CARL JUNG

(1875 1961)
Theory

Jung's theory divides the psyche into three parts. The first is the ego,which
Jung identifies with the conscious mind. Closely related is the personal
unconscious, which includes anything which is not presently conscious, but
can be. The personal unconscious is like most people's understanding of the
unconscious in that it includes both memories that are easily brought to
mind and those that have been suppressed for some reason. But it does not
include the instincts that Freud would have it include.
But then Jung adds the part of the psyche that makes his theory stand out
from all others: the collective unconscious. You could call it your "psychic
inheritance." It is the reservoir of our experiences as a species, a kind of
knowledge we are all born with. And yet we can never be directly conscious
of it. It influences all of our experiences and behaviors, most especially the
emotional ones, but we only know about it indirectly, by looking at those
influences.
There are some experiences that show the effects of the collective
unconscious more clearly than others: The experiences of love at first sight,
of deja vu (the feeling that you've been here before), and the immediate
recognition of certain symbols and the meanings of certain myths, could all
be understood as the sudden conjunction of our outer reality and the inner
reality of the collective unconscious. Grander examples are the creative
experiences shared by artists and musicians all over the world and in all
times, or the spiritual experiences of mystics of all religions, or the parallels
in dreams, fantasies, mythologies, fairy tales, and literature.
A nice example that has been greatly discussed recently is the near-death
experience. It seems that many people, of many different cultural
backgrounds, find that they have very similar recollections when they are
brought back from a close encounter with death. They speak of leaving their
bodies, seeing their bodies and the events surrounding them clearly, of being

pulled through a long tunnel towards a bright light, of seeing deceased

relatives or religious figures waiting for them, and of their disappointment at
having to leave this happy scene to return to their bodies. Perhaps we are all
"built" to experience death in this fashion.

Archetypes
The contents of the collective unconscious are called archetypes. Jung also
called them dominants, imagos, mythological or primordial images, and a
few other names, but archetypes seem to have won out over these. An
archetype is an unlearned tendency to experience things in a certain way.
The archetype has no form of its own, but it acts as an "organizing principle"
on the things we see or do. It works the way that instincts work in Freud's
theory: At first, the baby just wants something to eat, without knowing what
it wants. It has a rather indefinite yearning which, nevertheless, can be
satisfied by some things and not by others. Later, with experience, the child
begins to yearn for something more specific when it is hungry -- a bottle, a
cookie, a broiled lobster, a slice of New York style pizza.
The archetype is like a black hole in space: You only know its thereby how it
draws matter and light to itself.

The Mother Archetype

The mother archetype is a particularly good example. All of our ancestors
had mothers. We have evolved in an environment that included a mother or
mother-substitute. We would never have survived without our connection
with a nurturing-one during our times as helpless infants. It stands to reason
that we are "built" in a way that reflects that evolutionary environment: We
come into this world ready to want mother, to seek her, to recognize her, to
deal with her.
So the mother archetype is our built-in ability to recognize a certain
relationship, that of "mothering." Jung says that this is rather abstract, and

we are likely to project the archetype out into the world and onto a particular
person, usually our own mothers. Even when an archetype doesn't have a
particular real person available, we tend to personify the archetype, that is,
turn it into a mythological "story-book" character. This character symbolizes
the archetype.

The mother archetype is symbolized by the primordial mother or "earth

mother" of mythology, by Eve and Mary in western traditions, and by less
personal symbols such as the church, the nation, a forest, or the ocean.
According to Jung, someone whose own mother failed to satisfy the demands
of the archetype may well be one that spends his or her life seeking comfort
in the church, or in identification with "the motherland," or in meditating
upon the figure of Mary, or in a life at sea.

