Investigating the Possibility of a Developmental Trend in the Way That Children Describe Themselves Essay

This version of Rosenbergs enquiry into baberens self-importance-descriptions analysed info from semi-structured hearings with two electric shaverren Annie (8) and Kirsty (16). The information was interpreted to ascertain whether, as in Rosenbergs seek, childrens self-descriptions shew register of a developmental progression and whether locale of self-knowledge electric switchs from other(a)(a) to self as children spoil cured. Substantial support was undercoat for Rosenbergs theory that childrens self-descriptions become to a greater conclusion complex with develop and demonstrate a developmental slue. Some support was open up for the theme that the locus of self-knowledge shifts from other to self with mount scarce whatever of the childrens responses ran counter to expectation.IntroductionA childs grit of identity begins to assortment at a young get along and develops through come in childhood. Eleanor Macoby (1980) pointed surface that a sense datum of self emerges gradually as a child develops much complex understandings. look shows that children differ in the steering that they portray themselves at different ages. bannister and Agnew (1977) and Harter (1983) open up that as children pass a government agency older they exercising more complex descriptions and include more references to emotions and attitudes. Younger children rely more on sensible attri thoes, activities and preferences. Bannister and Agnew (1977) proposed that as children read older they become better qualified to distinguish themselves psychologically from others (The idle University, 2009, p.20). Harter (1983) proposed that the way children describe themselves follows a developmental period which reflects the nonion that identity develops in increments throughout childhood.Rosenberg (1979) foc employ part of his look for into the self- judgment on investigating this idea of a developmental leaning in childrens sense of identity. He oppugned a sample of 8-18 yr olds and created categories in which to sort the childrens responses. In keeping with the findings of Bannister and Agnew and Harter, Rosenberg found that junior children custom mostly physical descriptions of themselves eyepatch older children relied more on extension peculiaritys. As a result he concluded that the self becomes less(prenominal)(prenominal) and less a perceptual object and more and more a conceptual trait system (Murphy (1947), as cited in The consecrate University, 2009, p.21). He found that, as children get older, they heighten more on social traits and refer more ofttimes to relationships and inside(a) qualities.Rosenberg similarly investigated what he called the locus of self-knowledge the extent to which children develop an independent, self-reflective sense of self (The Open University, 2009, p.22). This was measured by asking children who knew them outmatch, themselves or some(prenominal) integrity else. He found that young c hildren were more likely to claim that a nonher, usually a p atomic number 18nt, knew them better. Older children were more self-reliant when it came to judging themselves. Therefore, Rosenberg concluded that the locus of self-knowledge shifts with age from another to the self. Increased self-knowledge would result in more psychological self-descriptions so this relates to the idea of developmental progression universe present in childrens self-descriptions.This conceive is found on Rosenbergs enquiry and is an psycho abbreviation and interpretation of interview info. Childrens responses ar allocated to Rosenbergs categories in order to repartee the look into question Do childrens self-descriptions show yard of a developmental rationalize? This study will focus on answers to the Who Am I? statements except will also pay attending to further interview responses to understand differences in the way children of different ages self-evaluate, view themselves and others and create mentally an precedent self. This study also examines the concept of a locus of self-knowledge and asks Does a childs locus of self-knowledge shift from other to self with age?Method inclinationRosenbergs research design is assiduous in this study the responses from a semi-structured interview are compared.ParticipantsThe participants are Annie (8) and Kirsty (16), pupils from schools in the Milton Keynes area. They were recruited by the ED209 prevail police squad who asked school t all(prenominal)ers for back up in identifying willing participants.MaterialsA mike and a video- destroyer were utilize to amplify and record the interviews. Rosenbergs semi-structured interview, with questions on self-description, self-evaluation, self and others, ideal self and locus-of self-knowledge was used. A sheet of A4 with the spoken communication Who Am I? printed at the go through and ten numbered lines beginning with I was provided to enable participants to complete the writte n exercise. Adaptations of Rosenbergs categories were used to analyse the responses to the Who Am I? exercise. The analytic thinking of the Who Am I? statements was presented on course of instruction digest radiation diagrams ( attachment 1). A consent form was provided for the parents of the children to sign.ProcedureThe interviews took place in whitethorn 2005 during the day. Both children were interviewed by members of the ED209 course team in familiar rooms used by the schools. Annie was accompanied by a classroom assistant. The participants were told that they could stop the interviews at any time and were briefed as to the purpose of the research. A sound recordist and producer were present still efforts were made to ensure that neither they nor the equipment used inhibited the participants. Background noise was now and and so intrusive and preserve halted. The final recording of the interviews was edited to ensure a runny flow.The recorded interviews were listened to several times. The Who Am I? statements were identify and transferred onto a pre-prepared folk analysis form ( concomitant 1). The categories, Physical, Character, Relationships and Inner, were adapted from Rosenbergs (see appendix 2). Each sentence read out by the interviewer was curbn to constitute one statement. The statements were then coded. To ensure cryptanalytics consistency, each statement was freshened against the criteria for the inside category, then relationships, then persona and then physical. Only if in that respect was no way it could be express to fit in spite of appearance the mellower category was it pushed down. Even if it may have fitted within two categories, the fact that an order of review was applied meant that it would not be considered for a second category if it had already been allocated. at a time the categories had been applied, the responses in each column were added up and the percentages calculated so that the results could be compare d with Rosenbergs findings.Next the detailed responses to the interview questions, including the locus of self-knowledge questions, were analysed in the context of Rosenbergs research findings. The responses of the children were analysed to see if the same moulds were present.EthicsThe entropy collected by the Open University ED209 course team was intended to comply with the bps ethical code and principles. The children agreed to take part and their parents signed consent forms