View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Gender and Patterns of Concerned Responsiveness in Representations of the Mother-Daughter and Mother-Son Relationship

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Gender and Patterns of Concerned Responsiveness in Representations of the Mother-Daughter and Mother-Son Relationship
Language: English
Authors: Butler, Ruth, Shalit-Naggar, Rachel
Source: Child Development. Jul-Aug 2008 79(4):836-851.
Availability: Blackwell Publishing. 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148. Tel: 800-835-6770; Tel: 781-388-8599; Fax: 781-388-8232; e-mail: customerservices@blackwellpublishing.com; Web site: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/jnl_default.asp
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 16
Publication Date: 2008
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Descriptors: Mothers, Daughters, Parent Child Relationship, Gender Differences, Sons, Females, Foreign Countries, Young Children, Personal Narratives, Low Income Groups, Social Influences, Child Development
Geographic Terms: Israel
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2008.01162.x
ISSN: 0009-3920
Abstract: Given that girls show more interpersonal concern than boys, it was predicted that more mother-daughter than mother-son dyads would develop a relationship of mutual concerned responsiveness (CR). Two hundred and twenty-six Israeli children (7-8 years old) and 91 mother-child pairs provided narratives of mother-child interactions. At high levels of socioeconomic status (SES), descriptions of child but not maternal concern differed by gender; therefore, more mother-daughter narratives described mutual CR and more mother-son narratives described a nonreciprocal pattern of maternal CR. In a low-SES sample, most mother-daughter narratives described mutual CR, but many mothers and sons described little concern by either partner. Results provided clear evidence of gender differences in mother-child reciprocity and confirmed the importance of examining gender influences in different social groups.
Abstractor: As Provided
Number of References: 62
Entry Date: 2008
Accession Number: EJ802174
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwGnX1ReYwIXeauKscpgPHSNAAAA4jCB3wYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHRMIHOAgEAMIHIBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDJLjgNnRls3UjR-SCwIBEICBms512SIjSpYkGrrDCV-pYm5L3kS55kvK33vIEp2rDc7GfGyMQUdA0EabSXk5hfspiE12pcx66_TsJQKiWoWplHo64l5o34_o_PLt_D-S9UJHVdTO8sQhtJNdVDqWmU9nW8vBCO1wI_GF0Y9ic2aCSVtLKkhjf_FTlhOJ5h6g62pHoeCZ6uxIh9s9ovK2YldskFMlF3WKNsLds9U=
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0033133955;cdv01jul.08;2019Jun03.14:50;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0033133955-1">Gender and Patterns of Concerned Responsiveness in Representations of the Mother–Daughter and Mother–Son Relationship. </title> <p>Given that girls show more interpersonal concern than boys, it was predicted that more mother–daughter than mother–son dyads would develop a relationship of mutual concerned responsiveness (CR). Two hundred and twenty‐six Israeli children (7–8 years old) and 91 mother–child pairs provided narratives of mother–child interactions. At high levels of socioeconomic status (SES), descriptions of child but not maternal concern differed by gender; therefore, more mother–daughter narratives described mutual CR and more mother–son narratives described a nonreciprocal pattern of maternal CR. In a low‐SES sample, most mother–daughter narratives described mutual CR, but many mothers and sons described little concern by either partner. Results provided clear evidence of gender differences in mother–child reciprocity and confirmed the importance of examining gender influences in different social groups.</p> <p>There is still active debate whether and how mother–daughter and mother–son interactions differ in childhood ([<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref1">39</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref2">42</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref3">54</reflink>]). In this article, we examined the novel proposal that one significant way in which they differ is in the degree to which both partners show active concern for promoting the welfare of the other and the relationship. Prior studies have not shown gender differences in mother–child mutual responsiveness ([<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref4">44</reflink>]). To date, however, researchers have focused mainly on the role of maternal sensitive concern in creating a reciprocal relational system ([<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref5">34</reflink>]). In contrast, we examined narrative representations of concern on the part of both mother and child. The first main prediction was that daughters would be described as displaying more active concern than sons. Because mothers tend to display similar levels of concern toward sons and daughters ([<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref6">39</reflink>]), we thus predicted that more mother–daughter than mother–son narratives would describe a pattern of mutual concerned responsiveness (CR), and more mother–son narratives would describe interactions characterized by concern on the part of the mother alone.</p> <hd id="AN0033133955-2">Gender, Concern, and Patterns of Responsiveness in the Mother–Child Relationship</hd> <p>Girls display higher levels of empathic concern, prosocial behavior, and interpersonal responsibility than do boys, across a variety of measures and contexts (see [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref7">20</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref8">44</reflink>], for reviews). These gender differences also have implications for boys' and girls' relationships. In their analysis of same‐sex peer groups, [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref9">47</reflink>] distinguished between the collaborative, affiliative speech of girls who speak to "create and maintain relationships of closeness and equality" (p. 207) and the competitive, adversarial speech of boys who speak to assert themselves and to maintain an audience. Studies of same‐sex friendships in later life have yielded similar findings, whereby women were more oriented than men to understanding and caring for others and to maintaining relational harmony and mutuality ([<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref10">11</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib60" id="ref11">60</reflink>]). Moreover, when the sexes meet, women tend to engage more than their male partners in support work that serves to encourage and maintain communication by active listening and sensitive responding ([<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref12">22</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref13">57</reflink>]). More generally, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref14">4</reflink>] has described heterosexual relationships as characterized by an unequal division of "emotional labor," whereby women invest more effort than do men to promote their partner's emotional welfare.</p> <p>In a similar vein, some theorists have proposed that the mother–daughter relationship is more likely to develop along a trajectory of reciprocal responsiveness than the mother–son relationship because mothers are predisposed to create more intimate relations with daughters ([<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref15">13</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref16">25</reflink>]). Analyses of mother–child mutual responsiveness have also emphasized the contribution of the mother and, in particular, the role of maternal sensitivity in inducting children into a system of reciprocity ([<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref17">34</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref18">45</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref19">46</reflink>]). Originally developed in the context of attachment theory, maternal sensitivity refers to the degree to which the mother is attuned to the child's needs and responds to them in ways intended to promote the child's welfare and to maintain a warm mother–child relationship ([<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref20">5</reflink>]).</p> <p>One possibility is that mothers may be more likely to induct daughters into a mutually responsive relationship because they tend to respond more sensitively to daughters than to sons. Most studies have not shown gender differences in the level of observed or reported maternal sensitivity, however (see [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref21">39</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref22">42</reflink>], for reviews), and the few exceptions have yielded mixed findings as to whether mothers responded more sensitively toward daughters (e.g., [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref23">3</reflink>]) or sons (e.g., [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref24">17</reflink>]). Moreover, studies of children's narrative representations have not shown differences in the degree to which girls and boys themselves described the mother as warm and responsive ([<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref25">49</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref26">56</reflink>]). Most significantly, in the present context, [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref27">44</reflink>] concluded that studies have not shown gender differences in mother–child mutual responsiveness.</p> <p>The main objective of the present studies was to examine the proposal that differences in mutual responsiveness in mother–son versus mother–daughter dyads will emerge more clearly than hitherto if one considers possible differences in the contributions of girls and boys to the interactive arena. Specifically, we conceptualized a dimension of child active concern (CAC), analogous in some senses to that of maternal sensitivity, to capture individual differences in the degree to which children respond to the mother's needs and feelings in ways that reflect concern to promote her welfare and to maintain relational harmony. Extrapolating from evidence of early gender differences in prosocial behavior, we predicted that girls will exhibit more such active concern than will boys in the mother–child as in other relationships.</p> <p>At first sight, this conceptualization may seem inappropriate, given the asymmetrical nature of the mother–child relationship, especially during childhood. Indeed, to date, researchers have defined child responsiveness to the mother mainly in terms of children's positive cooperation and receptive compliance with maternal signals, initiatives, and influence, rather than their proactive concern for the mother and the relationship ([<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref28">8</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref29">34</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref30">45</reflink>]). Studies have shown, however, that already during the first 3 years, some children responded to maternal distress or anger by spontaneously offering comfort or help or trying to repair ruptures in the relationship ([<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref31">37</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref32">50</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref33">62</reflink>]). Moreover, such responses were more common among girls than boys.</p> <p>These findings support our proposal that girls are more likely than boys to display active concern within the context of the mother–child relationship. This proposal has clear implications for mutual responsiveness in mother–daughter and mother–son dyads. Specifically, if both mothers and children differ in the degree to which they are oriented to promote the welfare of the other and the relationship, one can theoretically posit four distinct patterns: mutual CR, whereby both mother and child display active concern; maternal CR, whereby the mother but not the child displays active concern; child CR; and no CR by either partner. Moreover, if child gender influences CAC more than it does maternal active concern (MAC), one can predict that more mother–daughter than mother–son dyads will display a pattern of mutual CR, typical also of close female friendships. In contrast, more mother–son dyads should display a pattern of maternal CR, reminiscent of the unequal division of emotional labor that has emerged in studies of other cross‐sex interactions.</p> <p>Although some other theorists have also proposed that mothers are more likely to develop mutually binding relationships with daughters than sons ([<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref34">13</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref35">40</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref36">43</reflink>]), [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref37">44</reflink>] concluded that studies have not shown greater mutuality in mother–daughter than in mother–son dyads in childhood. The present analysis suggests that this may have been because researchers did not examine child and thus reciprocal concern. In keeping with prevailing conceptualizations of child responsiveness, [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref38">34</reflink>] defined a "mutually responsive orientation" when dyads show high levels of maternal sensitivity, child committed compliance, and positive mother–child interactions; others have defined reciprocity mainly in terms of shared positive affect ([<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref39">1</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref40">16</reflink>]). Studies have not shown differences between mother–daughter and mother–son dyads in these kinds of mutual responsiveness ([<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref41">34</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref42">35</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref43">44</reflink>]). In contrast, we predicted that examining the degree to which both partners are oriented to promote the welfare of the other and the relationship will confirm that more mother–daughter than mother–son dyads will experience a relationship of "mutual CR."