Psychology Study to Complement 'