Most research in child development has been from a unidirectional viewpoint in which the effects of parents’ behavior on children’s socialization has been studied. This assumes a simple asymmetrical causality model where parents shape children . Bell has criticized the view that the parent is the initial agent of culture and the child is the object. Be views parent and child as a social system in which each participant’s responses constitute stimuli for the other. The effect of children in socialization of their parents is emphasized in his study although it is from a unidirectional viewpoint.
Based on their new economic power and starting from an understanding of national sovereignty built upon strict non-interference, emerging countries are slowly but steadily changing the degree to which Western global governance is universally accepted (Hurrell 2007;Terhalle 2011). The shifting constellation of world power has fundamentally altered the nature of the EU-China relationship . China and the other rising non-Western states are permeating the existing Western order and while they are socialised into that order, at the same time they are reshaping it as they enter (Acharya 2014;Kupchan 2012;Terhalle 2011). Europeans must come to grips with the fact that the days of the West’s supremacy in international politics are numbered .
The second type of learning, cognitive development, is a cognitive psychological process of adjustment to one’s environment. Essentially, cognitive development refers to learning which occurs as a function of information processing maturation. Moschis and Moore combine both the cognitive and the social learning perspectives in their studies.
As the child develops, teachers, schools, and peer groups become important socializing agents. Mass media also socializes throughout the life span, and religious influences are also important. Family influence on children’s pawkins research diggy’s adventure neighborhoods and peer groups affects what types of socializing agents the child has access to. The government exerts influence on socialization through creating experiences common to all children, such as schooling.
Given the vast array of seemingly relevant child characteristics, a major effort must be made to draw together a more integrated account of these constraints and subject this account to empirical test. Fifth, we should be able to say whether the processes responsible for the transmission of social norms between children are similar across behavioral domains or whether they differ. Some investigators are convinced that child and adolescent development are domain specific rather than widely generalized (Bugental & Goodnow, 1997; Gelman & Williams, 1997). It is apparent from previous research that one likely source of variance in children’s decision influence will be the particular product under consideration. It will be desirable to gain some understanding of how perceived product importance (from both children’s and parents’ points of view) affects children’s decision influence.
The analysis in this chapter indicates the parallels between earlier contestation of economic governance norms, in the mid-twentieth century, and the post-GFC contestation. This concerned contestation between advocates of market efficiency and rationality and those who argued that government intervention was a necessary corrective to the flaws in market capitalism. GFC effects on global financial governance influenced this policy contestation, encouraging an important shift from micro- to macroprudential financial regulation. It indicated the decentralizing authority in this global policymaking context, in terms of shifting cognitive authority; this was also demonstrated by the integration of more policy actors from developing states in multilateral fora. Socialization in the G20 should not be considered a one-way process, as noted earlier. It partly concerns normative compliance of leading developing states in multilateral economic governance, but does not exclude the potential for “reciprocal socialization” of both erstwhile insiders and new insiders (Keck and Sikkink 1999 , ;Pu 2012 ;Terhalle 2011 ).