</p> <hd id="AN0033133955-3">Examining Active Concern and Patterns of CR in the Mother–Child Relationship</hd> <p>The use of projective methods to provide a window on people's emotional and interpersonal worlds has a long history in psychology. For example, in the context of research on the mother–child relationship, studies have shown that children's narratives could be reliably scored for descriptions of maternal sensitive concern that were coherently associated with other measures of child and maternal behavior and adjustment ([<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref44">49</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref45">56</reflink>]). In the present studies, children told stories about pictures in which a mother and her child were depicted in contexts conducive to eliciting concern for the welfare of the other and the relationship from both partners. Thus, in some pictures, the mother was angry, sad, or sick, and in others, the child was sad or angry. Narratives were scored in two ways. First, aggregate measures of maternal and CAC were derived by counting the number of stories in which the mother or the child, respectively, was described as acting to promote the welfare of the other and the relationship. Second, entire protocols were assigned to one or another category of CR based on the degree to which the global impression over all stories and situations was of mutual, maternal, child, or no CR. Children also told a story about an emotionally neutral picture, in which mother and child were depicted sitting on a bench; this story was scored for positive emotional climate. Inclusion of this measure was designed to provide some point of comparison with prior studies of mutual responsiveness. Thus, we anticipated that the well‐established association between observational measures of maternal sensitivity and positive mother–child interactions (see [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref46">35</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref47">44</reflink>], for reviews) would be replicated also when we examined the relation between representations of MAC in children's stories about negative emotions and representations of the emotional quality of mother–child interactions in their "bench" story.</p> <p>We report two studies. Participants in Study 1 were children living in a middle‐class neighborhood. We focused on 7‐ to 8‐year‐olds on the assumption that by this age, children can generate stories without excessive prompting. The first objective was to verify that stories could be reliably scored for descriptions of maternal and CAC and patterns of CR. The second and major objective was to examine the predictions that (a) descriptions of CAC would be more frequent in girls' than in boys' stories, but girls and boys would describe similar levels of MAC and (b) more girls' than boys' protocols would describe a pattern of mutual CR, and more boys' protocols would describe a nonreciprocal pattern of maternal CR. In Study 2, we reexamined these predictions for a larger and more socially diverse sample that included both children and some of their mothers. The main objective was to provide additional validation for our framework by testing the predictions that gender would be related to descriptions of child and mutual concern responsiveness among both children and mothers, at both higher and lower levels of maternal education. Another objective was to examine the further prediction that representations of children and their mothers would be correlated within mother–child dyads.</p> <hd id="AN0033133955-4">Study 1</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0033133955-5">Method</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0033133955-6">Participants</hd> <p>Participants were 63 children (31 boys, 32 girls, mean age = 97 months, <emph>SD</emph>= 3.62) in two Grade 2 classes in a school serving a middle‐class neighborhood in West Jerusalem. Israel has separate school systems for Hebrew‐speaking (mainly Jewish) and Arabic‐speaking populations; the Hebrew language system is further divided into secular and religious systems. Participants for the present studies were drawn from Hebrew language secular schools. Parents provided informed consent, but the principal did not authorize release of demographic information from students' files.</p> <hd id="AN0033133955-7">Instrument</hd> <p>An artist prepared six line drawings of a mother and either a boy or a girl; facial features differed in each; drawings are presented in Figure 1. Five pictures depicted negative emotional states. In each picture, one figure was drawn full‐face and one in profile. In two pictures, the mother's face expressed anger or sadness, respectively, and in another two, the child's face expressed anger or sadness. The fifth picture depicted a mother in bed with a thermometer in her mouth. The sixth, "neutral," picture depicted a mother and a child in profile sitting on a bench. A pilot study with 15 children at ages 7–8 confirmed that all correctly identified the facial expressions and showed that administration following the sequence mother angry, mother sad, bench, child sad, mother sick, and child angry minimized carryover of themes between stories. We had intended to tape the stories, but the pilot study indicated that the tape recorder distracted the children, increased self‐consciousness, and disrupted their narratives. This was not the case when administrators wrote down children's stories; they had no difficulty doing so at a pace that did not seem to affect narrative fluency.</p> <p>Graph: 1 Drawings used to elicit mother–daughter narratives: (a) mother sad, (b) mother angry, (c) bench, (d) child sad, (e) mother sick, and (f) child angry.</p> <hd id="AN0033133955-8">Procedure</hd> <p>The teacher introduced the second author as a student interested in children's stories. The second author invited each child to a side room and presented gender‐appropriate pictures in the sequence described above. For each picture, she said, "Here is a mother and her daughter (son). The child is in Grade 2. The mother (child) is angry (or sad, or the mother is sick, or they are sitting on a bench). Tell me a story about the picture: what happened before, what is happening now, what each person is feeling, saying, and doing, and what will happen next." Stories were written down verbatim; probes were used only when major elements were unclear.</p> <hd id="AN0033133955-9">Scoring</hd> <p>Pairs of coders who were unaware of the hypotheses scored (a) individual emotion stories, (b) entire protocols, and (c) emotional climate in the bench story. Each pair included one male and one female to control for possible gender influences in interpreting active concern as displayed by girls and boys. A third coder resolved any disagreements.</p> <p> <bold>CAC and MAC</bold> Children's stories about the five emotion pictures (mother angry, sad, sick, and child angry, sad) were each typed on a separate page; stories were scored by picture rather than by child to avoid carryover effects. Two scorers independently scored each story for the presence of CAC and MAC if the target figure acted to promote the other's welfare (e.g., comforted, helped, or tried to solve the other's difficulty) and/or to restore the relationship (e.g., apologized, made reparation). Active concern could be verbal ("The mother said she knew he was sad to miss the school trip, but she'd take him to the zoo when he got better"), nonverbal ("She hugged her mum"), or practical ("He bought his mum a vase instead of the one he broke"). Each story received a score of either 1 or 0 for both CAC and MAC. Agreement coefficients were high for both CAC (from κ=.86 for mother angry to κ=.96 for mother sad) and MAC (from κ=.87 for child angry to κ=.95 for child sad). Total CAC and MAC scores over all five stories could range from 0 to 5 and were highly correlated between judges, <emph>r</emph>(<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref48">63</reflink>) =.93 for CAC and <emph>r</emph>(<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref49">63</reflink>) =.90 for MAC.</p> <p> <bold>Patterns of CR</bold> Two scorers each read entire protocols (without the bench story) on the assumption that global readings would best capture patterns of coordination of maternal and child concern across different situations. Scorers assigned protocols to categories of CR after reading the following instructions:</p> <p>Mutual Concerned Responsiveness is scored when both mother and child are described as displaying an orientation of concern for the other and the relationship, rather than as guided only by their own needs, beliefs, or concerns, and as acting to relieve distress, to promote the other's welfare, and to maintain or restore harmonious relations. This category applies when each partner acts responsively in different stories and/or when stories describe reciprocal concern by both. Mutual empathy (partners feel for one another, but do not act responsively) or compliance (partners just comply with one's another's directives and requests) do not qualify. Maternal Concerned Responsiveness is scored when the mother, but not the child is described as acting responsively as described above. Disregard other child behaviors, such as whether they cooperate with or resist maternal initiatives. Child Concerned Responsiveness is scored when the child, but not the mother shows active concern. No Concerned Responsiveness is scored when neither partner acts responsively. Instead, mother and child ignore the other's distress or ruptures in the relationship, fail to act, or act to influence or discipline the other in keeping with their own wishes, needs, or beliefs.</p> <p>Scorers were instructed to consider the majority of stories if one differed markedly from the rest and to assign protocols that did not display a clear pattern to a fifth, unclear category. Agreement for assignment to the five categories was high, κ=.92.</p> <p> <bold>Emotional climate</bold> Two new scorers rated the bench story for emotional climate on a scale anchored at 5 (<emph>very positive: mood is happy, excited</emph>) and 1 (<emph>very negative</emph>: <emph>mood is angry, fearful, sad</emph>). Only two stories described conflicting emotions in mother and child; both scorers rated these 3. Ratings were highly correlated, <emph>r</emph>(<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref50">63</reflink>) =.94 and were averaged across judges.</p> <hd id="AN0033133955-10">Results</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0033133955-11">Gender, Active Concern, and Patterns of CR</hd> <p>As predicted, more girls' than boys' stories were scored for the presence of CAC, <emph>t</emph>(<reflink idref="bib61" id="ref51">61</reflink>) = 2.10, <emph>p</emph> <.05, (<emph>M</emph>= 2.03, <emph>SD</emph>= 1.45, and <emph>M</emph>= 1.29, <emph>SD</emph>= 1.35, respectively). In contrast, the effect for gender on descriptions of MAC was not significant (<emph>M</emph><subs>girls</subs>= 1.75, <emph>SD</emph>= 1.27, and <emph>M</emph><subs>boys</subs>= 1.58, <emph>SD</emph>= 1.36). We also predicted that more girls' than boys' protocols would describe a pattern of "mutual CR," and more boys' protocols would describe a pattern of "maternal CR." As expected, an initial analysis for the four categories of CR and the fifth, unclear category yielded a significant association between patterns and gender, χ<sups>2</sups>(<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref52">4</reflink>) = 17.92, <emph>p</emph> <.001 (see Table 1 for cell frequencies). Follow‐up analyses compared the frequency of each pattern (coded 1) versus all other patterns (coded 0). As predicted, more girls' than boys' protocols were scored as mutual CR, χ<sups>2</sups>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref53">1</reflink>) = 13.06, <emph>p</emph> <.001. Indeed, 15 of the 17 such narratives were told by girls, and this was the most frequent category for girls. In contrast, more boys' than girls' protocols were scored as "maternal CR,"χ<sups>2</sups>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref54">1</reflink>) = 8.22, <emph>p</emph> <.01, and this was the most frequent category for boys. The association with gender was not significant for the other patterns, but Table 1 shows some tendency for more boys than girls to describe a pattern of child CR.</p> <p>1 
