Assumptions you didn't know you had.

Your public face.

Sometimes in looking through Facebook, it can seem that everyone's life is perfect, full of smiling children, exciting parties, exotic vacations, and clever status updates that inspire responses from many.  It's a way to link to new and interesting things you might find surfing the web, play a variety of electronic games, a way to promote new businesses, and it's even becoming a medium for true social change.

It's also a way to realize that some of the people you know are really really irritating.  But are they irritating only online, or does this illustrate a more general truth about who they are?

People have commonly assumed that people put forth their best public face on social networking sites, and that they present not a real version of themselves, but an idealized one.  A recent study conducted by Sam Gosling of the University of Texas at Austin, however, suggests that Facebook profiles result in fairly accurate representations of our personalities. Researchers asked participants to fill out questionnaires on the Big 5 personality measures of openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness and neuroticism, listing both what they perceived themselves to be (their real self) and what they wished to be (their ideal self).  It turns out that when observers then rated their perceptions of the participants' profiles, the ratings matched pretty closely.  In other words, people's profiles were a good representation of their personality.

 "I was surprised by the findings because the widely held assumption is that people are using their profiles to promote an enhanced impression of themselves," says Gosling of the more than 700 million people worldwide who have online profiles. "In fact, our findings suggest that online social networking profiles convey rather accurate images of the profile owners, either because people aren't trying to look good or because they are trying and failing to pull it off."

Gosling argues that this "honesty" thus makes Facebook (and potentially other social networking sites) more like genuine social interaction, and that it fulfills many of the same functions.  He likens Facebook to using a telephone - allowing us to keep in contact with people with whom we might not keep in contact with otherwise. He makes the argument that his research shows that we really can trust the online personas people present to the world.

While I agree with these statements generally, I would also point out that online, particularly when posts can be made anonymous, many people are prone towards making statements that they would not make in real life.  The online framework provides a sense of anonymity which can sometimes result in online sharing of content that, if people reflected on it a bit, might not be information they want out there. There are consequences to this.  For example, in the recent past people have lost their jobs, cyberstalked their exes, inadvertently alerted their insurance companies to potential fraud, and even accidentally posted embarrassing photos of British spies in speedos.  While these are perhaps more extreme examples of the possible consequences of online over-sharing, it's rare to find a person that hasn't had some form of online gaffe.

In the past few weeks, I've gotten dozens of requests for letters of recommendation.  I'm willing happy to do so, and have, in the process, been advising students to make sure that any social networking sites are made private.  Recently, admissions committees have been using such materials to help make their decisions about which students to allow into programs.  And, Facebook does not seem to be helping students make that cut.

 A new survey of 500 top colleges found that 10% of admissions officers acknowledged looking at social-networking sites to evaluate applicants. Of those colleges making use of the online information, 38% said that what they saw "negatively affected" their views of the applicant.

So, a word to the wise. Keep up with the new privacy features on Facebook, and when they are instituted, update your privacy settings.  In the meantimes, make your profile private, consider the use of lists to control the flow of outgoing information, and most importantly, don't ever put anything on Facebook that you would be horrified to find the world at large viewing.  Once it is on the web, it is there forever. 

Remember, your mom could be watching.

Facebook, Twitter Revolutionizing How Parents Stalk Their College-Aged Kids

About a girl.

Hi all,
We will be talking about gender tomorrow, and in honor of that, I am submitting a post by my cousin.  She is transgender/transsexual, and I asked if she would mind writing a post about her experiences.  She didn't (mind that is), and it's lovely and informative and honest, and she also is willing to answer questions if you have any.  In any case, rather than speaking for her, here's her post.

Hi, 

I'm a 25-year-old trans girl. I've been asked to offer my perspective on being trans, so, uh....here goes? [I guess I should preface this by saying that this is just my own perspective, I certainly don't speak for all trans women or anything like that, and (as far as I can tell) there's a lot of variation in transpeople's experience, so...mine is not representative of everyone's. Moreover, I can't speak for trans men, seeing as how I'm not one.]