The Shadow
Sex and the life instincts in general are, of course, represented somewhere in
Jung's system. They are a part of an archetype called the shadow. It derives
from our prehuman, animal past, when our concerns were limited to survival
and reproduction, and when we weren't self-conscious.
It is the "dark side" of the ego, and the evil that we are capable of is often
stored there. Actually, the shadow is amoral -- neither good nor bad, just like
animals. An animal is capable of tender care for its young and vicious killing
for food, but it doesn't choose to do either. It just does what it does. It is
"innocent." But from our human perspective, the animal world looks rather
brutal, inhuman, so the shadow becomes something of a garbage can for the
parts of ourselves that we can't quite admit to.
Symbols of the shadow include the snake (as in the garden of Eden), the
dragon, monsters, and demons. It often guards the entrance to a cave or a
pool of water, which is the collective unconscious. Next time you dream
about wrestling with the devil, it may only be yourself you are wrestling with!

The persona

The persona represents your public image. The word is, obviously, related to
the word person and personality, and comes from a Latin word for mask. So
the persona is the mask you put on before you show yourself to the outside
world. Although it begins as an archetype, by the time we are finished
realizing it, it is the part of us most distant from the collective unconscious.

At its best, it is just the "good impression" we all wish to present as we fill the
roles society requires of us. But, of course, it can also be the "false
impression" we use to manipulate people's opinions and behaviors. And, at
its worst, it can be mistaken, even by ourselves, for our true nature:
Sometimes we believe we really are what we pretend to be!

Anima and animus

A part of our persona is the role of male or female we must play. For most
people that role is determined by their physical gender. But Jung, like Freud
and Adler and others, felt that we are all really bisexual in nature. When we
begin our lives as fetuses, we have undifferentiated sex organs that only
gradually, under the influence of hormones, become male or female.
Likewise, when we begin our social lives as infants, we are neither male nor
female in the social sense. Almost immediately -- as soon as those pink or
blue booties go on -- we come under the influence of society, which gradually
molds us into men and women.
In all societies, the expectations placed on men and women differ, usually
based on our different roles in reproduction, but often involving many details
that are purely traditional. In our society today, we still have many remnants
of these traditional expectations. Women are still expected to be more
nurturant and less aggressive; men are still expected to be strong and to
ignore the emotional side of life. But Jung felt these expectations meant that
we had developed only half of our potential.
The anima is the female aspect present in the collective unconscious of men,
and the animus is the male aspect present in the collective unconscious of
women. Together, they are refered to as syzygy. The anima may be

personified as a young girl, very spontaneous and intuitive, or as a witch, or

as the earth mother. It is likely to be associated with deep emotionality and
the force of life itself. The animus may be personified as a wise old man, a
sorcerer, or often a number of males, and tends to be logical, often
rationalistic, even argumentative.
The anima or animus is the archetype through which you communicate with
the collective unconscious generally, and it is important to get into touch
with it. It is also the archetype that is responsible for much of our love life:
We are, as an ancient Greek myth suggests, always looking for our other
half, the half that the Gods took from us, in members of the opposite sex.
When we fall in love at first sight, then we have found someone that "fills"
our anima or animus archetype particularly well!

The self
The goal of life is to realize the self. The self is an archetype that represents
the transcendence of all opposites, so that every aspect of your personality
is expressed equally. You are then neither and both male and female, neither
and both ego and shadow, neither and both good and bad, neither and both
conscious and unconscious, neither and both an individual and the whole of
creation. And yet, with no oppositions, there is no energy, and you cease to
act. Of course, you no longer need to act.
To keep it from getting too mystical, think of it as a new center, a more
balanced position, for your psyche. When you are young, you focus on the
ego and worry about the trivialities of the persona. When you are older
(assuming you have been developing as you should), you focus a little
deeper, on the self, and become closer to all people, all life, even the
universe itself. The self-realized person is actually less selfish.