 Percentages of Boys' and Girls' Protocols Assigned to Each Pattern of Mother–Child Responsiveness, Study 1</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr><th /><th align="center">Boys</th><th align="center">Girls</th><th align="center">All children</th></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td>Mutual responsiveness</td><td>7</td><td>47</td><td>27</td></tr><tr><td>Maternal responsiveness</td><td>36</td><td>6</td><td>21</td></tr><tr><td>Child responsiveness</td><td>26</td><td>13</td><td>19</td></tr><tr><td>No CR</td><td>19</td><td>25</td><td>22</td></tr><tr><td>Unclear</td><td>13</td><td>9</td><td>11</td></tr><tr><td><italic>n</italic></td><td>31</td><td>32</td><td>63</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>1 <emph>Note.</emph> CR = concerned responsiveness</p> <hd id="AN0033133955-12">Relations Between Representations</hd> <p>As expected, representations of MAC were significantly correlated with positive emotional climate in the bench story for both girls, <emph>r</emph>(<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref55">32</reflink>) =.51, <emph>p</emph> <.01, and boys, <emph>r</emph>(<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref56">31</reflink>) =.37, <emph>p</emph> <.05. The level of positive emotional climate did not differ significantly by gender. In contrast, descriptions of CAC and MAC were significantly correlated among girls, <emph>r</emph>(<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref57">32</reflink>) =.41, <emph>p</emph> <.05, but not boys, <emph>r</emph>(<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref58">31</reflink>) =−.23; these correlations differed significantly, <emph>z</emph>= 2.58, <emph>p</emph> <.01. This was the case also for the association between CAC and positive emotional climate in the bench story, <emph>r</emph>(<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref59">32</reflink>) =.42, <emph>p</emph> <.05 for girls, and <emph>r</emph>(<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref60">31</reflink>) =−.10 for boys, <emph>z</emph>= 2.08, <emph>p</emph> <.05.</p> <hd id="AN0033133955-13">Discussion</hd> <p>Children's stories could be reliably scored for representations not only of MAC but also of CAC and patterns of CR. Most significantly, the results supported the predictions that more girls than boys would describe a relationship of reciprocal concern because of gender differences in representations of CAC. In keeping with results from studies based on observational measures of maternal sensitivity ([<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref61">7</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref62">34</reflink>]) or a more established procedure for eliciting and scoring children's narratives ([<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref63">49</reflink>]), boys and girls did not differ in the frequency with which they described the mother as acting to promote the welfare of the child and the relationship. In contrast, girls described more instances of CAC than boys. Thus, far more girls than boys described a relationship of "mutual CR" in which both partners displayed active concern, and more boys than girls described a nonreciprocal pattern of "maternal CR."</p> <p>These results are quite exciting in view of [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref64">44</reflink>] conclusion that studies have not shown greater reciprocity in mother–daughter than in mother–son dyads in childhood. Some additional findings provided further support for our interpretation that gender is related to some, more than other, kinds of mother–child reciprocal responsiveness. In keeping with results from the studies of reciprocal positive affect reviewed by [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref65">44</reflink>], gender did not influence descriptions of positive emotional climate in the bench story or the positive association between positive climate and representations of maternal concern. This similarity with prior findings inspires confidence in our narrative measures. In contrast, although studies have shown that maternal sensitivity was associated with committed compliance in children of both sexes ([<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref66">34</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref67">35</reflink>]), representations of maternal and child concern were positively correlated only in girls' narratives. Thus, there might be differences between girls and boys not only in the level of child concern but also in the degree to which children respond to maternal concern with both concern and compliance or mainly with compliance alone.</p> <p>It is premature to discuss these results further because Study 1 had several limitations that we addressed in Study 2. First, the sample was small and socially homogenous. Second, claims about gender differences in the mother–child relationship necessitate incorporation also of the mother's perspective. Third, Study 1 did not provide any external validation for children's representations. Fourth, our interpretation that gender might moderate the relation between maternal and child concern more than it does the relation between maternal concern and child committed compliance must be treated with caution because we did not include a measure of committed compliance.</p> <hd id="AN0033133955-14">Study 2</hd> <p>In Study 2, we examined representations of mother–child interactions in a larger, socially diverse sample that included both children and some of their mothers. The first objective was to examine whether the gender differences in children's representations of child and mutual CR would be replicated at both higher and lower levels of socioeconomic status (SES), as determined by maternal education. This endeavor is important because most studies of gender influences in the mother–child relationship have examined middle‐class samples (see [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref68">39</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref69">41</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref70">40</reflink>], for reviews). Interestingly, the few studies that have shown gender differences in maternal sensitivity targeted low‐SES groups, but these studies have yielded mixed findings as to whether mothers behaved more sensitively toward sons ([<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref71">6</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref72">17</reflink>]) or daughters ([<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref73">3</reflink>]). Other studies of low‐SES groups in both North America and Israel did not show any effect of child gender on maternal sensitivity, however ([<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref74">33</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref75">56</reflink>]). In contrast with these mixed findings, gender differences in children's prosocial behavior have emerged across a wide range of social and cultural groups ([<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref76">38</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib58" id="ref77">58</reflink>]), and girls responded more empathically to maternal distress than boys in the only such study that targeted a low‐SES sample ([<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref78">33</reflink>]). Thus, there were grounds for anticipating that gender would affect representations of child, more than MAC at both high and low levels of maternal education, and thus that the gender differences in patterns of CR reported in Study 1 would be replicated for both social groups.</p> <p>The second objective was to examine the predictions that mothers will also describe girls as displaying more active concern than sons and will be more likely to describe a relationship of mutual CR with daughters and a relationship of maternal CR with sons. Most mothers were asked to describe recent situations in which the mother and target child were present; the mother was angry, sad, or ill; the child was angry or sad; and, for the neutral cue, a situation where both mother and child were present. The aim was to elicit rich and detailed descriptions of actual mother–child interactions, but we also had some concern that this procedure might be more likely than less direct methods to bias mothers to describe their relationship with their child too positively. Thus, some mothers were asked to tell stories about the pictures given to children; some of these mothers also described actual events. This aspect of the design enabled us to compare descriptions of MAC and CAC and patterns of CR both between mothers given different procedures and within mothers who responded to both.</p> <p>No studies have examined maternal reports of child or mutual responsiveness as defined here, but there is some prior evidence that mothers rated daughters as more empathic and helpful than sons ([<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref79">18</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref80">30</reflink>]). In addition, analyses of the mother–child relationship as a system of reciprocity ([<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref81">34</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref82">45</reflink>]) imply congruence between partners' perspectives and experiences. If boys and girls differ in their descriptions of CAC and patterns of CR, one would expect child gender to be related to maternal representations in similar ways. The third objective was to examine the related prediction that children's and mothers' representations of concern will be correlated within mother–child dyads. If the results support this prediction, they will contribute to addressing another limitation of Study 1 by providing some external validation for children's representations. We also examined the stability of children's representations by retesting some of the children after about a year.</p> <p>The fourth objective was to examine whether gender moderates the relation between maternal and child concern more than it does the relation between maternal concern and child committed concern. Maternal protocols were scored both for CAC and for the degree to which the mother described the child as cooperating and eagerly complying with her initiatives and directives. Following prior findings and the results of Study 1, we predicted that representations of maternal concern would be associated with descriptions of child committed compliance for both boys and girls ([<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref83">34</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref84">35</reflink>]) but would be associated with representations of CAC only for girls.</p> <hd id="AN0033133955-15">Method</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0033133955-16">Participants</hd> <p>The child sample included 83 boys and 80 girls (mean age at testing = 95 months, <emph>SD</emph>= 6.16) in one Grade 1 and six Grade 2 classes in three Hebrew language secular schools in a large city in Israel. All schools were defined by the Israeli Ministry of Education as serving similar socially diverse populations with a mix of about 60% students of middle to high SES and about 40% of low SES. Parents were sent a description of the study and asked whether they agreed (a) that their child participate in the study and (b) that schools release their phone number so that we could also invite mothers to participate. Data for children were collected in their schools; the procedure was readministered in two classes after 11 months to 20 boys and 19 girls (mean age = 9 years 1 month). Of the 140 mothers who agreed that we could contact them, 49 refused to participate, repeatedly canceled meetings, or moved to other towns. Data from the other 91 mothers (45 mothers of boys, 46 mothers of girls, mean age = 38 years 1 month) were collected in home visits. Mothers provided background information for the 91 children in the mother–child sample; 84 were living in two‐parent families. Schools provided information about maternal education and child age and birth order for the other 72 children. The child and mother–child samples, broken down by child gender and low (12 or fewer years) versus high (at least some higher education) levels of maternal education, are presented in Table 2. Sample comparability was maintained also when we compared the proportions of first‐ versus later‐born children.</p> <p>2 