Apologies in advance, this is kinda long and may sound a little rambly. I wasn't quite sure how to go about this at first, so...

Growing up was kind of odd and uncomfortable. As a young child, though I couldn't really identify particular things as 'oh hey signs that I'm trans' (after all, I had no idea that this sort of condition existed when I was little, and I didn't quite know what to make of my feelings at the time...though on an aside, it's worth noting that there are people who have an unshakeably certain sense of "I am [other gender]" from early early childhood), there were a bunch of times when I would look at what I guess one would call normal female socialization among girls my age - regular girls doing regular girl stuff, interacting in single-gender groups of friends (and in a way that differed from male group interaction), et cetera - and think, "I *should* be with the other girls." Of course, being male-bodied and reeeally given to worrying about this stuff, I figured...number one, they'll just see a guy and be all "augh get out," and number two, the male socialization I received told me that boys simply *shouldn't* try to be 'one of the girls'/do girl things/etc., and that doing so makes you a target for harassment. Not saying this was the sole cause, but this sort of stuff had a hand in making me pretty introverted and depressed as a young kid, to the point that I ended up on Zoloft by middle school.

When I was in my teens, the discomfort got worse, yay puberty! All the changes I went through - deeper voice, hair all over, other things that may or may not be TMI - just struck me as *wrong* and pretty depressing and I couldn't help but compare myself to the normal girls at school, feel really despondent/envious, and think, "that's how I -should- be, what the hell's wrong with me?" Really, I can't think of any time when it felt normal or right or whatever to look at myself based on male standards of 'normal' or 'healthy/good-looking'/what-have-you as opposed to female ones. My dysphoria and sense of "I am not a guy/not like guys, I should look like normal girls look," along with my existing sensitivity over weight/appearance, eventually brought on a nasty battle with anorexia/bulimia while I was in undergrad, as well. I'm still not *entirely* over that and have some pretty severe body image issues.

What made my adolescence even worse was, I was expected to be *happy* (or at least content) with being a guy, looking like a guy, et cetera, simply by virtue of having guyparts. Everything I knew told me that if I said *anything* about how I felt, I'd be ostracized/ridiculed as gay or weird or something. So I kept quiet about my feelings - the closest I got to doing anything was intermittently acting girly (sometimes exaggeratedly so) when with female friends in hopes of being perceived as "not a guy/one of the girls." 

So that's high school. In college, my gender dysphoria felt like it was at a low ebb for a little while, though it was supplanted somewhat by other problems for a little while. I ended up going through some pretty severe experiences with anorexia/bulimia (my gender dysphoria wasn't the sole cause of this, though it really affected my conception of "how I *should* look"), more depression followed, and consequently had to withdraw for a semester. I switched schools after my second year, finally said to myself "hey, I really *am* trans" sometime in my third year. Of course, saying it to myself and actively pursuing transition are two very different things, and I didn't start taking substantial steps until my second year of law school - my desire to right my body was inhibited by fear of discrimination (there have been more citywide trans-inclusive antidiscrimination ordinances passed in recent years, but it's still legal to discriminate in hiring, housing, public accommodations, and the like in most places, and even now it's iffy whether a trans-inclusive ENDA will be passed anytime soon), ostracism/harassment/outright violence, estrangement from friends and family, et cetera. 

Worries aside, thanks to a really supportive boyfriend and some other friends (trans and cisgender alike) who showed me that no, honesty about my tran *wouldn't* necessarily make me lose everyone I cared about, I worked up the courage to start transition last Fall, and I'm much much better for it (especially since starting hormones last December). I've come out of my shell (for lack of a better term), I feel genuinely *happy* (seriously, I was a pretty dour and despondent kid/adolescent/undergrad most of the time, so to find myself smiling and laughing and suchlike so much more nowadays is an almost unsettlingly big change, haha), and I just feel a lot more comfortable with myself on the whole. Moreover, I feel like I can just be myself gender identity-wise and otherwise, and that's a *huge* weight off my shoulders, not having to worry about 'giving myself away' or anything. 

