Copyright 1994 by the American Psychological Association, Inc.
0893-3200/94/S3.00
Journal of Family Psychology
1994, Vol. 8, No. 3, 251-253
Siblings, Family Relationships, and Child Development:
Introduction
E. Mavis Hetherington
Although the study of siblings has a long
history, until the past decade researchers in this
area have mainly concentrated on outcomes associated with birth order, family size, and sibling spacing. The results of these early studies
were inconsistent, and even some of the widely
cited findings on firstborn and only children
have been called into question (Ernst & Angst,
1983; Falbo, 1992). When birth order effects on
developmental outcomes were obtained, they
tended to be modest, to vary for boys and girls,
and to vary with gender constellation, age spacing, and age (Buhrmester, 1992; Dunn, 1988,
1992; Minnett, Vandell, & Santrock, 1983;
Stoneman, Brody, & MacKinnon, 1984; Teti,
Gibbs, & Bond, 1989).
More recent researchers of siblings have focused on four issues. First, they have examined
the developmental course of sibling relationships (e.g., Buhrmester, 1992; Furman &
Buhrmester, 1992). Second, they have explored
links between the sibling relationship and other
social relationships (e.g., Bryant, 1992; Dunn,
1988). Third, they have investigated the contributions of sibling relationships and other family
relationships to individual personality, social,
and cognitive development (e.g., Hetherington
& Clingempeel, 1992; Patterson, 1982). Finally,
researchers have studied why siblings in the
same family are so different and the relative
contribution of genetic and shared and nonshared environmental factors to these differences (Hetherington, Reiss, & Plomin, 1994).
These issues are considered in the four articles included in this special section on siblings;
however, the prevalent theme running through
all of the articles is that sibling relationships and
their contribution to developmental outcomes
Correspondence concerning this article should be
addressed to E. Mavis Hetherington, Department of
Psychology, Gilmer Hall, Charlottesville, Virginia
22903-2477.
can only be understood in the context of processes involved in other family relationships.
The interest in sibling relationships in the
larger context of the family emerged from two
theoretical perspectives. The first is attachment
theory, which suggests that there is a coherence in close personal relationships that is
based on the quality of early attachment to
parents (Sroufe & Fleeson, 1988). The child's
internal working model of relationships, which
is based on early interactions with caregivers,
shapes the child's expectations and behaviors
in subsequent relationships, such as the sibling
relationship (Teti & Abbard, 1989). Most of
the research based on attachment theory has
investigated the effects of the mother-child
relationship on the sibling relationship, as the
mother is viewed as the primary caregiver.
The associations among the father-child relationship, the sibling relationship, and child development continue to be understudied. However, it is clear from the articles by Brody,
Stoneman, and McCoy (1994), Conger and
Conger (1994), and Anderson, Hetherington,
Reiss, and Howe (1994) in this special section
that the contributions of mothers and fathers
may differ.
The second theoretical basis for the study of
sibling relationships in the larger context of the
family emerged from family systems theory,
which maintains that family members are part
of an interactive, interdependent network in
which the behavior of each individual, or subsystem, modifies that of other individuals, or
subsystems, in the family (Minuchin, 1988).
This perspective pushed investigators beyond
the study of sibling and parent-child relationships to an inclusion of links with the marital
relationship, the extended family, noncustodial
parents, and stepkin. In this perspective, relationships in the family system are not viewed as
static but as changeable, as family members,
family structure, and the larger social ecology in
which they are embedded change.
251
252
E. MAVIS HETHERINGTON
The interest in family systems has led to a
concern with how best to measure family processes and relationships. The modest agreement
among different family members' reports (Reiss
et al., 1994) has resulted in an increasing awareness of the importance of researchers using multiple sources and multiple measures, including
observational measures, in assessing family relations (Hetherington & Clingempeel, 1992;
Patterson, Reid, & Dishion, 1992). Although
reactivity and the nonrepresentativeness of behavior obtained in short observational sessions
may be problematic, observation is often
viewed as the most objective and reliable way to
study family process. It is not by happenstance
that all four studies in this special section include the use of observational methods, with
contingencies in parents' intervention in siblings' conflicts being central in the article by
Ross, Filyer, Lollis, Perlman, and Martin
(1994).
Finally, in this special section the last three
articles, which focus on differences in experiences within the family that contribute to differences in siblings' development, reflect an
increasing interest in the contribution of nonshared environment to development (Hetherington et al., 1994). It has been argued that conventional socialization studies, which typically
study only one child in the family and use
between-families designs, ignore the marked
differences between children in the same family
(Dunn & Plomin, 1990). Although shared genetic and environmental factors may contribute
to similarity in siblings, differences in experiences, both within and outside of the family,
may help to explain the notable cognitive, personality, and social differences found in siblings
(Plomin, Chipuer, & Neiderhiser, 1994). As can
be seen by a comparison of the Anderson et al.
(1994), Conger and Conger (1994), and Brody
et al. (1994) articles in this section, there is
little consensus on the most appropriate models
and methods for the assessment of nonshared
environment and its effects (Reiss et al., 1994;
Rovine, 1994). Furthermore, although both the
direct treatment of an individual child and nonshared experiences affect the development of
siblings, their relative contribution may differ
for different outcomes.