 Participants in Child and Mother–Child Samples of Study 2, by Maternal Education and Gender</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr><th /><th align="center">Maternal education</th></tr><tr><th align="center">High</th><th align="center">Low</th></tr><tr><th align="center">Boys</th><th align="center">Girls</th><th align="center">Boys</th><th align="center">Girls</th></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td>Child sample</td><td>45 (28)</td><td>51 (31)</td><td>38 (23)</td><td>29 (18)</td></tr><tr><td>Mother–child sample</td><td>26 (29)</td><td>29 (32)</td><td>19 (21)</td><td>17 (19)</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>2 <emph>Note.</emph> Percentages of each sample are in parentheses.</p> <hd id="AN0033133955-17">Procedure</hd> <p>Data were collected by five female students who were unaware of the study's aims and hypotheses. Children told stories about pictures during school hours, as described for Study 1. Data from mothers were collected in their homes up to 9 months later by a student who had not collected data from that mother's child. The student explained that we had asked children to make up stories about mothers and children and were also interested in how mothers describe things that happen between mothers and children. Mothers were randomly assigned to either a description or a story condition. Each mother in the description condition was asked to recall recent situations in which she and the target child were present and she was angry, she was sad, the child was sad, the mother was sick, and the child was angry. For the neutral cue, she was asked to recall a recent event when mother and child were together. Mothers were encouraged to describe each situation in detail: the setting and background; what each person did, felt, and said; and how it ended. Mothers in the story condition were asked to tell stories about the pictures given to children. They were told that each picture showed a mother and her 8 (or 7)‐year‐old daughter or son, depending on the age and sex of the participating child. Five mothers in this condition said that they did not like to make up stories and were asked to describe events instead. Overall, 49 mothers provided descriptions and 42 told stories; 19 of the latter were also asked to describe actual events. Students had no difficulty writing down mothers' narratives verbatim. Finally, mothers provided information about parents' education and marital status and any medical, psychological, economic, or other problems in the family or the target child.</p> <hd id="AN0033133955-18">Scoring</hd> <p>Each measure was scored by different pairs of judges who were all unfamiliar with the hypotheses and did not participate in data collection. Members of each pair independently scored a number of narratives to establish reliability and then divided remaining narratives between them. Different pairs scored stories and descriptions for mothers who provided both.</p> <p> <bold>Active concern and positive emotion</bold> Each story or description about negative emotions was scored for the presence of active concern by each partner, as described for Study 1. Agreement coefficients were calculated separately for CAC and MAC after two pairs of judges scored 50 stories about each situation from child or mother protocols, respectively. Agreement ranged from κ=.85 for mothers' descriptions of MAC in the mother angry situation to κ=.96 for both children's and mothers' descriptions of CAC in the mother sick situation. Total CAC and MAC scores over all five stories were highly correlated between scorers, <emph>r</emph>(<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref85">50</reflink>) =.92 and <emph>r</emph>(<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref86">50</reflink>) =.94 for children, and <emph>r</emph>(<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref87">50</reflink>) =.92 and <emph>r</emph>(<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref88">50</reflink>) =.93 for mothers. Two new scorers rated narratives about the neutral cue for positive emotional climate with high agreement, <emph>r</emph>(<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref89">50</reflink>) =.94 for children and <emph>r</emph>(<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref90">50</reflink>) =.93 for mothers.</p> <p> <bold>Patterns of CR</bold> Protocols were assigned to one of four categories of CR or to a fifth, unclear category, as described for Study 1. Agreement coefficients for 40 randomly selected child protocols and 40 randomly selected maternal protocols were κ=.92 and κ=.90, respectively.</p> <p> <bold>Child committed compliance</bold> The first author identified stories or descriptions as relevant for scoring if the mother described attempts to influence the child by making suggestions, giving advice, or directing the child to behave in a particular way. Following [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref91">34</reflink>], two scorers rated the 234 relevant narratives for child compliance on a 3‐point scale, where a score of 3 reflected eager and committed compliance or cooperation, a score of 2 reflected compliance after pressure or repeated attempts, and a score of 1 reflected noncompliance; stories that did not describe the child's response were coded 0. We could not assess internal reliability because in most protocols at least one story was irrelevant or did not describe the child's response. Final scores for committed compliance were computed as the mean over all relevant stories and were highly correlated between scorers, <emph>r</emph>(<reflink idref="bib91" id="ref92">91</reflink>) =.89, <emph>p</emph> <.001.</p> <hd id="AN0033133955-19">Results and Discussion</hd> <p>Results are reported in three sections that examine (a) effects of gender and maternal education on representations of concern for the 163 children, (b) effects for the 91 mothers, and (c) relations among representations of concern and compliance in the 91 dyads.</p> <hd id="AN0033133955-20">Child Data</hd> <p> <bold>Representations of active concern and patterns of CR</bold> We predicted that the effects of child gender on representations of CAC and patterns of CR reported in Study 1 would be replicated at both high and low levels of maternal education. As expected, a 2 (gender) × 2 (maternal education) analysis of variance (ANOVA) for children's representations of child concern yielded only a significant main effect for gender, <emph>F</emph>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref93">1</reflink>, 159) = 12.24, <emph>p</emph> <.001 (<emph>M</emph><subs>girls</subs>= 1.97, <emph>SD</emph>= 1.30 and <emph>M</emph><subs>boys</subs>= 1.25, <emph>SD</emph>= 1.34). In contrast, a 2 (gender) × 2 (maternal education) ANOVA for representations of maternal concern yielded unanticipated main effects for gender <emph>F</emph>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref94">1</reflink>, 159) = 5.13, <emph>p</emph> <.05, and maternal education, <emph>F</emph>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref95">1</reflink>, 159) = 5.65, <emph>p</emph> <.05, which were qualified by a significant interaction effect, <emph>F</emph>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref96">1</reflink>, 159) = 7.16, <emph>p</emph> <.01, <emph>MSE</emph>= 1.51. Follow‐up analyses indicated that these effects derived from the low levels of maternal concern described by boys in the low maternal education group (see Table 3 for cell means). Girls described significantly more instances of maternal concern than did boys in the low, <emph>F</emph>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref97">1</reflink>, 159) = 10.32, <emph>p</emph> <.001, <emph>MSE</emph>= 1.51, but not the high maternal education group. In addition, representations of maternal concern were significantly more frequent at high than at low levels of maternal education among boys, <emph>F</emph>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref98">1</reflink>, 159) = 13.53, <emph>p</emph> <.001, <emph>MSE</emph>= 1.51, but not girls.</p> <p>3 
 Means for Children's and Mothers' Representations by Maternal Education and Gender, Study 2</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr><th /><th align="center">High maternal education</th><th align="center">Low maternal education</th></tr><tr><th align="center">Boys</th><th align="center">Girls</th><th align="center">Boys</th><th align="center">Girls</th></tr><tr><th align="center"><italic>M</italic></th><th align="center"><italic>SD</italic></th><th align="center"><italic>M</italic></th><th align="center"><italic>SD</italic></th><th align="center"><italic>M</italic></th><th align="center"><italic>SD</italic></th><th align="center"><italic>M</italic></th><th align="center"><italic>SD</italic></th></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td>Children</td></tr><tr><td> CAC</td><td>1.36</td><td>1.42</td><td>1.94</td><td>1.27</td><td>1.13</td><td>1.26</td><td>2.03</td><td>1.38</td></tr><tr><td> MAC</td><td>2.02</td><td>1.27</td><td>1.94</td><td>1.33</td><td>1.03</td><td>1.02</td><td>2.00</td><td>1.23</td></tr><tr><td> Positive emotion</td><td>3.36</td><td>1.33</td><td>3.55</td><td>1.39</td><td>2.61</td><td>1.29</td><td>3.52</td><td>1.27</td></tr><tr><td> <italic>n</italic></td><td>45</td><td>51</td><td>38</td><td>29</td></tr><tr><td>Mothers</td></tr><tr><td> CAC</td><td>1.27</td><td>0.87</td><td>1.83</td><td>1.04</td><td>0.84</td><td>0.90</td><td>2.00</td><td>1.00</td></tr><tr><td> MAC</td><td>2.08</td><td>0.94</td><td>2.10</td><td>0.90</td><td>1.53</td><td>0.96</td><td>2.06</td><td>1.20</td></tr><tr><td> Positive emotion</td><td>3.85</td><td>1.05</td><td>3.93</td><td>1.03</td><td>3.53</td><td>1.12</td><td>4.00</td><td>1.23</td></tr><tr><td> Child willing compliance</td><td>2.38</td><td>0.64</td><td>2.49</td><td>0.65</td><td>2.01</td><td>0.69</td><td>2.57</td><td>0.71</td></tr><tr><td> <italic>n</italic></td><td>26</td><td>29</td><td>19</td><td>17</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>3 <emph>Note.</emph> CAC = child active concern; MAC = maternal active concern.</p> <p>The results for patterns of CR were also more complex than anticipated because a 5 (pattern) × 2 (gender) × 2 (maternal education) loglinear analysis yielded a significant third‐order effect, χ<sups>2</sups>(<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref99">4</reflink>) = 8.68, <emph>p</emph> <.05 (see Table 4 for cell frequencies). Follow‐up 2 × 2 × 2 loglinear analyses for each pattern, with the target pattern coded 1 and all other patterns coded 0 contributed to clarifying this effect. As predicted, the mutual CR pattern was significantly associated only with gender, χ<sups>2</sups>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref100">1</reflink>) = 18.09, <emph>p</emph> <.001, and was described far more frequently by girls (49%) than by boys (16%). In addition, the tendency noted in Study 1 for more boys than girls to describe a relationship in which only the child displayed active concern was significant for the larger sample of Study 2, χ<sups>2</sups>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref101">1</reflink>) = 8.20, <emph>p</emph> <.01; 16% of boys' protocols but only 3% of girls' protocols were scored as child CR. The third‐order effect for Pattern × Gender × Maternal Education was significant for both the maternal CR, χ<sups>2</sups>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref102">1</reflink>) = 4.92, <emph>p</emph> <.05, and the nonresponsive pattern, χ<sups>2</sups>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref103">1</reflink>) = 3.97, <emph>p</emph> <.05. Further analyses and the frequencies presented in Table 4 showed that results for the high maternal education group replicated those of Study 1 because more boys than girls described a pattern of maternal CR, χ<sups>2</sups>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref104">1</reflink>) = 6.25, <emph>p</emph> <.05, and gender did not affect the frequency of the nonresponsive pattern. In contrast, in the low maternal education group, boys were no more likely than girls to describe a pattern of maternal CR but were more likely to describe the nonresponsive pattern, χ<sups>2</sups>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref105">1</reflink>) = 4.63, <emph>p</emph> <.05.</p> <p>4 
 Percentages of Children's Protocols Assigned to Each Pattern of Mother–Child CR by Maternal Education and Gender, Study 2</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr><th /><th align="center">High maternal education</th><th align="center">Low maternal education</th><th align="center">All</th></tr><tr><th align="center">Boys</th><th align="center">Girls</th><th align="center">Boys</th><th align="center">Girls</th></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td>Mutual CR</td><td>18</td><td>47</td><td>11</td><td>41</td><td>29</td></tr><tr><td>Maternal CR</td><td>36</td><td>14</td><td>16</td><td>24</td><td>22</td></tr><tr><td>Child CR</td><td>13</td><td>4</td><td>16</td><td>0</td><td>9</td></tr><tr><td>No CR</td><td>24</td><td>31</td><td>50</td><td>24</td><td>32</td></tr><tr><td>Unclear</td><td>9</td><td>4</td><td>8</td><td>10</td><td>8</td></tr><tr><td><italic>n</italic></td><td>45</td><td>51</td><td>38</td><td>29</td><td>163</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>4 <emph>Note.</emph> CR = concerned responsiveness.</p> <p> <bold>Emotional climate in the bench story</bold> A 2 (gender) × 2 (maternal education) ANOVA yielded an unanticipated effect for gender, <emph>F</emph>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref106">1</reflink>, 159) = 6.53, <emph>p</emph> <.05 (<emph>M</emph><subs>girls</subs>= 3.54, <emph>SD</emph>= 1.34 and <emph>M</emph><subs>boys</subs>= 3.01, <emph>SD</emph>= 1.36) and a marginally significant effect for maternal education (<emph>p</emph> <.10). The means presented in Table 3 indicate that both effects derived mainly from the low level of positive emotion described by boys in the low maternal education group. Thus, to summarize, results for the high maternal education group replicated those for the similar sample of Study 1, and results for girls were similar in both social groups. In contrast, the boys in the low maternal education group described lower levels than did the girls not only of child concern but also of maternal concern and positive emotion. Low‐SES boys were also less likely than were boys in the high maternal education group to describe a pattern of maternal CR and were more likely to describe a relationship in which neither partner displayed active concern.</p> <p> <bold>Stability of children's representations</bold> Measures for children who were retested after 11 months were quite stable, <emph>r</emph>(<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref107">39</reflink>) =.45, <emph>p</emph> <.01 for CAC, and <emph>r</emph>(<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref108">39</reflink>) =.58, <emph>p</emph> <.001 for MAC. Protocols were assigned to the same category of CR in 79% of cases.