I guess the only thing I have left to say is that, although transition isn't a cure-all - if you had issues before starting E or T, taking hormones or whatever isn't going to fix them right off the bat - it has the potential to *really* help people like myself, both in the immediate physical sense and in the longer-term happiness/motivation sense. 

Sorry, this is probably all over the place. :x I'm better at answering questions (seriously, I'm fairly well-read on this sort of thing) than I am at coming up with stuff from scratch, so....if any of you have any questions, please feel free to post them in the comments for this entry and I'll try to respond ASAP.

(Also, short lexicon (as far as I know, please bear in mind I'm *not* an expert, I just read a lot of stuff on the internet) for the uninitiated:

As far as the distinction between sex and gender goes, 

"sex is between the legs (physical/external), gender is between the ears (neurological/internal)."

MtF - male-to-female 

FtM - female-to-male 

Cisgender - where your internal gender identity matches your body/natal sex.

Transgender - umbrella category encompassing all "gender-variant individuals"

Transsexuals - subcategory of transgender people, individuals whose gender identity does not match their natal (birth) sex and who either plan to pursue sex reassignment surgery or who have already received this treatment.

Intersex - people born with both male and female sexual characteristics, or those with "intermediate or atypical combinations of physical features that usually distinguish male from female," according to Wikipedia. Some intersexed individuals' experiences mirror those of transpeople to an extent; in some cases (or so I've read), an intersexed child will receive corrective surgery to make their 'atypical features' match their presumed sex, and in the event (however unlikely) that the doctor gets it wrong, well. 

Anyways, thanks for your time, everyone!

How to be nice.

As we approach Thanksgiving, I wanted to mention that, as it turns out, happiness may be contagious, and being grateful isn't just good for the soul, it's good for the body as well.  And apparently one of the things we should be very grateful for is the action of a small peptide hormone known as oxytocin.

Above all, be thankful for your brain’s supply of oxytocin, the small, celebrated peptide hormone that, by the looks of it, helps lubricate our every prosocial exchange, the thousands of acts of kindness, kind-of kindness and not-as-nakedly-venal-as-I-could-have-been kindness that make human society possible. Scientists have long known that the hormone plays essential physiological roles during birth and lactation, and animal studies have shown that oxytocin can influence behavior too, prompting voles to cuddle up with their mates, for example, or to clean and comfort their pups. Now a raft of new research in humans suggests that oxytocin underlies the twin emotional pillars of civilized life, our capacity to feel empathy and trust.

We talked a little bit about oxytocin in class on Thursday, and I said I would link to a recent article on it. It's a good read - I recommend it.  The article focuses on some new findings about oxytocin, suggesting that it's involved in a lot about what makes society function relatively smoothly, from the ways in which we trust strangers within the context of scripted social interactions to how good we are at inferring people's emotional states using only their eyes as our guide.

While genetic data suggests that there are stable individual differences between people, there are also laboratory studies in which subjects are given oxytocin artificially.  These subjects then show differences in their behavioral and emotional responses to others.

In the Nature Study, 58 healthy male students were given a single nasal squirt of either oxytocin or a placebo solution and, 50 minutes later, were instructed to start playing rounds of the Trust Game with each other, using monetary units they could either invest or withhold. The researchers found that the oxytocin-enhanced subjects were significantly more likely than the placebo players to trust their financial partners: whereas 45 percent of the oxytocin group agreed to invest the maximum amount of money possible, just 21 percent of the control group proved so amenable.

As you all are undoubtedly aware of, tomorrow is Thanksgiving.  While certainly a welcome holiday, it is often fraught with tension and difficulty for many.  As laid out in this recent article, Thanksgiving, as well as a time for thanks, can be a time for tension.

As families gather around the country this week to celebrate Thanksgiving, many of them are bracing for the intense emotions of the holiday meal. The combination of food and family often brings out longstanding tensions, criticism and battles for control. Simple issues like cooking with butter or asking for seconds are fraught with family conflict and commentary.