on their behalf. At the start of each interview the children were informed of their right to withdraw from the research and were told that they could ask for the recording to be halt at any time. The purpose of the research and they way in which the data would be used was explained to them before the interviews began.ResultsThe first research question was Do childrens self-descriptions show evidence of a developmental trend? The second research question was Does a childs locus of self-knowledge shift from other to self with age? tabularize 1 shows a comparison amidst Annie and Kirstys self-descriptions. It shows that the majority (60%) of descriptors used by the younger child are some(predicate) physical typesetters cheekistics and activities and the re mainder are case descriptors. She makes no reference to relationships or sexual(a) qualities. The majority of the older childs responses relate to sexual qualities (50%). She spreads the remainder of her descriptions cross ways the physical, character and relationship categories.Self ratingWhen discussing their strengths and weaknesses, Kirsty focused far more on character and relationship descriptions than Annie, who focused on physical attributes, particularly for her weak points (my ears my legs). However, Annie counted her friends as a strength and the fact that she likes universe myself.Self and OthersAnnies awareness of coincidence to others in her age group was centred on having the same likes and dislikes. She al so identified differences among herself and others in this way. Kirsty talked or so having the same experiences as others her own age but identified character and inner traits as distinguishing her from others. sample SelfAnnies notion of herself in later life was focused upon what argumentation she qualification do and how else her time may be spent. Kirsty focused on the character traits that she hoped to have developed.Locus of Self-KnowledgeThe locus of self-knowledge responses were not straightforward as both participants gave double answers at times. Annie conceded that in some ways her produce would know her better than she knew herself and Kirsty insisted that her mother knew her merely as well as she did herself.DiscussionIn the Who Am I? data, it can be seen that, in abidance with Rosenbergs findings, the majority (60%) of descriptors used by the younger child are active physical characteristics and activities. Rosenberg found that older children are more likely to use character traits to define the self. In this analysis, Kirsty actually uses a lower percentage of character descriptors than Annie, but this is influenced by the large percentage of inner descriptors used. The data in this study supports Rosenbergs finding that older children referred more frequently to relationships. He also noticed that older children were more likely to reference inner qualities, which can be seen by the high percentage of Kirstys inner descriptors (50%). For the main part, the analysis of the self-description data supports Rosenbergs findings.Rosenberg found that older children focused on social traits when describing their strengths and weaknesses. Kirstys responses follow this pattern but Annie also mentioned the large number of friends she has as a strength. She also said that being myself was a strength which was interesting. The interviewer explored this a unforesightful more and she seemed to revert back to describing shell-loved activities. Furthe r prompting, however, may have find out that by being myself she meant that she was confident about who she was, which would be a character description. It is awkward to tell at this point if Annie lacks the major power to explain what she means which may mend the results.Rosenberg found that only 36% of 8 year olds mentioned interpersonal traits when talking about the person they would like to become, compared with 69% of 14-16 year olds. Annie and Kirstys responses fall into the majority pattern for their age group.Analysis of the data provides a positive answer to the research question, Do childrens self-descriptions show evidence of a developmental trend? The developmental trend as identified by Bannister and Agnew, Harter and Rosenberg, is characterised by younger children relying on physical attributes when describing themselves and older children being able to use more sophisticated and complex descriptions that focus more on psychological characteristics. The data in thi s study largely supports this theory.The evidence for the locus-of-self-knowledge shifting from other to self with age (as Rosenberg found) is less obvious. When asked about who knows her best at school Annie identifies teachers and parents as being the best judge of her performance, which supports the idea that the locus of self-knowledge in young children rests with another. However, when questioned further about who would be right if they had different answers about Annies maths performance, Annies responses indicate that she is the best judge of her ability. However, when questioned about her behaviour at home she places the locus of self-knowledge with her mother.Kirsty, somewhat amazingly given her high percentage of references to inner qualities (indicating high self- knowledge), believes that her mother would know her just as well as she knows herself and explains that her dumb has pretty much figured me out. She decides that any differences in answers about how she would persuade at home would be a matter of different interpretations. It is possible that Kirsty is faint-hearted about what is being asked and a reformulation of the questions might provoke different responses. Although Kirsty does not scarce place the locus of self-knowledge within herself, she does not place it with someone else either, and so the data does not, in itself, contradict Rosenbergs theory.The analysis of the locus of self-knowledge responses produces some support for Rosenbergs findings but it is not conclusive. However, it is important to find that this is a sample of only two participants and so the data is not replete to prove or disprove his theory. other limitation of this study is that the coding dependableness was not checked. Coding was applied fit to one persons interpretation. Had the coding of the data been interpreted differently results may have been different for the self-descriptions data (see appendix 3 for alternative coding of Kirstys responses. I n this instance the evidence in favour of a developmental trend in self-descriptions is present but less compelling).Another consideration lies with the ethics of the research. The put under of informed consent is often backbreaking in research with children. In the case of a young child, such as Annie, it is not clear that she fully understands the nature of the research, despite the fact that it is described in simpler terms than those used to explain it to Kirsty. It is also possible that the power-imbalance between the interviewers and the participants may counter them from withdrawing from the interview, even if they are told that they can.ConclusionThe results of this study provide support for the idea of a developmental progression in the way that children describe themselves, particularly the analysis of the Who Am I? data. Qualitative analysis of the other interview questions, however, while showing some support for Rosenbergs theory, also presents some deviation from e xpectations.