</p> <hd id="AN0033133955-21">Mother Data</hd> <p> <bold>Representations of active concern and patterns of CR</bold> Mean levels of CAC and MAC did not differ significantly in descriptions versus stories, and these procedures yielded similar distributions of patterns of CR (33% mutual, 27% maternal, 4% child, 33% nonresponsive, and 4% unclear for descriptions and 33%, 19%, 2%, 10%, respectively, for stories). Protocols of mothers who provided descriptions and stories were assigned to the same category of CR in 90% of cases. These results allayed our concern that descriptions might be more positively biased than stories and justified combining data from both procedures. We analyzed descriptions for mothers who also told stories.</p> <p>Overall, the results for mothers were consistent with the initial predictions. A 2 (gender) × 2 (maternal education) ANOVA for maternal descriptions of CAC yielded only the predicted significant main effect for gender, <emph>F</emph>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref109">1</reflink>, 87) = 17.42, <emph>p</emph> <.001; mothers described more instances of active concern by daughters (<emph>M</emph>= 1.84, <emph>SD</emph>= 0.98) than by sons (<emph>M</emph>= 1.09, <emph>SD</emph>= 0.90). The analysis for representations of maternal concern did not yield any significant effects involving gender or maternal education, but the means presented in Table 3 show that low‐SES mothers of sons tended to describe fewest instances of both MAC and CAC.</p> <p>Few maternal protocols were scored as child CR or unclear (see Table 5 for cell frequencies). Loglinear modeling of associations between gender, maternal education, and the three other patterns (<emph>n</emph>= 82) retained only the predicted association between patterns and gender, χ<sups>2</sups>(<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref110">2</reflink>) = 10.58, <emph>p</emph> <.01. Follow‐up analyses confirmed that more mothers of daughters (54%) than sons (20%) described a relationship of mutual CR, χ<sups>2</sups>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref111">1</reflink>) = 10.30, <emph>p</emph> <.001, but the predicted association between gender and the maternal CR pattern was only marginally significant (<emph>p</emph> <.10). As was the case also for children, this pattern was more frequent in mother–son than in mother–daughter protocols in the high maternal education group, but in the low maternal education group, mothers of boys were no more likely than mothers of girls to describe a pattern of maternal CR and were more likely to describe a nonresponsive relationship (see Table 5 for cell frequencies).</p> <p>5 
 Percentages of Maternal Protocols Assigned to Each Pattern of Mother–Child CR by Maternal Education and Child Gender, Study 2</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr><th /><th align="center">High maternal education</th><th align="center">Low maternal education</th><th align="center">All</th></tr><tr><th align="center">Boys</th><th align="center">Girls</th><th align="center">Boys</th><th align="center">Girls</th></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td>Mutual CR</td><td>19</td><td>52</td><td>16</td><td>41</td><td>33</td></tr><tr><td>Maternal CR</td><td>39</td><td>14</td><td>21</td><td>18</td><td>23</td></tr><tr><td>Child CR</td><td>4</td><td>3</td><td>0</td><td>6</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>No CR</td><td>35</td><td>28</td><td>53</td><td>24</td><td>34</td></tr><tr><td>Unclear</td><td>4</td><td>3</td><td>11</td><td>12</td><td>6</td></tr><tr><td><italic>n</italic></td><td>26</td><td>29</td><td>19</td><td>17</td><td>91</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>5 <emph>Note.</emph> CR = concerned responsiveness.</p> <p> <bold>Positive emotional climate and child compliance</bold> Positive emotion did not differ significantly by gender or maternal education, but a 2 (gender) × 2 (maternal education) ANOVA for maternal descriptions of child compliance yielded a significant main effect for gender, <emph>F</emph>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref112">1</reflink>, 87) = 4.17, <emph>p</emph> <.05. Overall, mothers described girls as more cooperative and compliant (<emph>M</emph>= 2.53, <emph>SD</emph>= 0.66) than boys (<emph>M</emph>= 2.26, <emph>SD</emph>= 0.69), but the means presented in Table 3 indicate that this difference was marked only in the low maternal education group.</p> <hd id="AN0033133955-22">Relations Among Representations in Mother–Child Dyads and Narratives</hd> <p>Patterns of CR within mother–child dyads are presented in Table 6. Although data for mothers and children were collected in different arenas, with a time lag of up to 9 months, there was considerable congruence between their representations. Thus, for each of the three relatively frequent patterns of mutual, maternal, and no CR, mother and child protocols were assigned to the same category in over 70% of dyads. Low expected cell frequencies precluded statistical analysis, but the correlations presented in Table 7 confirm that equivalent measures derived from children's and mothers' narratives were significantly correlated in both mother–son and mother–daughter dyads. This was the case both for descriptions of CAC and MAC and for descriptions of positive emotional climate; no correlations differed significantly at high versus low levels of maternal education.</p> <p>6 
 Cross‐Tabulation of Patterns of CR Within Mother–Child Pairs, Study 2</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr><th /><th align="center">Children</th></tr><tr><th align="center">Mutual</th><th align="center">Maternal</th><th align="center">Child</th><th align="center">Nonresponsive</th><th align="center">Unclear</th></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td>Mothers</td></tr><tr><td>Mutual</td><td>82</td><td>9</td><td>14</td><td>3</td><td>50</td></tr><tr><td>Maternal</td><td>7</td><td>73</td><td>14</td><td>7</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>Child</td><td>4</td><td>0</td><td>14</td><td>3</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>Nonresponsive</td><td>7</td><td>18</td><td>29</td><td>82</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>Unclear</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>29</td><td>7</td><td>50</td></tr><tr><td><italic>n</italic></td><td>28</td><td>22</td><td>7</td><td>28</td><td>6</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <ulist> <item>6 <emph>Note.</emph> Data presented as percentages of child protocols assigned to each category of CR. CR = concerned responsiveness.</item> <item>7 
 Correlations Between Measures for Children and Mothers in 91 Mother–Child Pairs</item> </ulist> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr><th /><th align="center">CMAC</th><th align="center">CCAC</th><th align="center">MMAC</th><th align="center">MCAC</th><th align="center">CPE</th><th align="center">MPE</th></tr><tr><th align="center">Boys</th><th align="center">Girls</th><th align="center">Boys</th><th align="center">Girls</th><th align="center">Boys</th><th align="center">Girls</th><th align="center">Boys</th><th align="center">Girls</th><th align="center">Boys</th><th align="center">Girls</th><th align="center">Boys</th><th align="center">Girls</th></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td>CCAC</td><td>.25</td><td>.63***</td><td /></tr><tr><td>MMAC</td><td>.38**</td><td>.32*</td><td>.11</td><td>.25</td><td /></tr><tr><td>MCAC</td><td>.07</td><td>.36*</td><td>.31*</td><td>.57***</td><td>.11</td><td>.36*</td><td /></tr><tr><td>CPE</td><td>.34*</td><td>.36**</td><td>.14</td><td>.55***</td><td>.30*</td><td>.22</td><td>.07</td><td>.39**</td><td /></tr><tr><td>MPE</td><td>.31*</td><td>.25</td><td>.12</td><td>.32*</td><td>.63***</td><td>.49***</td><td>.11</td><td>.30*</td><td>.33*</td><td>.44**</td><td /></tr><tr><td>MCCP</td><td>.53***</td><td>.49***</td><td>.32<sup>*</sup></td><td>.31*</td><td>.65***</td><td>.40***</td><td>.32*</td><td>.49***</td><td>.39**</td><td>.38**</td><td>.46**</td><td>.34*</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <ulist> <item>7 <emph>Note.</emph> The first letter denotes whether the measure was derived from child or maternal narratives. CAC = child active concern; MAC = maternal active concern; PE = positive emotion; CCP = child committed compliance.</item> <item>8 * <emph>p</emph> <.05.</item> <item>9 ** <emph>p</emph> <.01.</item> <item>10 *** <emph>p</emph> <.001.</item> </ulist> <p>The correlations presented in Table 7 also confirmed that descriptions of maternal and child concern were significantly correlated in mother–daughter but not mother–son narratives and dyads; the difference between correlations was significant for children's narratives, <emph>z</emph>= 2.22, <emph>p</emph> <.05. In keeping with the results of Study 1, positive emotional climate was significantly correlated with active concern in mother–daughter but not mother–son narratives and dyads. In contrast, maternal concern was similarly and usually significantly correlated with descriptions of both child compliance and positive emotional climate in all narratives and dyads. Despite the different correlates of child concern and child committed compliance, these kinds of responsiveness were significantly correlated for both girls and boys.</p> <hd id="AN0033133955-23">Supplementary Analyses</hd> <p>Representations of active concern were not significantly associated with birth order, number of siblings, or maternal reports of problems in the family or child, and the number of problems reported did not differ by gender or maternal education. Although girls might be more interested than boys in socioemotional themes, gender was not related to the word count of children's stories, and this measure of verbal fluency was not significantly correlated with either MAC, <emph>r</emph>(<reflink idref="bib163" id="ref113">163</reflink>) =.05 or CAC, <emph>r</emph>(<reflink idref="bib163" id="ref114">163</reflink>) =.11.</p> <hd id="AN0033133955-24">General Discussion</hd> <p>Results from two studies provided novel evidence of gender differences in mother–child reciprocal responsiveness and suggested that these were due in large part to the differential contributions of girls and boys to the interactive arena. Children and mothers described girls as acting more often than boys to alleviate maternal distress and to maintain or restore relational harmony. In contrast, with the exception of children in the low‐SES sample of Study 2, participants did not describe mothers as showing more concern toward daughters than sons. Thus, far more mother–daughter than mother–son narratives described a relationship of "mutual CR" reminiscent of the reciprocal care and concern that has emerged in studies of close female friendships ([<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref115">11</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib60" id="ref116">60</reflink>]).</p> <p>We examined representations rather than behaviors, but studies have shown consistent relations between narrative and observational measures of attachment and maternal sensitivity ([<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref117">2</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref118">9</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref119">56</reflink>]) and between child narrative, mother report, and behavioral measures of children's concern for others ([<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref120">15</reflink>]). The results of Study 2 confirmed further that child representations of active concern and patterns of CR were consistently associated with equivalent measures derived up to 9 months later from their mothers, most of whom provided detailed descriptions of actual interactions with the child. Thus, we can be fairly confident that the narratives of both children and mothers described important aspects of their experiences and behaviors in the mother–child relationship.</p> <p>Many studies have shown that females tend to show greater interpersonal care and responsibility than do males, as peers, friends, spouses, and parents ([<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref121">44</reflink>]) and also in early interactions with the mother ([<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref122">33</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref123">37</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref124">50</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref125">62</reflink>]). Interestingly, however, prior studies have not examined the implications of these differences for the development of reciprocity in mother–daughter and mother–son dyads. Rather, analyses of mother–child mutual responsiveness have emphasized the role of maternal sensitive concern in creating a relational system in which children of both sexes are motivated to cooperate and comply with maternal initiatives, and influence, and engage with the mother in mutually enjoyable interactions ([<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref126">8</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref127">34</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref128">35</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref129">45</reflink>]). Against this background, our main contribution was in conceptualizing active concern as a feature not only of the mother but also of the child and of the interactions between them. This approach yielded a novel framework for characterizing the mother–child relationship in terms of patterns of CR and provided the clearest empirical evidence to date that mother–daughter dyads are more likely than mother–son dyads to develop a relationship of mutual care and concern already in childhood ([<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref130">13</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref131">32</reflink>]).