Last year, my mother in law came over for Thanksgiving, and, of all things, the mashed potatoes were a source of controversy.  It took more patience than I had to handle that. She's coming over again this year, and comments have already been relayed to me about mashed potatoes, although she's said nothing to me directly about it.  In thinking about these articles together, one thought struck my mind.

I need some of that nasal spray.

So how do you really feel about race?

So we talked a bit about race and stereotypes recently in class.  I mentioned that we all know what the stereotypes are, but we differ on how much we endorse them.  In other words, the content of all our stereotypes is very similar, but our endorsement of their accuracy varies wildly.

But, even if we disagree with a particular stereotype, can it still affect us? Research shows that it might.  There are what are called implicit stereotypes that operate outside of conscious awareness, but can still affect us.  A particularly clever methodology has been developed by Greenwald to test out our implicit biases - the underlying beliefs and associations that we might have and not even be aware of.  This methodology was originally developed to examine implicit attitudes directed towards African-Americans, but has since been extended to a wide variety of areas in which people standardly discriminate against each other.

I think this is research that provides a good model of what research should be; about important things, methodologically sound, based on prior knowledge, and ultimately, creative in its development and execution.  What Greenwald's test does is use our reaction time as a measure of what things tend to go together with what other things in our brains.  In other words, how quickly we can perform certain tasks is a clue about the structure of our concepts.

What happens is you are asked to make a decision about a series of pictures.  A photo of a face pops up - if the photo is of the face of an African American you are asked to indicate this by pressing the "e" button, and if it's the face of a European, you are to press the "i" button.  After this training session, the faces are replaced with words.  If a "good" word (e.g. love, glorious) pops up you press the "e", and if a "bad" word (e.g. war, hate) pops up you are to press the "i" button.  Then, after this second training session, you are asked to do both tasks at once.  Either a word or a face will pop up, and you have to categorize them correctly. This process is repeated, although the pairs are varied (i.e. first you might be asked to categorize (AA/good, EA/bad), then (AA/bad, EA/good)).

The critical dependent variables are your reaction times and mistakes.  If you can respond more quickly when the "good" words and European American faces are paired, then this suggests that you have an automatic association of European American and good.  In other words, you are quicker to respond to that particular pairing because it fits with your own unconscious attitudes.  The task and your beliefs match. On the other hand, if they don't, your performance will be slower.  So, we can get a sense of how strong your biases are by how much you are sped up or slowed down in your responses.  Analogously, your mistakes will tend to be in one direction.  If you make very few categorization mistakes for the (EA/good, AA/bad) trials, but many mistakes for the (AA/good, EA/bad) trials, then that suggests that the second pairing is harder for you because it doesn't match your internal associations.

As it turns out, most everyone, even people who are low in prejudice, tend to have biases.  In fact, when the IAT was first developed, many people became upset at discovering that they had been harboring less-than-nice beliefs (that's in fact, now in part of the consent form so that people aren't surprised to find out unsavory truths about themselves).  While some people argue about what these findings might mean, Greenwald and his associates make the argument that without due diligence on our part, implicit biases can indeed color our actions and impact explicit, conscious behavior.

Try the IAT for yourself.  

H1N1 vaccine links

Hi all,
I've gotten quite a few questions about the H1N1 vaccine, so here are a few links to help out.  First off, the CDC's statement on the failure of multiple studies to find a linkage between autism and vaccines.  Please note that journal articles are cited below which support the CDC's position.  In other words, there is hard data to back them up.  Overall, vaccines are not linked with the risk of autism, although there may be small subgroups which may be affected differently.  Second, a very nice recap of commonly asked questions about the H1N1 vaccines with short, informative answers.  And, a reminder of why we have vaccines.  They serve a purpose.

I hope that's helpful to those of you with questions!

