Re:How Parents Around the World Describe Their Children, in ...
by anigbrowl on Saturday April 13, 2013 @01:38PM
(#5543914)
I'm not sure about your extrapolation here. For example, labeling a child 'rebellious' isn't necessarily praise, it might just as easily express disappointment with conformist expectations. I have to say I never heard the phrase 'oppositional defiance disorder' until I came to the US. In Europe people would just regard such kids as stubborn, but not necessarily assume it was the result of a pathology.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:How Parents Around the World Describe Their Children, in ...
by PKop on Saturday April 13, 2013 @02:57PM
(#5544215)
Isn't it more likely that these descriptions are what the parents want to see in their children? As for 'rebellious', I see that as more of a humble-brag. "Oh, he's so rebellious, hehe". My takeaway from the data is these are the qualities that the parents in the respective countries hope their children possess, or perhaps that they've instilled in them...since in any meaningful sense most young children would be fairly similar across cultures, the differences the researchers perceived in the parents' answers must have been biases from the parents themselves.
Re:How Parents Around the World Describe Their Children, in ...
by trhtrsh on Sunday April 14, 2013 @12:22AM
(#5545886)
You see "rebellious" as a brag because you think "rebellious" is a positive trait, not because the surveyed person thinks so.
Re:How Parents Around the World Describe Their Children, in ...
by PKop on Monday April 15, 2013 @01:05AM
(#5549855)
Or I could say that you see at as not positive because you don't think it is. My point though was that, in my opinion, from my experience, people describe their children how they want to see them, or in their version of positive ways whatever those may be for each person (I'm thinking of young children here mostly). I mean can a 2 or 3 year old really be more "happy" or "rebellious" in any meaningful different degree from any other child of same age, in the aggregate? It's projection.. That's what I'm getting at.