</p> <p>These results are consistent with our proposal that other researchers did not find gender differences in mother–child reciprocity because they examined different kinds of child and mutual responsiveness. Representations of child concern and committed compliance were moderately correlated, however, and girls tended to score higher than boys also on committed compliance. This was the case also in studies of mother–child mutually responsive orientation (e.g., [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref132">34</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref133">36</reflink>]). Further studies might address the intriguing possibility that Kochanska's strategy of assessing mutually responsive orientation as an aggregate of child committed compliance, maternal sensitivity, and shared positive affect might mask possible differential contributions of girls and boys to the development of this kind of mother–child reciprocity as well. However, although we emphasized differences in the level of concern that girls and boys bring to interactions with the mother, our results also revealed another way in which gender seemed to influence mutual concern more than it does other kinds of mother–child reciprocity. In keeping with prior findings (see [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref134">35</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref135">44</reflink>], for reviews), associations between maternal responsiveness, child willing compliance, and positive affect were similar and significant across all narratives and dyads. Therefore, boys did not fail to respond to maternal concern, and sensitive parenting seemed to orient children of both sexes to interact positively and cooperatively with sensitive mothers. In contrast, representations of maternal and child concern were significantly associated only in mother–daughter narratives and dyads. Thus, mutual responsiveness in mother–daughter and mother–son interactions differed not only because girls showed more active concern, and to some extent compliance than boys, but also because girls seemed more likely to reciprocate maternal concern in kind.</p> <p>There is some prior evidence that links between parenting and children's empathy were more consistent in mother–daughter than in mother–son dyads ([<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref136">20</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref137">29</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib61" id="ref138">61</reflink>]; but see [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref139">33</reflink>], for a recent exception). Our data cannot explain why this might be the case, but one possibility is that mothers induct daughters more than sons into a relationship of reciprocal concern. Responsive mothering is crucial in creating a system in which children are receptive to maternal influence, but relations between maternal sensitivity and child outcomes are moderated by parenting goals and practices ([<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref140">26</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref141">28</reflink>]), some of which may differ for boys and girls. Specifically, mothers seem to value and strive to socialize willing compliance in both sons and daughters ([<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref142">27</reflink>]), but gender stereotypes, mother's prior social histories, and early gender differences in sociability might converge in orienting mothers to value, expect, and socialize active concern for the mother in girls more than in boys (see also [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref143">10</reflink>]). If mothers expect daughters to show more concern than sons, this could also explain why maternal descriptions of mother–child emotionally positive interactions were significantly correlated with their descriptions of girls' but not boys' active concern. Few studies have directly examined maternal socialization of care and concern, but mothers do seem to talk to and discipline young children in ways that direct girls more than boys to consider other people's perspectives and feelings and to assume responsibility for alleviating distress and repairing relationships ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref144">10</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref145">23</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref146">40</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref147">55</reflink>]). Any such divergence in reciprocal concern in mother–daughter as compared with mother–son dyads should then increase as gender differences in relational styles are reinforced in the same‐sex peer group ([<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref148">43</reflink>]).</p> <p>Although the school‐age children in our samples already had considerable peer experience, other scholars have also proposed that the mother–child relationship plays a role in orienting girls to display care and concern in relationships and orienting boys to cooperate with, but not necessarily reciprocate concern in their interactions with, females ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref149">10</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref150">51</reflink>]). Indeed, the results for the high‐SES samples confirmed that more mother–son than mother–daughter narratives described a pattern of maternal CR reminiscent of the unequal division of support work that has emerged in studies of cross‐sex relationships in later life ([<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref151">22</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref152">57</reflink>]). Interestingly, boys were also more likely than girls to describe the other nonreciprocal pattern, in which only the child showed active concern. The intriguing implication that child concern develops in response to maternal concern in girls, but may develop in response to maternal deficits in at least some boys, must be treated with caution because, overall, both boys and girls who described unconcerned mothers also described unconcerned children. In support, however, [<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref153">50</reflink>] found that maternal depression was necessary to elicit caring behavior in sons but undermined care for the mother in girls.</p> <p>Finally, we must address the unanticipated interactions between gender and SES, which we assessed in terms of high versus low levels of maternal education. Descriptions of concern and compliance in mother–daughter interactions did not differ at higher and lower levels of SES, but a striking 50% of low‐SES boys told stories in which neither mother nor child showed concern for the other or the relationship. Mothers' narratives differed significantly only by gender, but low‐SES mothers of sons also tended to describe low levels of maternal and child concern and were most likely to describe a nonresponsive relationship. Descriptions of emotional climate and child committed compliance were also most negative in this group. A close reading of maternal protocols indicated further that low‐SES mothers of sons were most likely to spontaneously complain that the child did not listen to her and was hard to talk to.</p> <p>If these sons were relatively uncommunicative and resistant to maternal influence, they might also have evoked less sensitive, more power‐assertive parenting, which tends to further undermine children's responsiveness to gentler forms of influence to create an escalating cycle of aversive interactions ([<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref154">12</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref155">53</reflink>]). Conversely, low‐SES mothers and daughters, at least in our sample, may have maintained close and positive relations at least in part because they talked more. In their comprehensive study of British working‐class and middle‐class mothers and their 7‐year‐old sons or daughters, [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref156">48</reflink>] found somewhat similar patterns whereby mothers and daughters chatted to and confided in one another in both social groups, middle‐class sons talked to their mothers but were less likely than girls to invite and receive maternal confidences, and mother–child interactions were most distant and aversive in working‐class mother–son dyads. Of particular interest, working‐class mothers attributed these negative interactions mainly to the growing influence of fathers and male peers whom they saw as encouraging their sons to resist and disparage maternal influence and companionship.</p> <p>We must be cautious in generalizing from our results because of the small sample, the sometimes insignificant trends, and the mixed results of some other studies. For example, maternal sensitivity tends to be lower in low‐SES samples than in high‐SES samples (see [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref157">14</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref158">31</reflink>], for reviews), but in our Study 2, this was the case only for mothers of boys. In addition, as we reviewed in an earlier section, studies that targeted low‐SES samples have yielded mixed findings as to whether mothers behaved more sensitively toward sons or daughters, and [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref159">19</reflink>] reported more aversive conflicts in low‐SES mother–daughter than mother–son dyads. Moreover, although our discussion focused on unresponsive low‐SES mother–son dyads, it is important to emphasize that about a quarter of the narratives in other groups also described unresponsive and usually aversive interactions. Finally, reviews have identified both SES ([<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref160">31</reflink>]) and gender ([<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref161">41</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref162">40</reflink>]) influences on mother–child talk, but few studies have examined both sources of influence. Thus, further research is necessary to examine our tentative interpretation that low‐SES mother–son dyads displayed such low levels of concern at least in part because boys growing up in traditional working‐class cultures might be least likely to listen to their mothers'"voice."</p> <p>Before we address some additional implications, it is important to note several limitations of our studies. First, the narratives provided rich and coherent information as to how representations of concern and other aspects of mother–child interactions were related within individual protocols and mother–child pairs, but it is important to validate our framework and results for additional, preferably behavioral, measures of concern and compliance. Second, the results for high‐SES samples provided consistent support for our proposal that there are gender differences in child, more than in maternal concern, but one must be cautious in drawing conclusions from null results. Third, we did not consider other arenas that might influence school‐age children's CR in the mother–child relationship. Peers and fathers may be more influential than mothers in sex‐role socialization and may play a particularly important role in fostering an orientation of care and concern in girls and orienting boys to construct a sense of self based in part on the repression of such feminine qualities ([<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref163">25</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref164">44</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref165">52</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref166">54</reflink>]). Fourth, our interpretation that any such influences might be particularly marked in more traditional working‐class cultures must be treated with caution in view of the small sample and the mixed results of some other studies. Longitudinal, multimethod studies that would examine the development and correlates of child and reciprocal concern between early and middle childhood in different social groups would contribute to addressing these limitations.</p> <p>Focusing on levels and patterns of coordination between maternal and CAC shed new light on the contribution of the child to reciprocal responsiveness in mother–son and mother–daughter dyads and revealed some intriguing continuities in the ways in which boys and girls behave with the mother and in later relationships with females. Our concepts and results also suggest some interesting directions for further research. Distinguishing between global maternal sensitivity and specific practices more directly relevant to the induction of concern might reveal more consistent linkages than hitherto between parenting and the development of empathic concern in both boys and girls (see also [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref167">15</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref168">21</reflink>]). Our framework and methods might also contribute to understanding the joint influences of both child and parent gender. For example, gender differences in concern imply that fathers will be less likely than mothers to develop a relationship of mutual CR, especially with sons. In support, [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref169">44</reflink>] reported that mother–daughter pairs were most successful and father–son dyads were least successful on a task of referential communication because of gender differences in the referential skills of both children and parents. Our narrative procedures might also be well suited, however, to reveal other ways in which fathers might promote mutually binding relations with their children.