The lessons in a mirror

We talked about the development of self-recognition abilities in class Tuesday.  As I mentioned, apes, dolphins and maybe even pigs have self-recognition abilities.  Self-recognition is generally tested with the rouge test, in which a spot of rouge is placed on a child's nose. When looking in a mirror, children who have attained self-recognition will reach towards their nose, indicating they understand the image in the mirror is their own.  This generally happens at about a year and a half of age, and is considered to be a significant achievement.

So why is this considered important?  Well, self-recognition is viewed as a marker of the development of the self, and the development of the self is a fundamental skill that underlies many abilities.  Among the most important of these are abilities related to social competence.  But why should understanding that you are a person separate from other people have an impact on social competence?

Well, humans are complicated creatures, and much of our understanding of social interactions involves figuring out what is going on in people's mind's on the basis of clues they give us or things that we might observe them do or say.  And to do this effectively, we need to be able to model what's going on in their minds.  For example, before we can understand how to cooperate with another person, we need to be able to figure out what it is that they want us to do.  Before we compete with someone, it helps us to know what they know, or how far they will go to win, or to pick up on cues of their weaknesses.  If the understanding of the distinction between your mind and the mind of others is missing, this makes social interactions a cacophony of confusion.

As with many of our most sophisticated skills, it turns out that we do this so naturally and easily we don't even realize we are continually doing it.  In fact, it comes so easily that much of the work on the modeling of others' minds (known as "theory of mind") emerged from research on people with autism.  In autism, this understanding of the split between yours and others' minds appears to be lacking, making social interactions confusing and nonsensical.  Note that in this clip , the boy doesn't seem to be able to understand that a person might not know the location of a hidden coin.  "I know where it is," he thinks, "so clearly, they must as well."

Self-recognition isn't the same thing as theory of mind certainly.  But it's a clue that things are going in the right direction, and an easy way to assess the development of the self.

It's a good thing I took statistics...

Or I might not know how to interpret this:

By the way, while most parents believe that candy and chocolate cause hyperactivity in children, research suggests this is, surprisingly, not the case.  Generally, the excitement of a holiday or special event is seen as being the contributing factor to bouncing off the walls after eating a bucket of candy.

Plus, candy makes anyone happy in my book.

Happy Halloween!

No Virginia, watching TV won't make your baby smarter.

As mentioned in class today, the Walt Disney Company has admitted that watching television will not make your baby smarter, although it may be an interesting segue way into a discussion of mental illness and an effective means of torture for adults.  As it turns out, the use of videos targeted for young children may actually be negatively related to language development and problems with attention.

So, if you bought your child some Baby Einstein videos and were disappointed with the results, here's how to get your money back.

Happy viewing.

Bubbles on your Tongue

How taste works is somewhat unclear, and a lot of work remains to be done in order to really figure it out.  There are hints however, and we keep finding out new things.  For example, this recent study suggests that carbonation - the fizzy bubbles found in many drinks - has a taste.  It's not just the sensation of the bubbles popping on your tongue, it's a flavor.  And that flavor?  Most akin to sour.

Here's something even stranger.  For years people have worked on how to restore sight to the blind.  In this new technique, special sunglasses attached to a "lollipop" are used to transduce visual signals into electrical stimulation on the tongue.  Users report a sensation similar to champagne bubbles on the tongue, and with some practice, can start to interpret some limited visual information.

And we're all familiar with the idea that we have certain taste receptors - including sweet, salty, sour and bitter. But there's a more recently identified taste (in addition to the new work on carbonation).  There is a savory flavor called umami. It's found in soups, cheese, seafood and meat.  It's a naturally occurring flavor, however a form of it (MSG) is often used as an additive in foods.




And then to end with, an essay on food and flavor by one of my favorite authors, Michael Pollan.  He writes about the health value of food and agriculture and the shared history of humans and plants.  And in this short article, about how we should be enjoying food, and how so much of what is sold in the supermarkets today really isn't food anymore.  

Gone until Monday!