Introversion and extroversion

Jung developed a personality typology that has become so popular that some
people don't realize he did anything else! It begins with the distinction

between introversion and extroversion. Introverts are people who prefer their
internal world of thoughts, feelings, fantasies, dreams, and so on, while
extroverts prefer the external world of things and people and activities.
The words have become confused with ideas like shyness and sociability,
partially because introverts tend to be shy and extroverts tend to be
sociable. But Jung intended for them to refer more to whether you ("ego")
more often faced toward the persona and outer reality, or toward the
collective unconscious and its archetypes. In that sense, the introvert is
somewhat more mature than the extrovert. Our culture, of course, values the
extrovert much more. And Jung warned that we all tend to value our own
type most!
We now find the introvert-extravert dimension in several theories, notably
Hans Eysenck's, although often hidden under alternative names such as
"sociability" and "surgency."

Attitudes
An attitude is a predisposition to respond cognitively,
emotionally, or behaviorally to a particular object, person,
or situation in a particular way.

How Attitudes Form, Change and Shape Our

Behavior
What's your opinion on the death penalty? Which political party does a better
job of running the country? Should prayer be allowed in schools? Should
violence on television be regulated?Chances are that you probably have
fairly strong opinions on these and similar questions. You've developed
attitudes about such issues, and these attitudes influence your beliefs as well
as your behavior. Attitudes are an important topic of study within the field of
social psychology. What exactly is an attitude? How does it develop?

Continue reading to learn more about how psychologists define this concept,
how attitudes influence our behavior and things we can do to change
attitudes.

What Is an Attitude?
Psychologists define attitudes as a learned tendency to evaluate things in a
certain way. This can include evaluations of people, issues, objects or events.
Such evaluations are often positive or negative, but they can also be
uncertain at times. For example, you might have mixed feelings about a
particular person or issue.Researchers also suggest that there are several
different components that make up attitudes.
An Emotional Component: How the object, person, issue or event makes you
feel.
A Cognitive Component: Your thoughts and beliefs about the subject.
A Behavioral Component: How the attitude influences your behavior.
Attitudes can also be explicit and implicit. Explicit attitudes are those that we
are consciously aware of and that clearly influence our behaviors and beliefs.
Implicit attitudes are unconscious, but still have an effect on our beliefs and
behaviors

How Do Attitudes Form?

Attitudes form directly as a result of experience. They may emerge due to
direct personal experience, or they may result from observation. Social roles
and social norms can have a strong influence on attitudes. Social roles relate
to how people are expected to behave in a particular role or context. Social
norms involve society's rules for what behaviors are considered
appropriate.Attitudes can be learned in a variety of ways. Consider how
advertisers use classical conditioning to influence your attitude toward a
particular product. In a television commercial, you see young, beautiful
people having fun in on a tropical beach while enjoying a sport drink. This
attractive and appealing imagery causes you to develop a positive

association with this particular beverage.Operant conditioning can also be

used to influence how attitudes develop. Imagine a young man who has just
started smoking. Whenever he lights up a cigarette, people complain,
chastise him and ask him to leave their vicinity. This negative feedback from
those around him eventually causes him to develop an unfavorable opinion
of smoking and he decides to give up the habit.Finally, people also learn
attitudes by observing the people around them. When someone you admire
greatly espouses a particular attitude, you are more likely to develop the
same beliefs. For example, children spend a great deal of time observing the
attitudes of their parents and usually begin to demonstrate similar outlooks.

How Do Attitudes Influence Behavior?

We tend to assume that people behave in accordance with their attitudes.
However, social psychologists have found that attitudes and actual behavior
are not always perfectly aligned. After all, plenty of people support a
particular candidate or political party and yet fail to go out and
vote.Researchers have discovered that people are more likely to behave
according to their attitudes under certain conditions:

When
When
When
When
When

your attitudes are the result of personal experience.

you are an expert in the subject.
you expect a favorable outcome.
the attitudes are repeatedly expressed.
you stand to win or lose something due to the issue.

