties that children may hide or not yet understand themselves. Researchers may benefit from combining parent reports with more objective measures, such as physiological indicators like levels of cortisol (a hormone related to stress) or measurements of nervous system activity, to better capture young children’s internal emotional experiences.

Parents’ non-supportive reactions did not predict children’s adjustment

Interestingly, we did not find strong evidence that non-supportive parental reactions – such as dismissing or minimizing children’s negative emotions, or punishing children’s for expressing such emotions – predicted children’s behavioral or emotional adjustment six months later. This may seem surprising, especially given earlier research from Western countries in which non-supportive reactions have often been linked to less optimal outcomes like higher levels of aggression, lower levels of social competence, and more internalizing problems.

One possible explanation is that the negative impact of non-supportive reactions may be less pronounced in Chinese cultural contexts. In our study, supportive and non-supportive reactions were related to each other only moderately, suggesting that a parent can be supportive in some moments and still react dismissively or punitively in others.

In many Chinese families, emotional restraint and minimizing emotional expressions are sometimes viewed as promoting resilience and self-discipline rather than as being neglectful or harmful. As a result, Chinese children may be more accustomed to these reactions and affected less negatively by them than are children in Western cultures.

Tips for parents to support a child during emotionally charged moments

When your child is navigating negative emotions, you can:

• Name the emotion: “It looks like you’re feeling frustrated … That puzzle is very tricky, huh?”
• Stay calm and grounded: Children mirror adults’ emotions. Your calmness gives them something to lean on.
• Model coping strategies: “Let’s take a deep breath together. Sometimes that helps me when I’m upset.”
• Validate, then guide: “It’s okay to feel angry. Let’s figure out what we can do instead of crying/yelling.”
• Reconnect after the storm: Let your child know you are still there for them, even after a challenging moment.

The post When children struggle with negative emotions, parents’ supportive reactions can help appeared first on Child and Family Blog.

• Parents sometimes avoid talking about science with their children, fearing they might provide inaccurate or misleading information.
• Watching science television can help families engage in interactions that more effectively help children learn about science.
• In our research, parents who watched educational science television programs demonstrated more science knowledge, formulated more accurate scientific explanations, and engaged in higher-quality science conversations than parents who did not watch the programs.
• However, parents do not need to be experts to talk to their children about science.
• Science is a process of discovery, and modeling that process is just as important as teaching science information.

“Mom, why is it cold outside?”

Questions like this might catch parents by surprise. They might feel unprepared to answer and struggle to clarify what their child is asking or have trouble recalling the correct explanation. Putting a response in age-appropriate terms can add to the challenge.

Science is not just about knowing the right answer – it is also a process of learning and discovery.

These difficulties often lead parents and other caregivers to avoid talking about science with their children. However, science is not just about knowing the right answer – it is also a process of learning and discovery.

As researchers, we wanted to find ways to support parents in these moments. To do so, we turned to one of the most popular educational resources that families use together: science television.

What is children’s science television?

In recent years, the number of science television programs available for young children to watch has skyrocketed.

These programs cover a wide range of topics, including biology (e.g., Dinosaur Train), physics (e.g., Blaze and the Monster Machines), and outer space (e.g., Ready Jet Go). They also cater to different age groups, ranging from preschool (e.g., Octonauts) to late elementary school (e.g., Sci Girls).

Often, episodes of these programs begin with a provocative science question (e.g., “Why is the sky blue?”), which characters answer by engaging in a series of trial-and-error investigations. Along the way, the characters befriend vibrant and imaginative creatures, including familiar figures that many children know and love (e.g., the Cat in the Hat).

How do science television programs support parents?

We hypothesized that science television can support parents and other caregivers in several ways:

1. By refreshing knowledge: These programs are rich in factual science content, which may refresh caregivers’ knowledge and can also teach them new science concepts.
2. By building confidence: Presenting complex ideas in an age-appropriate narrative may help parents feel more confident when answering their children’s science questions and improve the science explanations they provide.
3. By encouraging collaboration: Science programs may remind caregivers that they do not need to always have all the answers, and that it is okay to learn with their children.

To examine these possibilities, we conducted three studies with different groups of families, settings, and research methods.

Science television improved parents’ science explanations

We conducted our first proof-of-concept study online. We recruited 141 U.S. parents of three- to six-year-olds. About half of parents and children were female and half male. Most parents were between 25 and 40 years old, most self-identified as White, and almost half reported having at least a college degree. We randomly selected some parents to watch two four-minute videos from the science program Earth to Luna. One video featured science information about the day/night cycle and one featured science information about butterflies. Other parents did not watch the videos.