Well go figure.  It's available online.  With subtitles that aren't in English, but still.  If you miss class, you can watch it here.


via videosift.com

Want to be on film?

Play with rules

So in class today I showed this video on the Marshmallow Test - a replication of a classic experiment conducted by Walter Mischel.



It shows a bunch of kids trying not to eat a marshmallow now in order to get two marshmallows later.  This ability to hold back from an enticing action and to distract oneself from temptation is part of what is known  as self-control, and is closely related to self-regulation.

Generally skills such as these are part of what psychologists call executive functioning.  Executive functioning involves goal-directed mental activity, or the control of thoughts, emotions, actions and strategies to accomplish goals and solve problems.  Children develop many of these abilities between the ages of about 2-5 years of age, and we'll be talking about the development of things like selective attention, inhibition of responses and theory of mind later in the quarter.  As it turns out (as proposed in this recent article in the New York Times) a subset of executive functioning - the ability to self-regulate - may be important for later academic success.

The Times article intersects with a number of the issues we'll be talking about in the next week.  First off is the question of nature and nurture.  Is the ability to self-regulate something we are born with, and that some people have more of and some people have less of, or is it the result of learning processes in those early years of life?  Different people have different opinions.  Generally, people have had limited success in designing programs that lead to any long term changes in self-control, suggesting that these abilities are not terribly malleable, and that self-control is more affected by the nature side of things.  However, the Times article discusses a new "Tools of the Mind" immersive approach currently being tested with preschoolers that seems to be meeting with greater success, suggesting that nurture may play a larger role than previously believed.

The article also discusses a conflict between different theoretical perspectives, and illustrates quite nicely how the theories that people have play out in real life.  Most educational experiences with young children aim to motivate children with a system of rewards (e.g. stickers and praise for desired behaviors) and punishments (e.g. time out for inappropriate behaviors).  This is closely linked to the learning perspective with its focus on environmental contingencies as the major shapers of development.  And, as the Times writer points out, some people have theorized that this leads to a focus on performing behaviors not because you are internally motivated to do so, but to gain the approval of others, and that what children are learning is more akin to obedience than it is to self-regulation.

The new immersive approach described in the Times article borrows heavily from a far different approach - Vygotsky's sociocultural theory.  Vygotsky focused on the interactions with others, and the ways in which more sophisticated interaction partners can support and guide your development.  We'll be talking about him in more detail (he's one of my favorites), but for now I will just point out in that in in the self-control program discussed in the article, it is assumed that much of learning will occur via peer pressure in pretend play (e.g. "You're doing it wrong!  Do it this way! Like this!") or via guidance and scaffolding provided by teachers (e.g. coaching, learning conferences).  And, hopefully what is imparted here is not just obedience to rules and the receipt of praise, but also the ability to regulate your thoughts and behavior for yourself at a later point.

I like this article because I think it touched on a variety of important things, some of which are outlined above. But I also like this article for another reason - it touched upon the importance of play.  It's my firm belief that we learn many of our most important skills through the context of play. In the U.S. I think many people tend to focus on academics - which I'm clearly in favor of and are clearly important - but too much.  Children need to play, they are driven to it relentlessly, they love it, they will play given the slightest opportunity to do so, and  it is found everywhere across the world and in most animal species as well.  That gives me an indication of how important it is, and I like to see others agree.

The Interrelationships Between Domains

Hi all,

We won't be covering Chapter 5, on health and physical development, and so we don't talk very much about motor development.  This is not because I think it's not interesting, because it is, or because it's not important, which it also is, but because in the 3 month time span we are given to cover the entirety of human development, some things get cut.  And that's my cut.

So, I want to talk a bit here about motor development, specifically, about the relationships early motor development has with development in other areas.  But before I do I want to digress here for a moment and talk about an important concept - the interrelationships between domains of development.

There are many ways to think about development.  You might conceptualize development as quantitative or qualitative, and you might study it using a variety of different research methodologies designed to capture change over time.  But those aren't the only ways.  We can also focus on development either as happening in concert across all areas simultaneously and focus on age as the relevant variable, or we can think about development in one area and focus on that particular area and how it changes over time.  Neither is right or wrong, they are just useful for different reasons.

