RUNNING HEAD : PSYCHOLOGICAL KINSHIP

Pulling from the foundations of research on social support and resilience indicating that those who receive extensive social support are more resilient, this research, consisting of two studies, primarily examined the differences between individuals who are only children and individuals who have siblings in their formation of social support networks. While it is true that only children inherently have less immediate kin available, this research explored the formation of relationships in which non-kin come to be psychologically considered as kin, or psychological kinship. In Study 1, qualitative interviews were conducted in order to develop a working Kinship scale. Study 2, an online study conducted with 480 English-speaking adults, assessed selfreported resilience, social support, and experiences of psychological kinship. Contrary to original hypotheses, results indicated that while only children did not match people with siblings in their levels of social support and resilience, they did report experiencing equal amounts of psychological kinship. Overall, psychological kin relationships appear to be an important aspect of social support networks and therefore meaningfully contribute to one’s resiliency. PSYCHOLOGICAL KINSHIP 3 “I came up with this one thing And I don’t believe I’m wrong That nobody, But nobody Can make it out here alone. ” -Excerpt from “Alone” by Dr. Maya Angelou (1994) “Alone” is a state, but it is also a feeling. And so it is true that most states of being are defined from within the self and therefore cannot be separated from emotion and perspective. It is this state, and the intense emotion associated with it, that Dr. Maya Angelou discusses in her poem “Alone. ” Her words do not only resonate emotionally and artistically. From a psychological perspective, her words can also be taken quite literally. Despite the importance of independence and self-reliance, it is well established within the psychological literature that people need people. According to Maslow’s (1958) hierarchy of needs, the need for affiliation comes before self-actualization, or self-understanding, and therefore before complete identity formation. For the majority of human beings, the solution to this need for affiliation lies partly within family relationships, particularly with siblings, who can be depended on for support throughout one’s lifetime. However, there are individuals whose family structures do not include a sibling— “only children. ” Within popular culture, the subject of ‘being an only-child’ is approached with varied, yet normally stigmatized analysis. Only children have been vilified as selfish and uncooperative, yet they have also been hailed as more intelligent and independent than children with siblings (Milevsky, 2015, June 10; Sandler, 2013, June 8). Considering that the percentage of childbearing women in the United States who have only children has increased from 10% in 1976 to 22% in 2014 (Pew Research Center, 2015a), the question of how only children form their social support networks becomes especially salient. With this increasing number of onlyPSYCHOLOGICAL KINSHIP 4 children in industrialized countries, including as many as 16 million households in the United States (Vespa, Lewis, & Kreider, 2013), many parents and experts alike seem to want to know the ‘right’ answer about whether or not only children are doomed or advantaged. Be that as it may, when viewed objectively, it seems as if many of these experts may be looking for an answer that does not exist, creating a false dichotomy between two groups that are ultimately more similar than different. There are numerous individual differences including socio-economic status, gender, and family environment that render true evaluation of these broad disparities between two variable groups nearly impossible. Instead, it would be beneficial for researchers to investigate the specific mechanisms by which only children and individuals with siblings turn out to be more similar than different. In an effort to focus on these mechanisms, the proposed research explores whether only children experience similar levels of social support as individuals with siblings as a result of relationships formed outside the biological/legal family structure. Consequently, this research also explores the implications of the presence, or lack thereof, of a robust social support network on a person’s level of resilience to life adversity. Review of the Literature Decades of research have attempted to discern whether only children differ from children with siblings in distinctly adaptive or maladaptive ways, yet most research seems to find agespecific or inconclusive evidence at best (Falbo, 2012; Trent & Spitze, 2011). A study done by Kitzmann, Cohen, and Lockwood (2002) collected data related to sibling status and social competence from 139 children in an elementary school setting, and found that only children had similar numbers of close, quality friendships, but were generally less liked by their classmates. PSYCHOLOGICAL KINSHIP 5 Furthermore, these only children were cited to be more likely subjects of victimization, but also more aggressive toward their peers. However, it seems odd that within this sample only children would simultaneously be both victims and aggressors. Therefore, it is possible that the sample of only children from one specific elementary school in a university lab-school setting is not sufficiently representative of the larger population. In addition, Bobbitt-Zehere and Downey (2010) examined a sample of approximately 13,500 adolescents and found that any social skills deficits observed in early childhood among only children resolve before adolescence. Some of the most extensive research on only children in terms of social adjustment comes from Toni Falbo’s three large-scale meta-analyses of differences between only children and those who have siblings. Her first project (Falbo & Polit, 1986) examined the results of 115 studies, examining outcomes within five different categories: achievement, adjustment, character, intelligence, and sociability. Within this study, Falbo and Polit analyzed 39 studies of adjustment, 30 studies of sociability, and 26 studies of character that compared only children to non-only children. They found that in terms of adjustment and sociability, the two groups were not significantly different. Moreover, Falbo and Polit found that regardless of sibling status, only children are just as likely to have a desirable character as individuals with siblings, supporting the notion that positioning only children in a distinct category, or as a distinct type of personality, from individuals with siblings only creates a false dichotomy and furthers societal stigmatization. This finding was also reinforced by Trent and Spitze (2011) who noted that while only children saw relatives fewer times a year, this was the sole area in which only children significantly differed across age groups from individuals with siblings in terms of frequency and type of social activities. This trend can easily be explained by the fact that only children inherently have fewer traditionally defined relatives than individuals who have siblings. PSYCHOLOGICAL KINSHIP 6 Despite the overall similarity of only children and those with siblings, it does appear that only children are advantaged in a few areas. In a meta-analysis of 43 studies, Falbo and Polit (1986) reported that only children generally received better grades and achieved higher levels of education than non-only children. In addition, out of 16 personality characteristics, Polit and Falbo (1987) reported that only children had significantly higher levels on only two, achievement motivation and self-esteem. Furthermore, looking at literature on the influences of birth order and family size in relation to individual intelligence, Polit and Falbo (1988) found that only children were advantaged in their verbal abilities. However, these data must be considered in light of research showing that mothers with more education tend to have fewer children (Pew Research Center, 2015b). Therefore, these trends could be the result of a larger allocation of family resources when there is a single child and a highly educated mother, or the result of more focused, quality parent attention and interaction (Milevsky, 2015, June 10). Additionally, Falbo (2012) reported that these effect sizes were not significantly different from zero when comparing only children to firstborn children or people from two-child families. Therefore, these differences arise exclusively when comparing only children to children from relatively larger families, and could be the result of many other individual differences that are not accounted for in this literature, such as socio-economic status or family environment. Conceptual Research Origins The current literature on the connections between extended family relationships, social support and resilience, and on the differences in these areas between people who are only children and those who are not, all exists within fairly separate literatures. Therefore, these topics will be examined individually before being synthesized within this investigation. PSYCHOLOGICAL KINSHIP 7 Ultimately, the underlying question of this research is what motivates humans to cultivate, and at times seek out, companionate relationship formation. When investigating any form of motivation within the human species, it is best to turn toward the theories of the foundational psychologist Abraham Maslow and his hierarchy of needs. Maslow established what he termed the “hierarchy of needs” in the 1940’s and 1950’s in an effort to describe a complete theory of human motivation. This hierarchy includes the satisfaction of basic physiological, safety, love and belongingness, esteem, and self-actualization needs (Maslow, 1958). Maslow asserted that each of these needs is contingent upon the other in the order presented,