When I was limited to four articles for this
special section on siblings, I decided to select
researchers with a family systems perspective
and a focus on family process. Many of the
most distinguished researchers working on sibling relationships could not be included in this
small set of articles, but served as reviewers. I
wish to thank them for their thoughtful commentaries, which greatly enhanced the quality
of the final articles.
References
Anderson, E. R., Hetherington, E. M., Reiss, D., &
Howe, G. (1994). Parents' nonshared treatment of
siblings and the development of social competence
during adolescence. Journal of Family Psychology,
8, 303-320.
Brody, G. H., Stoneman, Z., & McCoy, J. K. (1994).
Contributions of family relationships and child
temperaments to longitudinal variations in sibling
relationship quality and sibling relationship styles.
Journal of Family Psychology, 8, 274-286.
Bryant, B. K. (1992). Sibling caretaking: Providing
emotional support during middle childhood. In F.
Boer & J. Dunn (Eds.), Children's sibling relationships (pp. 55-70). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Buhrmester, D. (1992). The developmental courses
of sibling and peer relationships. In F. Boer & J.
Dunn (Eds.), Children's sibling relationships (pp.
19-40). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Conger, K. J., & Conger, R. D. (1994). Differential
parenting and change in sibling differences in
delinquency. Journal of Family Psychology, 8,
287-302.
Dunn, J. (1988). Connections between relationships:
Implications of research on mothers and siblings.
In R. A. Hinde & F. Stevenson Hinde (Eds.), Relationships within families: Mutual influences (pp.
168-180). Oxford, England: Clarenden Press.
Dunn, J. (1992). Current issues in developmental
research. In F. Boer & J. Dunn (Eds.), Children's
sibling relationships (pp. 1-17). Hillsdale, NJ:
Erlbaum.
Dunn, J., & Plomin, R. (1990). Separate lives: Why
siblings are so different. New York: Basic Books.
Ernst, C , & Angst, J. (1983). Birth order: Its influence on personality. Berlin, Federal Republic of
Germany: Springer-Verlag.
Falbo, T. (1992). Social norms and the one-child
family: Clinical and policy implications. In F. Boer
& J. Dunn (Eds.), Children's sibling relationships
(pp. 71-82). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Furman, W., & Buhrmester, D. (1992). Age and sex
differences in perceptions of networks of personal
relationships. Child Development, 63, 103-115.
Hetherington, E. M., & Clingempeel, W. G. (1992).
Coping with marital transitions. Monographs of the
Society for Research in Child Development,
57(2-3, Serial No. 227).
Hetherington, E. M., Reiss, D., & Plomin, R. (Eds.).
SPECIAL SECTION: INTRODUCTION
(1994). Separate social worlds of siblings (pp. 3 3 62). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Minnett, A. M., Vandell, D. L., & Santrock, J. W.
(1983). The effects of sibling status on sibling
interaction: Influence of birth order, age spacing,
sex of child, and sex of sibling. Child Development, 54, 1064-1072.
Minuchin, P. (1988). Relationships within the family:
A systems perspective on development. In R. A.
Hinde & J. Stevenson-Hinde (Eds.). Relationships
within families: Mutual influences (pp. 7-26).
Oxford, England: Clarendon Press.
Patterson, G. R. (1982). Coercive family process:
Vol. 3. A social learning approach. Eugene, OR:
Castalia Press.
Patterson, G. R., Reid, J. B., & Dishion, T. J. (1992).
Antisocial boys. Eugene, OR: Castalia Press.
Plomin, R., Chipuer, H. M., & Neiderhiser, J. M.
(1994). Behavioral genetic evidence for the importance of nonshared environment. In E. M. Hetherington, D. Reiss, & R. Plomin (Eds.), Separate
social worlds of siblings (pp. 1-32). Hillsdale, NJ:
Erlbaum.
Reiss, D., Plomin, R., Hetherington, E. M., Howe,
W. G., Rovine, M., Tryon, A., & Hagan, M. S.
(1994). The separate worlds of teenage siblings:
An introduction to the study of the nonshared environment and adolescent development. In E. M.
Hetherington, D. Reiss, & R. Plomin (Eds.), Separate social worlds of siblings (pp. 63-110). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
253
Ross, H. S., Filyer, R. E., Lollis, S. P., Perlman, M ,
& Martin, J. L. (1994). Administering justice in the
family. Journal of Family Psychology, 8, 254-273.
Rovine, M. J. (1994). Estimating nonshared environment using sibling discrepancy scores. In E. M.
Hetherington, D. Reiss, & R. Plomin (Eds.), Separate social worlds of siblings (pp. 33-62). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Stoneman, Z., Brody, G. H., & MacKinnon, C. E.
(1984). Naturalistic observations of children's
roles and activities while playing with their siblings and friends. Child Development, 60, 1519—
1528.
Sroufe, L. A., & Fleeson, J. (1988). The coherence of
family relationships. In R. A. Hinde & J. Stevenson-Hinde (Eds.), Relationships within families:
Mutual influences (pp. 27-47). Oxford, England:
Clarendon Press.
Teti, D. M., & Abbard, K. E. (1989). Security of
attachment and infant-sibling relationships: A laboratory study. Child Development, 60, 1519-1528.
Teti, D. M., Gibbs, E. D., & Bond, L. A. (1989).
Sibling interaction, birth spacing and intellectual
development. In P. Zukow (Ed.), Sibling relationships across cultures (pp. 117-139). New York:
Springer-Verlag.
Received April 24, 1994
Accepted April 25, 1994
•