You may have noticed our book is topically oriented.  That means that it is organized by topic area (e.g., cognition, language) rather than chronologically (i.e., by age).  Generally, the argument for chronologically oriented books is that you cannot understand how one area develops without understanding what other areas are doing at the same time.  I myself prefer the more linear organization of the topical approach for teaching, but I think the concept of interrelationships is really really important.

So, going back to motor development, let's talk about interrelationships.  I think it's a particularly apt area to illustrate the point.  When an infant is born it can be likened to "a three-pound bag of loose corn; the baby has about as much motor control as the sack of kernels" (Wingert & Underwood, 1997).  Newborns are all clumsy movement and flailing limbs and slobber; they have a variety of reflexes designed to help them adjust and adapt to life on the outside, but when it comes to voluntary motor movements, they are pretty helpless.  What happens when they gain control of their bodies?

Think about cognitive development.  One of the things that is good for cognitive development is exposure to new things and experiences, and an environment that affords exploration and discovery.  But if the only motor movement you can actually do is to lift your head for a few brief seconds, the amount of exploration and discovery you can access is limited.

By contrast, if you can do this there's a lot more you can explore in your environment, and a whole lot more you can learn.  So, advances in motor development lead to advances in cognitive development because they open up a whole new world of exploration.

Now let's consider language.  There are lots of components to language, but one of the ways that we break those up is in into receptive (what you understand) and expressive (what you can say) language.  Once children can speak and be understood, they can use language to frame questions about the world and ask for answers to those questions.  But to be able to speak they need to be able to manipulate their lungs, throat, mouth, tongue and nasal cavity, and to continually modify this as their body changes and grows.  While certainly all the cognitive machinery needs to be in place before the child can know what he or she wants to say, it's also true that the motor component of language is a challenge.  It's no surprise that many toddlers have lisps or leave sounds off words or simplify their speech - talking is hard.  But once you have the motor coordination to speak intelligibly, then you can ask questions and learn from the answers.  And once you can learn from your answers, then this feeds into cognitive development too.

What about emotional development?  Motor development, as it happens, seems to be related to the development of a number of very specific fears.  In particular, the advent of self-propelled locomotion - most typically crawling - is important.  For example, at about the age of 6-9 months or so, many babies start showing stranger anxiety (a marked wariness or fear in response to strangers).  Why at this time?  Well, generally, stranger anxiety is tied to the attachment system.  And, another component of the attachment system - indeed the primary function of it - is proximity maintenance (that's just a fancy way of saying "stay close to mommy").  What happens is that just at the same time that babies become capable of crawling away from their caregivers, all of a sudden they are strongly motivated not to do so.  And, a consequence of the attachment system being turned on in this way is stranger anxiety.  So, being scared of strange people is therefore linked to being able to crawl, even though it seems like those things are miles apart on the surface.

I could go on and on with more examples, but I'll stop there.  I think the point is made. These interrelationships between domains, in my opinion at least, are most salient at the beginning of life, as children increase in complexity and organization, and at the end of life, as abilities sometimes decline in concert.   But they are always interacting and changing and feeding into each other in big loops of causal effects, like a giant spiderweb growing out in widening circles, where one rung of development is necessarily constrained and affected by what is going on in the rest of the web.  It's really quite amazing.

These are a few of my favorite things.

There are a variety of useful and interesting products for new parents - here are a few.

SLEEP

Many new parents complain about difficulty sleeping.  However, there are now products on the market which can make the process of getting your baby to bed easier than ever before.  For example, the Zaky hand is a wonderful tool.  It simulates the gentle, loving, pressure of a mother’s hand.  And it’s not creepy at all.

Babies also like pacifiers.  However, there’s no reason to stick to the old fashioned sort.  There are now a wide variety of pacifiers available for your baby to showcase his or her own unique style and personality.