In some cases, people may actually alter their attitudes in order to better
align them with their behavior. Cognitive dissonance is a phenomenon in
which a person experiences psychological distress due to conflicting
thoughts or beliefs. In order to reduce this tension, people may change their
attitudes to reflect their other beliefs or actual behaviors.Imagine the
following situation: You've always placed a high value on financial security,
but you start dating someone who is very financially unstable. In order to
reduce the tension caused by the conflicting beliefs and behavior, you have
two options. You can end the relationship and seek out a partner who is more
financially secure, or you can de-emphasize the importance of fiscal stability.
In order to minimize the dissonance between your conflicting attitude and
behavior, you either have to change the attitude or change your actions.

Attitude Change
While attitudes can have a powerful effect on behavior, they are not set in
stone. The same influences that lead to attitude formation can also create
attitude change.

Classical Conditioning

The process of closely associating a neutral stimulus with

one that evokes a reflexive response so that eventually
the neutral stimulus alone will evoke the same response.

Classical conditioning is an important concept in the school of psychology

known as behaviorism, and it forms the basis for some of the techniques
used in behavior therapy.
Classical conditioning was pioneered by the Russian physiologist Ivan Pavlov
(1849-1936) in the 1890s in the course of experiments on the digestive
systems of dogs (work which won him the Nobel Prize in 1904). Noticing that
the dogs salivated at the mere sight of the person who fed them, Pavlov
formulated a theory about the relationship between stimuli and responses
that he believed could be applied to humans as well as to other animals. He
called the dogs' salivation in response to the actual taste and smell of meat
an unconditioned response because it occurred through a natural reflex
without any prior training (the meat itself was referred to as an
unconditioned stimulus). A normally neutral act, such as the appearance of a
lab assistant in a white coat or the ringing of a bell, could become associated
with the appearance of food, thus producing salivation as a conditioned
response (in response to a conditioned stimulus).Pavlov believed that the
conditioned reflex had a physiological basis in the creation of new pathways
in the cortex of the brain by the conditioning process. In further research
early in the 20th century, Pavlov found that in order for the conditioned

response to be maintained, it had to be paired periodically with the

unconditioned stimulus or the learned association would be forgotten (a
process known as extinction). However, it could quickly be relearned if
necessary.
In humans, classical conditioning can account for such complex phenomena
as a person's emotional reaction to a particular song or perfume based on a
past experience with which it is associated. Classical (sometimes called
Pavlovian) conditioning is also the basis for many different types of fears or
phobias, which can occur through a process called stimulus generalization (a
child who has a bad experience with a particular dog may learn to fear all
dogs). In addition to causing fears, however, classical conditioning can also
help eliminate them through a variety of therapeutic techniques. One is
systematic desensitization, in which an anxiety-producing stimulus is
deliberately associated with a positive response, usually relaxation produced
through such techniques as deep breathing and progressive muscle
relaxation. The opposite result (making a desirable stimulus unpleasant) is
obtained through aversion therapy, in which a behavior that a person wants
to discontinue often an addiction, such as alcoholismis paired with an
unpleasant stimulus, such as a nausea-producing drug.

Operant Conditioning

Approach to human learning based on the premise that

human intelligence and will operate on the environment
rather than merely respond to the environment's stimuli.

Operant conditioning is an elaboration of classical conditioning. Operant

conditioning holds that human learning is more complex than the model
developed by Ivan Pavlov (1849-1936) and involves human intelligence and
will operating (thus its name) on its environment rather than being a slave to
stimuli.
The Pavlovian model of classical conditioning was revolutionary in its time
but eventually came to be seen as limited in its application to most human
behavior, which is far more complex than a series of automatic responsesto

