Gender Differences in Child and Adolescent Social Withdrawal: A Commentary

Abstract

In a manuscript entitled, “Bashful boys and coy girls: A review of gender differences in childhood shyness” Doey et al. (2013) suggest that shyness and its related constructs pose a greater developmental risk for boys compared to girls. They support this claim by citing empirical evidence suggesting that shy and anxiously withdrawn boys are responded to more negatively by important others (i.e., parents, peers, and teachers) and that the relationship between internalizing problems and anxious withdrawal is stronger for boys compared to girls. The principal aim of our commentary is to provide a critical examination of Doey et al.’s conclusions vis-à-vis gender differences in child and adolescent shyness. In this response, we begin by providing important theoretical background regarding shyness and its related constructs. Next, we critically examine the two main arguments the authors use in support of their conclusion through a review of existing empirical and theoretical work as well as the presentation of data from The Friendship Project. These data were analyzed with the specific purpose of providing an empirical test of the hypotheses implicit in Doey et al.’s primary arguments: 1) shy and anxiously withdrawn boys are responded to more negatively than girls and 2) the association between anxious withdrawal and internalizing problems is stronger for boys compared to girls. Our results indicate mixed support for these two claims. Finally, we conclude by suggesting new directions for future researchers interested in clarifying the relationship between gender and both the correlates and outcomes of childhood shyness.

Shyness, Preference for Solitude, and Adolescent Internalizing: The Roles of Maternal, Paternal, and Best‐Friend Support

“…While we did control for gender in our models, research has consistently shown that, beginning in adolescence, girls experience higher levels of internalizing problems than boys (e.g., Hankin et al., ). Additionally, researchers have suggested that withdrawal may be more strongly related to negative socio‐emotional outcomes for boys compared with girls (e.g., Doey, Coplan, & Kingsbury, ), though there is some debate (Gazelle, Peter, & Karkavandi, ; Rubin & Barstead, ). Larger samples that afford the opportunity to explore gender as a moderator of the associations tested in the present study would also represent a fruitful next step.…”

Distinguishing types of social withdrawal in children: Internalizing and externalizing outcomes of conflicted shyness versus social disinterest across childhood

“…However, a recent review found that shyness is more strongly associated with internalizing symptoms among boys relative to girls, although it also notes some contrary findings (Doey et al, 2014). However, the conclusions of this review have been challenged by others who argued that the narrative review approach in Doey et al (2014) was not sufficiently objective (Gazelle et al, 2014), or that the studies included were too broad and focused not only on childhood shyness per se, but on social withdrawal in general (Rubin & Barstead, 2014). Rubin & Barstead (2014) also provided additional evidence that anxious withdrawal in sixth grade is associated with more anxiety, but only for girls, and that in eighth grade, anxious withdrawal is associated with both depression and anxiety for girls and boys.…”

“…However, the conclusions of this review have been challenged by others who argued that the narrative review approach in Doey et al (2014) was not sufficiently objective (Gazelle et al, 2014), or that the studies included were too broad and focused not only on childhood shyness per se, but on social withdrawal in general (Rubin & Barstead, 2014). Rubin & Barstead (2014) also provided additional evidence that anxious withdrawal in sixth grade is associated with more anxiety, but only for girls, and that in eighth grade, anxious withdrawal is associated with both depression and anxiety for girls and boys. However, it is somewhat difficult to extrapolate from these prior findings to the current study as the conclusions of these prior reviews were, by and large, not based on studies that differentiated between conflicted shyness and social disinterest, or adjusted for the effects of both.…”

Do not forget the boys – gender differences in children living in high HIV-affected communities in South Africa and Malawi in a longitudinal, community-based study

“…Gender is an important driver of child outcomes (Park & Brondi, 2015 ). Gender differences have been found in in educational outcomes, cognition, language (Wallace et al., 2015 ), physical growth (Wamani, Astrøm, Peterson, Tumwine, & Tylleskär, 2007 ), socialisation (Rubin & Barstead, 2014 ) and parental interactions (Barbu et al., 2015 ; Park & Brondi, 2015 ). Thus, gender differences have been well documented, but all too often studies on children conflate gender and thereby hide or overlook any gender-specific findings which can guide differentiation in response and provision (Sherr, Mueller, & Varrall, 2009 ).…”