Potential causes and consequences of self‐esteem were explored by examining dimensions of children’s social relations and experiences. Evidence indicated, for example, that self‐esteem correlated positively with warm, affectionate parent–child relations (Ojanen & Perry, 2007), and negatively with parental abuse (Cicchetti & Toth, 2006). Likewise, children were found to have higher self‐esteem when their peer relationships were supportive as opposed to abusive (e.g., friendships vs. peer victimization; Hodges et al., 1999). Decrements in self‐esteem were documented following school transitions (Wigfield & Eccles, 1994) and parental divorce (Bynum & Durm, 1996). The premise that self‐esteem is a precondition for healthy development received mixed support in that higher levels of this construct were linked with positive as well as negative outcomes (e.g., happiness, lower internalizing problems vs. drug use, prejudice; Baumeister et al., 2003).
Social‐cognition
In addition to the self, investigators explored children’s cognitions about others. Principal foci included research on children’s inferences about others’ mental states and psychological traits (e.g., intentions, personalities), and their ability to use these and other insights to negotiate interactions and solve social problems.
Research on theory of mind helped to clarify when children begin to draw inferences about others’ thoughts and beliefs, and how they utilize these conjectures to forecast their own and others’ social behavior. Evidence suggested that abilities such as these emerged during early childhood, were refined throughout middle childhood, and were instrumental in the development of social competence (Harris, 2006).
Investigators also studied children’s inferences about others’ psychological characteristics and traits. Findings implied that children begin to make trait attributions during early childhood and differentiate among people on this basis about the time they enter school. Studies of older age groups suggested that children increasingly regard others’ traits as stable, and utilize these attributions to interpret others’ motives and behaviors (Flavell et al., 2002).
Broader, more dynamic frameworks were developed and tested as a means of explicating the combination of social‐cognitive processes that enabled children to cope with complex interpersonal tasks, such as provocations and conflict. The dominant models developed for this purpose were based on information processing and social learning theories (Dodge, 1986).
Among the constructs postulated within these models were those representing operations deemed essential for gathering, interpreting, and storing social information, and for retrieving and utilizing social information to guide social behavior. These models spurred investigation and findings linked the hypothesized social‐cognitive processes with numerous indicators of children’s social behavior (e.g., aggression; Gifford‐Smith & Rabiner, 2004).
Moral development
Children’s moral reasoning, emotions, and behavior were at the forefront of investigation during this era. Research on moral reasoning, arising from constructivist perspectives, outstripped that conducted on other aspects of moral development, including children’s moral emotions (e.g., guilt) and moral behavior. Conceptual propositions (e.g., stage theory; Kohlberg, 1969) spurred investigation and led to discoveries that extended knowledge about continuities and change in children’s moral reasoning. Eventually, claims about the cognitive bases and universality of stage progressions were tempered by evidence suggesting that moral deliberations were shaped by situational factors (e.g., form, context, realism of ethical quandaries) as well as by culture, cohort, and personal experience (Nucci, & Gingo, 2011).
Another impetus for inquiry was social domain theory (Smetana et al., 2014) and, in particular, the premise that morality constitutes one domain of social knowledge, among others (e.g., knowledge about social norms and conventions), that children construct and utilize as they mature. Empirical findings implied that children recognize domain differences, develop more mature reasoning patterns within domains with age, and judge infractions differentially, depending on the domain (Smetana et al., 2014).
Moral behavior was investigated primarily by examining children’s developing capacity to refrain from rule‐breaking and their ability to conform to moral standards (e.g., parents’ rules, values). Key objectives were to determine how and when children internalized moral rules (i.e., growth of conscience; Kochanska et al., 2010) and developed the ability to follow internalized rules, even in the absence of parental control. Other focal constructs included self‐control, self‐regulation, and delay of gratification. Evidence gathered on delay of gratification tasks, for example, indicated that children’s self‐control increased dramatically from the toddler through the preschool years (Cole et al., 2011), and correlated positively with brain maturation and maternal support (Bernier et al., 2010).
Investigators who studied moral emotions primarily focused on the development and determinants of guilt and shame. Such emotions were found to emerge in 2‐ and 3‐year‐olds, and correlated positively with both child factors (e.g., inhibited, fearful temperaments; female gender) and parenting practices (e.g., provision of support vs. anger following transgressions; Kochanska et al., 2002). Other findings suggested that children who manifested stronger expressions of guilt and remorse at early ages exhibited greater rule adherence and fewer moral transgressions at later ages (Tangney & Dearing, 2002).
Emotional development
Advances in this domain stemmed partly from the creation of coding schemes that reliably differentiated infants’ and children’s emotional expressions, and from the implementation of technologies that indexed emotion’s physiological referents (e.g., heart, brain, and CNS monitoring instruments). These innovations paved the way for researchers to distinguish among basic emotions (e.g., joy, fear, sadness) and self‐conscious emotions (e.g., pride, guilt), and to chart developmental milestones (e.g., emergence, stability) and gauge individual differences in emotional reactivity (Lewis, 2014).
Efforts to define and measure individual differences in emotions (e.g., forms expressed, intensity, regulation) and relate them to other aspects of children’s development produced important discoveries. Associations were found between the emotions children frequently expressed and their temperament and adjustment. Children prone to express positive affect, for example, were found to have outgoing temperaments and manifested better adjustment outcomes (e.g., higher self‐esteem, social competence). In contrast, negative affectivity was linked with inhibited and difficult temperaments and a range of adjustment problems (Rothbart, 2007). Similar differences in temperament and adjustment were found for children who evidenced greater as opposed to lesser ability to manage their emotions (e.g., self‐regulation, effortful control; Denham et al., 2011).
Aim 4: Identify the forms of socialization and the bio/psycho/social developments in children that predict adverse outcomes
Principal research aims included examining the effects of nonoptimal or aberrant socialization practices and rearing conditions, and ascertaining the sequela of risky child characteristics and maladies. Scientists who addressed these aims often did so in the context of short‐ and long‐term longitudinal investigations.
Disruptions, deviations, and dysfunctions in the family system
The principal aspects of the family system that were investigated as detriments to children’s development were child abuse, marital discord and divorce, parental