various stimuli. B.F. Skinner (1904-1990) elaborated on this concept by

introducing the idea of consequences into the behaviorist formula of human
learning. Pavlov's classical conditioning explained behavior strictly in terms
of stimuli, demonstrating a causal relationship between stimuli and behavior.
In Pavlov's model, humans responded to stimuli in specific, predictable ways.
According to Skinner, however, behavior is seen as far more complex,
allowing for the introduction of choice and free will. According to operant
conditioning, the likelihood that a behavior will be repeated depends to a
great degree on the amount of pleasure (or pain) that behavior has caused
or brought about in the past. Skinner also added to the vocabulary of
behaviorism the concepts of negative and positive reinforcer and of
punishment.
According to the Skinner model of operant conditioning humans learn
behaviors based on a trial and error process whereby they remember what
behaviors elicited positive, or pleasurable, responses and which elicited
negative ones. He derived these theories from observing the behaviors of
rats and pigeons isolated in what have come to be known as Skinner boxes.
Inside the boxes, rats that had been deprived of food were presented with a
lever that, when pushed, would drop a pellet of food into the cage. Of course,
the rat wouldn't know this, and so the first time it hit the lever, it was a
purely accidental, the result of what Skinner called random trial and error
behavior. Eventually, however, the rat would "learn" that hitting the lever
resulted in the appearance of food and it would continue doing so. Receiving
the food, then, in the language of operant conditioning, is considered the
reinforcer while hitting the lever becomes the operant, the way the organism
operates on its environment.
Skinner's model of operant conditioning broke down reinforcements into four
kinds to study the effects these various "schedules of reinforcement" would
have on behavior. These schedules are: fixed interval, variable interval, fixed
ration, and variable ration. In a fixed interval schedule experiment, the lever
in the rat's box would only provide food at a specific rate, regardless of how
often the rat pulled the lever. In other words, food would be provided every
60 seconds. Eventually, the rat adapts to this schedule, pushing the lever
with greater frequency approximately every 60 seconds. In variable interval
experiments, the lever becomes active at random intervals. Rats presented
with this problem adapt by pressing the lever less frequently but at more
regular intervals. An experiment using a fixed ratio schedule uses a lever
that becomes active only after the rat pulls it a specific number of times, and
in a variable ration experiment the number of pulls between activity is

random. Behavior of the rats adapts to these conditions and is adjusted to

provide the most rewards.
The real-world ramifications of operant conditioning experiments are easy to
imagine, and many of the experiments described would probably sound very
familiar to parents who use such systems of rewards and punishments on a
daily basis with their children regardless of whether they have ever heard of
B.F. Skinner. His model has been used by learning theorists of various sorts to
describe all kinds of human behaviors. Since the 1960s, however,
behaviorism has taken a back seat to cognitive theories of learning, although
few dispute the elementary tenets of operant conditioning and their use in
the acquisition of rudimentary adaptive behaviors.

Intelligence

An abstract concept whose definition continually evolves

and often depends upon current social values as much as
scientific ideas. Modern definitions refer to a variety of
mental capabilities, including the ability to reason, plan,
solve problems, think abstractly, comprehend complex
ideas, learn quickly, and learn from experience as well as
the potential to do so.

Several theories about intelligence emerged in the 20th century and with
them debate about the nature of intelligence, whether it is hereditary,
environmental or both. As methods developed to assess intelligence,
theorizing occurred about the measurability of intelligence, its accuracy and
this field known as psychometrics. As the 20th century drew to a close,
publication of The Bell Curve by Richard J. Herrnstein and Charles Murray in
1994 stirred the controversy. Their findings pointed to links between social
class, race, and IQ scores, despite questions by many about the validity of IQ
tests as a measurement of intelligence or a predictor of achievement and
success.

Part of the problem regarding intelligence stems from the fact that nobody
has adequately defined what intelligence really means. In everyday life, we
have a general understanding that some people are "smart," but when we
try to define "smart" precisely, we often have difficulty because a person can
be gifted in one area and average or below in another. To explain this
phenomenon, some psychologists have developed theories to include
multiple components of intelligence.