</p> <p>Our distinctions between different patterns of CR might also contribute to reconciling approaches that consider empathic concern for the mother to be an important component of prosocial behavior ([<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref170">30</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref171">33</reflink>]) with approaches that consider child concern for the mother to be rather maladaptive ([<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref172">24</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib59" id="ref173">59</reflink>]). This might be the case if concern develops in response to poor mothering or is expressed in age‐inappropriate ways. However, most stories scored for CAC described children who cared about, rather than taking care of the mother, and most narratives that described concerned children also described concerned parents. Thus, the role of children's concern in their social and emotional adjustment should depend mainly on the degree to which children also experience the mother as concerned and sensitive. Further studies might, however, address the possibility that as long as interpersonal care and concern are viewed mainly as "women's work," high levels of concern for the mother might be more problematic for boys than for girls. Thus, such concern might be more likely to develop in response to maternal deficits in boys ([<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref174">50</reflink>]) and is less congruent with the relational style of the male than the female peer group ([<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref175">44</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref176">47</reflink>]). Last, but not least, our results highlight the importance of examining gender patterns in the mother–child relationship in different social and cultural groups.</p> <ref id="AN0033133955-25"> <title> Footnotes </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref39" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Rachel Shalit‐Naggar is now a clinical child psychologist in private practice.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref110" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Study 1 was based in part on the master's thesis of the second author. We would like to thank Lydia Ginsburg and Naama Navin for helping to coordinate data collection for Study 2, the many undergraduate students who contributed to data collection and coding, and, above all, the children and mothers who participated in this research.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <ref id="AN0033133955-26"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibtext> Ainsworth, M. S., Blehar, M. C., Waters, E., & Wall, S. (1978). Patterns of attachment: A psychological study of the strange situation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Bar‐Haim, Y., Sutton, D. B., Fox, N. A., & Marvin, R. S. (2000). Stability and change of attachment at 14, 24, and 58 months of age: Behavior, representation, and life events. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 41, 381 – 388.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref23" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Barnett, D., Kidwell, S. L., & Leung, K. H. (1998). Parenting and preschooler attachment among low‐income African‐American families. Child Development, 69, 1657 – 1671.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref14" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Bartky, S. L. (1990). Feeding egos and tending wounds: Deference and disaffection in women's emotional labor. In S. L. Bartky, Femininity and domination: Studies in the phenomenology of oppression (pp. 99 – 119). New York: Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref20" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Bell, S. M., & Ainsworth, M. D. (1972). Infant crying and maternal responsiveness. Child Development, 43, 1171 – 1190.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref71" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Biringen, Z., Brown, D., Donaldson, L., Green, S., Krcmarik, S., & Lovas, G. (2000). Adult Attachment Interview: Linkages with dimensions of emotional availability for mothers and their pre‐kindergarteners. Attachment and Human Development, 2, 188 – 202.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref61" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Biringen, Z., Emde, R. N., Brown, D., Lowe, L., Myers, S., & Nelson, D. (1999). Emotional availability and emotional communication in naturalistic mother‐child interactions: Evidence for gender relations. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 14, 463 – 478.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref28" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Biringen, Z., & Robinson, J. (1991). Emotional availability in mother‐child interactions: A reconceptualization for research. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 61, 258 – 271.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref118" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Bretherton, I., Ridgeway, D., & Cassidy, J. (1990). Assessing internal working models of the attachment relationship: An attachment story completion task for 3‐year olds. In M. T. Greenberg & D. Ciccetti (Eds.), Attachment in the preschool years: theory, research and intervention (pp. 273 – 308). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Brody, L. R. (1999). Gender, emotion, and the family. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Burke, R. A., & Fuqua, D. R. (1987). Sex differences in same and cross‐sex supportive relationships. Sex Roles, 17, 339 – 352.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Campbell, S. B., Pierce, E. W., Moore, G., & Marakovitz, S. (1996). Boys' externalizing problems at elementary school age: Pathways form early behavior problems, maternal control and family stress. Development and Psychopathology, 8, 701 – 719.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Chodorow, N. (1978). The reproduction of mothering: Psychoanalysis and the sociology of gender. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Conger, R. D., & Dogan, S. J. (2007). Social class and socialization in families. In J. E. Grusec & P. D. Hastings (Eds.), Handbook of socialization (pp. 433 – 461). New York: Guilford.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Davidov, M., & Grusec, J. E. (2006). Untangling the links of parental responsiveness to distress and warmth to child outcomes. Child Development, 77, 44 – 58.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dix, T. (1991). The affective organization of parenting: Adaptive and maladaptive processes. Psychological Bulletin, 110, 3 – 25.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dodge, K. A., Pettit, G. S., & Bares, J. E. (1994). Socialization mediators of the relation between socioeconomic status and child conduct problems. Child Development, 65, 649 – 665.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Eberly, M. B., & Montemayor, R. (1998). Doing good deeds: An examination of adolescent prosocial behavior in the context of parent‐adolescent relationships. Journal of Adolescent Research, 13, 403 – 432.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Eisenberg, A. R., (1996). The conflict talk of mothers and children: Patterns related to culture, SES, and gender of child. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 42, 438 – 458.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Eisenberg, N., & Fabes, R. A. (1998). Prosocial development. In W. Damon & N. Eisenberg (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 3. Social, emotional, and personality development (5th ed., pp. 702 – 778). New York: Wiley.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Eisenberg, N., Fabes, R. A., Carlo, G., Speer, A., & Switzer, G., D. (1993). The relations of empathy‐related emotions and maternal practices to children's comforting behaviors. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 55, 131 – 150.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fishman, P. M. (1983). Interaction: The work women do. In B. Thorne, C. Kramerae, & N. Henley (Eds.), Language, gender and society (pp. 89 – 101). Cambridge, MA: Newbury House.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fivush, R. (1993). Emotional content of parent‐child conversations about the past. In C. A. Nelson (Ed.), Memory and affect in development. Minnesota Symposium on Child Psychology (Vol. 26, pp. 39 – 78). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Freud, A. (1946). The ego and the mechanisms of defense. New York: International Universities Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gilligan, C. (1996). The centrality of relationship in human development: A puzzle, some evidence, and a theory. In. G. G. Noam & K. W. Fischer (Eds.), Development and vulnerability in close relationships (pp. 237 – 261). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Grusec, J. E., & Goodnow, J. J. (1994). Impact of parental discipline methods on the child's internalization of values: A reconceptualization of current points of view. Developmental Psychology, 32, 99 – 1007.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hastings, P. D., & Grusec, J. E. (1998). Parenting goals as organizers of responses to parent‐child disagreement. Developmental Psychology, 34, 465 – 479.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hastings, P. D., & Rubin, K. H. (1999). Predicting mothers' beliefs about preschool‐aged children's social behavior: Evidence for maternal attitudes moderating child effects. Child Development, 70, 722 – 741.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hastings, P. D., Utendale, W. T., & Sullivan, C. (2007). The socialization of prosocial development. In J. E. Grusec & P. D. Hastings (Eds.), Handbook of socialization (pp. 638 – 664). New York: Guilford.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hastings, P. D., Zahn‐Waxler, C., Robinson, J., Usher, B., & Bridges, D. (2000). The development of concern for others in children with behavior problems. Developmental Psychology, 36, 531 – 546.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hoff, E., Laursen, B., & Tardiff, T. (2002). Socioeconomic status and parenting. In M. H. Bornstein (Ed.), Handbook of parenting: Vol. 2: Biology and ecology of parenting (pp. 231 – 252). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jordan, J. V., & Surrey, J. L. (1986). The self‐in‐relation: Empathy and the mother‐daughter relationship. In T. Bernay & D. W. Cantor (Eds.), The psychology of today's woman: New psychoanalytic visions (pp. 81 – 104). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kiang, L., Moreno, A. J., & Robinson, J. J. (2004). Maternal preconceptions about parenting predict child temperament, maternal sensitivity, and children's empathy. Developmental Psychology, 40, 1081 – 1092.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kochanska, G. (1997). Mutually responsive orientation between mothers and their young children: Implications for early socialization. Child Development, 68, 94 – 112.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kochanska, G. (2002). Mutually responsive orientation between mothers and their young children: A context for the early development of conscience. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11, 191 – 195.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kochanska, G., Coy, K. C., & Murray, K. T. (2001). The development of self‐regulation in the first four years of life. Child Development, 68, 94 – 112.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kochanska, G., & Forman, D. R., & Coy, K. C. (1999). Implications of the mother‐child relationship in infancy: Socialization in the second year of life. Infant Behavior and Development, 22, 249 – 265.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> LaFreniere, P., Masataka, N., Butovskaya, M., Chen, Q., Dessen, M. A., Alwanger, K, et al. 2002). Cross‐cultural analysis of social competence and behavior problems in preschoolers. Early Education and Development, 13, 201 – 219.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Leaper, C. (2002). Parenting girls and boys. In M. H. Bornstein (Ed.), Handbook of parenting: Vol. 1: Children and parenting (pp. 189 – 225). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Leaper, C., Anderson, A., K., & Sanders, P. (1998). Moderators of gender effects on parents' talk to children: A meta‐analysis. Developmental Psychology, 34, 3 – 27.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Leaper, C., & Smith, T. E. (2004). A meta‐analytic review of gender variations in children's language use: Talkativeness, affiliative speech, and assertive speech. Developmental Psychology, 40, 993 – 1027.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lytton, H., & Romney, D. M. (1991). Parents' differential socialization of boys and girls: A meta‐analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 109, 267 – 296.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Maccoby, E. (1990). Gender and relationships: A developmental account. American Psychologist, 45, 513 – 520.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Maccoby, E. E. (1998). The two sexes: Growing up apart, coming together. