Detail One Child Stereotype: Myths or Reality? A Chinese Experience   Oleh:  Jennifer L Y, Mak Jenis: Article from Proceeding Dalam koleksi: The International Symposium on Social Sciences (TISSS) and Hong Kong International Conference on Education, Psychology and Society (HKICEPS) at Hongkong, December 2013, page 892-897. Topik: Stereotype; Chinese Fulltext: Hong Kong-Conference 142.pdf (295.34KB) Isi artikel One-child family is a global trend. In the United States of America, “the percentage of women having only one child rose from roughly 10% to 23% between 1980 and 2009 (Austin, 2006)”; in United Kingdom, women born in 1981 have had slightly fewer children on average than their peers born in 1966 (UK Office for National Statistics, 2010, 2011). Not to mention the one-child policy applied in China since 1979. Its younger couples, even “if given the opportunity to have a second child, declines, citing economic concerns (Cai et al, 2010; Falbo, 2012).” The trend can be attributed to social- economic demands, such as mounting living cost, couples starting families at an older age and growing number of two-career couples (Austin, 2006). Yet many are still indecisive about the decision to stop at one. Part of the reason is the negative stereotype. G. Stanley Hall was one of the first experts to give only children a bad reputation (Sorensen, 2008, p. 14). He was echoed by scholar of birth order, Alfred Adler, who theorized that because only children have no rivals for their parents' affection, they will become pampered and spoiled. He suggested that this could later cause interpersonal difficulties (Sorensen, 2008, p. 6). Another common belief is that singletons lack opportunity to interact with siblings, preventing them to build effective social skill and emotional maturity (Sorensen, 2008, p. 12). Traditionally, only-borns are therefore considered as selfish and unsociable. Yet, the stereotype was challenged by contemporary studies of both the quantitative stream and qualitative stream. One of the noted researchers is Toni Falbo, who “uses empirical studies to show that there is little difference between onlies and non-onlies (Sorensen, 2008, p.15).” Her approach was to examine over 100 existing research findings (Sorensen, 2008, p.16). On the other hand, Sorensen was drawn to qualitative approach, which she believes can take into the account of “people’s lives as a whole (Sorensen, 2008, p.37),” and as “an opportunity to contribute to the research literature in a different, yet complementary way (Sorensen, 2008, p. 38).” In this passage, I will examine the controversy from the Chinese experience. By examining studies on singletons of various developmental stages, we can see the difference between onlies and non-onlies is insignificant both emotionally and socially. Rather, a diverse number of factors were observed to have contributed to the healthy development of only children. But first, let’s review studies in support of the stereotype. Opini Anda Klik untuk menuliskan opini Anda tentang koleksi ini! Kembali

Copyright © 2006, 2007 Unika Atma Jaya, all rights reserved