Charles Darwin's younger cousin, Sir Francis Galton, inspired by the Origin of
the Species, developed a forerunner of 20th-century testing in the 1860s
when he set out to prove that intelligence was inherited. He used
quantitative studies of prominent individuals and their families.
British psychologist and statistician Charles Spearman in 1904 introduced a
central concept of intelligence psychometrics, pointing out that people who
perform well on one type of intelligence test tend to do well on others also.
This general mental ability that carried over from one type of cognitive
testing to another, Spearman named gfor general intelligence. Spearman
concluded that g consisted mainly of the ability to infer relationships based
on one's experiences. Spearman's work led to the idea that intelligence is
focused on a single, main component.
French psychologists Alfred Binet and Theodore Simon followed in 1905,
introducing the concept of mental age to match chronological age in children
with average ability. In bright children, mental age would exceed
chronological age; in slower learners, mental age would fall below
chronological age. Simon and Binet's test was introduced into the United
States in a modified form in 1916 by Stanford psychologist Lewis Terman,
and with it the concept of the intelligence quotient (I.Q.), the mental age
divided by chronological age and multiplied by 100.
With the adoption of widespread testing using the Stanford-Binet and two
versions created for the Army in World War I, the concept of the intelligence
test departed from Binet and Simon's initial view. Intelligence became
associated with a fixed, innate, hereditary value. That is, one's intelligence,
as revealed by IQ tests, was locked at a certain level because of what was
seen as its hereditary basis. Although a number of well-known and respected
psychologists objected to this characterization of intelligence, it gained
popularity, especially among the public.

At this time, people placed great faith in the role of science in improving
society; intelligence tests were seen as a specific application of science that
could be used beneficially. Unfortunately, because of the nature of the tests
and because of many people's willingness to accept test results uncritically,
people of racial minorities and certain ethnic groups were deemed to be
genetically inferior with regard to intelligence compared to the majority.
Some early psychologists thought that measuring the speed of sensory
processes and reaction times might indicate an individual's intelligence. This
approach provided no useful results. Subsequently, tests reflecting white
American culture and its values provided the benchmark for assessing
intelligence. Although such tests indicate the degree of academic success
that an individual is likely to experience, many have questioned the link to
the abstract notion of intelligence, which extends beyond academic areas.
Immigration laws restricted entry into the United States of "inferior" groups,
based on the results of early intelligence testing, according to some scholars.
This claim seems to have some merit, although many psychologists objected
to the conclusions that resulted from mass intelligence testing. In large part,
the immigration laws seemed to reflect the attitudes of Americans in general
regarding certain groups of people.
In the 1940s, a different view of intelligence emerged. Rejecting Spearman's
emphasis on g, American psychologist L.L. Thurstone suggested that
intelligence consists of specific abilities. He identified seven primary
intellectual abilities: word fluency, verbal comprehension, spatial ability,
perceptual speed, numerical ability, inductive reasoning, and memory.
Taking Thurstone's concept even further, J.P. Guilford developed the theory
that intelligence consists of as many as five different operations or processes
(evaluation, convergent production, divergent production, memory, and
cognition), five different types of content (visual, auditory, symbolic,
semantic, and behavioral) and six different products (units, classes, relations,
systems, transformation, and implications). Each of these different
components was seen as independent; the result being an intelligence
theory that consisted of 150 different elements.
In the past few decades, psychologists have expanded the notion of what
constitutes intelligence. Newer definitions of intelligence encompass more
diverse aspects of thought and reasoning. For example, psychologist Robert
Sternberg developed a three-part theory of intelligence that states that
behaviors must be viewed within the context of a particular culture (i.e., in