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Maccoby, E. E., & Martin, J. A. (1983). Socialization in the context of the family: Parent‐child interactions. In P. H. Mussen & E. M. Hetherington (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology (4th ed., Vol. 4, pp. 1 – 102). New York: Wiley.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Maccoby, E. E., & Parpal, M. (1985). Maternal responsiveness and subsequent child compliance. Child Development, 56, 1326 – 1334.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Maltz, D. N., & Borker, R. A. (1982). A cultural approach to male‐female miscommunication. In J. J. Gumperz (Ed.), Language and social identity (pp. 195 – 216). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Newson, J., & Newson, G. (1976). Seven years old in the home environment. Oxford, England: Wiley.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Oppenheim, D., Emde, R. N., & Warren, S. (1997). Children's narrative representations of mothers: Their development and associations with child and mother adaptation. Child Development, 68, 127 – 138.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Radke‐Yarrow, M., Zahn‐Waxler, C., Richardson, N. T., Susman, A., & Martinez, P. (1994). Caring behavior in children of clinically depressed and well mothers. Child Development, 65, 1405 – 1414.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Robinson, J., Little, C., & Biringen, Z. (1993). Emotional communication in mother‐toddler relationships: Evidence for early gender differentiation. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 39, 496 – 517.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ruble, D. N., & Martin, C. L. (1998). Gender development. In W. Damon & N. Eisenberg (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 3. Social, emotional, and personality development (5th ed., pp. 933 – 1016). New York: Wiley.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sanders, M. R., Dadds, M. R., Johnston, B. M., & Cash, R. (1992). Childhood depression and conduct disorder: Behavioral, affective and cognitive aspects. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 101, 495 – 504.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Siegal, M. (1987). Are sons and daughters treated more differently by fathers than by mothers? Developmental Review, 7, 183 – 209.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Smetana, J. G., (1989). Toddlers' social interactions in the context of moral and conventional transgressions in the home. Developmental Psychology, 25, 499 – 509.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Solomonica‐Levi, D., Yirmiya, N., Erel, O., Samet, I., & Oppenheim, D. (2001). The associations between observed maternal behavior, children's narrative representations of mothers, and children's behavior problems. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 18, 673 – 690.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tannen, D. (1993). Gender and conversational interaction. New York: Oxford University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Whiting, B. B., & Edwards, C. P. (1988). Children of different worlds: The formation of social behavior. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Winnicott, D. W. (1965). The maturational process and the facilitating environment. New York: International Universities Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wright, P. H. (1982). Men's friendships, women's friendships, and the alleged inferiority of the latter. Sex Roles, 8, 1 – 20.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Zahn‐Waxler, C., Cole, P., & Barrett, K. C. (1991). Guilt and empathy: Sex differences and implications for the development of depression. In J. Garber & K. Dodge (Eds.), The development of empathic regulation and dysregulation (pp. 243 – 272). New York: Cambridge University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Zahn‐Waxler, C., Radke‐Yarrow, M., Wagner, E., & Chapman, M. (1992). Development of concern for others. Developmental Psychology, 28, 126 – 136.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Ruth Butler and Rachel Shalit‐Naggar</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib42" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib54" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib44" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib47" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib60" firstref="ref11"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref12"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib57" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref15"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref16"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib45" firstref="ref18"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib46" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref24"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib49" firstref="ref25"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib56" firstref="ref26"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref31"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib50" firstref="ref32"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib62" firstref="ref33"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref35"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib43" firstref="ref36"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref40"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref42"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib63" firstref="ref48"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib61" firstref="ref51"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref55"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref56"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib41" firstref="ref69"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref74"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref76"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl33" bibid="bib58" firstref="ref77"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl34" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref79"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl35" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref80"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl36" bibid="bib91" firstref="ref92"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl37" bibid="bib163" firstref="ref113"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl38" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref120"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl39" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref133"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl40" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref137"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl41" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref140"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl42" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref141"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl43" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref142"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl44" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref143"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl45" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref145"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl46" bibid="bib55" firstref="ref147"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl47" bibid="bib51" firstref="ref150"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl48" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref154"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl49" bibid="bib53" firstref="ref155"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl50" bibid="bib48" firstref="ref156"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl51" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref157"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl52" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref159"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl53" bibid="bib52" firstref="ref165"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl54" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref168"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl55" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref172"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl56" bibid="bib59" firstref="ref173"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ802174
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Gender and Patterns of Concerned Responsiveness in Representations of the Mother-Daughter and Mother-Son Relationship
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Butler%2C+Ruth%22">Butler, Ruth</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Shalit-Naggar%2C+Rachel%22">Shalit-Naggar, Rachel</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Child+Development%22"><i>Child Development</i></searchLink>. Jul-Aug 2008 79(4):836-851.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Blackwell Publishing. 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148. Tel: 800-835-6770; Tel: 781-388-8599; Fax: 781-388-8232; e-mail: customerservices@blackwellpublishing.com; Web site: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/jnl_default.asp
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 16
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2008
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Mothers%22">Mothers</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Daughters%22">Daughters</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Parent+Child+Relationship%22">Parent Child Relationship</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Gender+Differences%22">Gender Differences</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Sons%22">Sons</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Females%22">Females</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Foreign+Countries%22">Foreign Countries</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Young+Children%22">Young Children</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Personal+Narratives%22">Personal Narratives</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Low+Income+Groups%22">Low Income Groups</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Social+Influences%22">Social Influences</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Child+Development%22">Child Development</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Geographic Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Israel%22">Israel</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2008.01162.x
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 0009-3920
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Given that girls show more interpersonal concern than boys, it was predicted that more mother-daughter than mother-son dyads would develop a relationship of mutual concerned responsiveness (CR). Two hundred and twenty-six Israeli children (7-8 years old) and 91 mother-child pairs provided narratives of mother-child interactions. At high levels of socioeconomic status (SES), descriptions of child but not maternal concern differed by gender; therefore, more mother-daughter narratives described mutual CR and more mother-son narratives described a nonreciprocal pattern of maternal CR. In a low-SES sample, most mother-daughter narratives described mutual CR, but many mothers and sons described little concern by either partner. Results provided clear evidence of gender differences in mother-child reciprocity and confirmed the importance of examining gender influences in different social groups.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: Ref
  Label: Number of References
  Group: RefInfo
  Data: 62
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2008
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ802174
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ802174
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2008.01162.x
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 16
        StartPage: 836
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Mothers
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Daughters
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Parent Child Relationship
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Gender Differences
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Sons
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Females
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Foreign Countries
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Young Children
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Personal Narratives
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Low Income Groups
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Social Influences
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Child Development
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Israel
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Gender and Patterns of Concerned Responsiveness in Representations of the Mother-Daughter and Mother-Son Relationship
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Butler, Ruth
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Shalit-Naggar, Rachel
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2008
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 0009-3920
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 79
            – Type: issue
              Value: 4
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Child Development
              Type: main
ResultId 1