Photo by Vitaly Gariev on Pexels

After each video, we asked parents a series of science questions (e.g., “Why does day turn into night?”), and we invited them to respond as if they were talking to their child. Parents who were randomly selected to not watch the videos skipped straight to responding to the science questions as if they were talking to their child.

Parents who watched the videos before responding formulated explanations with more science facts (e.g., the earth rotates) and fewer scientific misconceptions (e.g., the sun goes to sleep) than parents who did not view the videos. These findings offered preliminary support for our assertion that parents extract useful information from children’s educational television.

However, this initial study had clear limitations – it was conducted online and relied on hypothetical questions from children. To better assess the impact of science television, we needed to observe families as they engaged in actual science conversations.

Science television imparted knowledge to mothers and boosted their confidence

In our second study, 46 U.S. mothers and their four- to five-year-olds visited our lab at Ohio State University in a large urban part of the United States. Most mothers were 30 to 40 years old and most self-identified as White. Most mothers also described their children as White, and just under half of the children were female. We focused on mothers because they are generally more likely than fathers to watch educational television with children.

Mothers who watched the conceptual video demonstrated more knowledge about rocks than mothers who watched the video emphasizing science inquiry skills.

Mother-child pairs were randomly assigned to watch one of two 10-minute videos from the science program Sid the Science Kid, which focused on the concept of rock identification. One video emphasized conceptual information about rocks (i.e., distinguishing igneous from metamorphic rocks), and the other video emphasized science inquiry skills (i.e., observing and describing rocks).

We then examined whether these videos affected mothers’ relevant conceptual knowledge, confidence about teaching their children related content, and engagement during a hands-on rock identification activity with their children.

Mothers who watched the conceptual video demonstrated more knowledge about rocks than mothers who watched the video emphasizing science inquiry skills. In contrast, mothers who watched the inquiry video felt more confident teaching their children about rocks than mothers who watched the conceptual video. Despite these improvements, neither video affected what mothers said to their children during the activity.

These findings suggest that science television can provide some content and confidence support for parents. However, this study had too few participants to draw stronger conclusions. Additionally, our audio recordings of parent-child conversations were somewhat low in quality, which made it difficult to assess children’s contributions (e.g., they were often quieter).

Science television supported parent-child science conversations

In our final study, we addressed the limitations of our previous work by recruiting 116 U.S. parents (about 30% were fathers) and their four- to seven-year-olds. Just over half of the children were female and most of the parents and children were White.

The study took place in a quiet space at a children’s museum in Columbus, Ohio. We invited families to watch a five-minute video from the science program Hero Elementary and to complete a five-minute science activity. Both the video and the activity involved an early engineering concept (i.e., tower stability).

Photo by RDNE Stock project on Pexels

We randomly assigned half of the parent-children pairs to watch the video before the activity and half to watch the video afterward. We also used a higher-quality audio recorder to allow us to analyze parent-child conversations in greater depth.

Watching the video before (rather than after) the activity motivated parents to ask more science questions during the activity. Using an advanced form of dialog analysis, we also examined the patterns in conversational turn-taking that unfolded after parents’ questions.

Children who watched the video before (rather than after) the activity were more likely to formulate science explanations in response to parents’ questions. Without the video, they usually responded by revealing their lack of knowledge (e.g., by saying “I don’t know”).

Recommendations for caregivers

Collectively, our research suggests that science television can support parents by increasing their science knowledge, improving their scientific explanations, and facilitating higher-quality science conversations. These improvements have downstream benefits for children, such as improved learning from joint science activities.

Photo by RDNE Stock project on Pexels

Our studies focused on U.S. families who were predominately White and high-income. Additional research is needed to examine whether similar patterns emerge among other populations.

However, given the benefits we found, we encourage parents and other caregivers to watch science television with their children when possible and to seek out activities that reinforce lessons from these programs. These experiences can provide a shared language for discussing and exploring science in ways that are both tangible and fun.

Parents should not feel pressure to be science experts. Instead, they should emphasize the value of asking questions and seeking answers. Science television is just one platform through which shared learning can occur; families should explore other options in their community, such as zoos, museums, and public gardens.

Science is a process of discovery. Encouraging children to participate in that process is just as important as teaching them science information.

The post Children’s science television: Not just for children appeared first on Child and Family Blog.