some cultures, a given behavior might be highly regarded whereas in

another, the same behavior is given low regard); that a person's experiences
impact the expression of intelligence; and that certain cognitive processes
control all intelligent behavior. When all these aspects of intelligence are
viewed together, the importance of how people use their intelligence
becomes more important than the question of "how much" intelligence a
person has. Sternberg has suggested that current intelligence tests focus too
much on what a person has already learned rather than on how well a person
acquires new skills or knowledge. Another multifaceted approach to
intelligence is Howard Gardner's proposal that people have eight
intelligences: logical-mathematical, linguistic, musical, spatial, bodilykinesthetic, interpersonal, intrapersonal and the naturalistic.
Daniel Goleman has written about an emotional intelligence of how people
manage their feelings, interact and communicate, combining the
interpersonal and intrapersonal of Gardner's eight intelligences.
One feature that characterizes the newly developing concept of intelligence
is that it has broader meaning than a single underlying trait (e.g.,
Spearman's g). Sternberg and Gardner's emergent ideas suggest that any
simple attempt at defining intelligence is inadequate given the wide variety
of skills, abilities, and potential that people manifest.
Some of the same controversies that surfaced in the early years of
intelligence testing have recurred repeatedly throughout this century. They
include the question of the relative effects of environment versus heredity,
the degree to which intelligence can change, the extent of cultural bias in
tests, and even whether intelligence tests provide any useful information at
all.
The current approach to intelligence involves how people use the information
they possess, not merely the knowledge they have acquired. Intelligence is
not a concrete and objective entity, though psychologists have looked for
different ways to assess it. The particular definition of intelligence that has
currency at any given time reflects the social values of the time as much as
the scientific ideas.
The approach to intelligence testing, however, remains closely tied to
Charles Spearman's ideas, despite new waves of thinking. Tests of
intelligence tend to mirror the values of our culture, linking them to
academic skills such as verbal and mathematical ability, although
performance-oriented tests exist.

Self-Esteem
Considered an important component of emotional health,
self-esteem encompasses both self-confidence and selfacceptance.

Psychologists who write about self-esteem generally discuss it in terms of

two key components: the feeling of being loved and accepted by others and
a sense of competence and mastery in performing tasks and solving
problems independently.
Much research has been conducted in the area of developing self-esteem in
children. Martin Seligman claims that in order for children to feel good about
themselves, they must feel that they are able to do things well. He claims
that trying to shield children from feelings of sadness, frustration, and
anxiety when they fail robs them of the motivation to persist in difficult tasks
until they succeed. It is precisely such success in the face of difficulties that
can truly make them feel good about themselves. Seligman believes that this
attempt to cushion children against unpleasant emotions is in large part
responsible for an increase in the prevalence of depression since the 1950s,
an increase that he associates with a conditioned sense of helplessness.
Self-esteem comes from different sources for children at different stages of
development. The development of self-esteem in young children is heavily
influenced by parental attitudes and behavior. Supportive parental behavior,
including the encouragement and praise of mastery, as well as the child's
internalization of the parents' own attitudes toward success and failure, are
the most powerful factors in the development of self-esteem in early
childhood. Later, older children's experiences outside the homein school
and with peersbecome increasingly important in determining their selfesteem. Schools can influence their students' self-esteem through the
attitudes they foster toward competition and diversity and their recognition
of achievement in academics, sports, and the arts. By middle childhood,
friendships have assumed a pivotal role in a child's life. Studies have shown
that school-age youngsters spend more time with their friends than they
spend doing homework, watching television, or playing alone. In addition, the

amount of time they interact with their parents is greatly reduced from when
they were younger. At this stage, social acceptance by a child's peer group
plays a major role in developing and maintaining self-esteem.
The physical and emotional changes that take place in adolescence,
especially early adolescence, present new challenges to a child's selfesteem. Boys whose growth spurt comes late compare themselves with
peers who have matured early and seem more athletic, masculine, and
confident. In contrast, early physical maturation can be embarrassing for
girls, who feel gawky and self-conscious in their newly developed bodies.
Fitting in with their peers becomes more important than ever to their selfesteem, and, in later adolescence, relationships with the opposite sex can
become a major source of confidence or insecurity.