BATHING

Here, a wonderful bucket bathtub for bathing young infants.  And, at only $60, a crazy price to pay for something you can buy at Home Depot for $10 real bargain.

Many children struggle when getting their hair washed.  This makes sense to me – no one likes shampoo in their eyes.  Luckily, there is a product to help.

And, here, the tubsider.  Designed by a chiropractor, it helps support your spine, back and neck while washing the baby in the tub.  Of course, one might wonder if it’s a good idea to constrict your leg and body movements while washing a slippery baby.  But at least your back will be okay.

And, after bath time is over, what baby doesn’t like to slap on a little cologne?

Additionally, if your baby is bald, this product can reduce the embarrassment and stares until his/her hair grows in.

TRAVEL

I used to just write my name and phone number with a Sharpie on my kids’ foreheads, but this is just so much cuter!

Often when traveling, it is difficult to pack fruits and other healthy snacks as they become bruised and can ooze fluids on your stuff.  Luckily, the Banana Bunker can help guard against this.  It reminds me of something…but I just can’t place it.  Nonetheless, it is a fine piece of gear.

If you are going to be traveling on an airplane, it might be a good idea to introduce this fine educational toy to your child, particularly if you think you have reason to look suspicious.  Make sure to read the reviews.

EDUCATION

While whether or not television can truly be educational is a contentious issue, however, it is true that judiciously used, videos such as Baby Einstein can give parents a short break.  This video is particular is also a nice segueway into a discussion of mental illness in the event that your child notices Goat Van Gogh's bandaged ear and asks how it got hurt.

HEALTH AND SAFETY

Forget nanny cams.  This is the future of household espionage.

Or, if you’ll be using daycare, you’re likely to encounter a variety of colds and childhood illnesses on a regular basis.  Tired of the old-fashioned nasal aspirators?  Well, you’re not alone.  Here: an innovative product to help you address a common concern with sick babies.

Also in the safety category are these – for the new wobbler in your life.

And, to make sure that no falls happen in the first place, you might want to check out the Daddle.  Originally it was available at Petsmart along with the matching knee pads, but for some reason they pulled it.  So sadly, it's a bit harder to find one now.

TOILETING

Given that “wetness is the number one cause of diaper rash” the need for this product is clear.   It can “soothe your baby from any agony.”

If you’re on the go with your baby and can’t find a restroom, here’s a product for mom and for baby and for baby's little hands.

You know when you’re in a public bathroom, and you have the baby with you, and you just don’t know what to do with him or her while you use the facilities?  Well – worry no more.  The Babykeeper has arrived!

There are also a couple of wonderful products to help toilet train your toddler.  If you have a boy, you may be interested in this portable urinal. 

And, if you’re having trouble getting your child to poop in his or her diaper, well, the trick is to make pooping fun!

If you're not on board with the fun shapes, you might want to try out a personalized potty song for your toddler instead.

For Lifespan Human Development Students

The bookends of 4 generations of Martorells

Welcome to Human Development!  This is somewhat of an experiment.  I attended a teaching conference last year, and in one of the talks I attended they discussed how to  rope students into listening by pretending to be young and hip like them stimulate online learning communities -  and blogs were suggested.  So, I'm giving it a shot. 

Some ground rules.  

• Commentary, reactions, and opinions are welcome, but please keep the discourse respectful and professional.   It is entirely okay to disagree with me or with another poster, but be nice about it.
• Don't use ethnic slurs, personal insults and show proper consideration for others' privacy and for topics that may be considered objectionable or inflammatory.
• I reserve the right not to post, or to later remove, any comments. 

You may earn up to two points of extra credit for posting comments on the blogs.  In order to quality for a point, a comment must add substance to the discussion.  In other words, merely posting that you agree or disagree, or that you found a link or discussion interesting, is not sufficient.  The deadline for fall quarter 2009 extra credit is November 30.  At that point, the extra credit will be entered into blackboard.  

I hope you had a great summer.  I did.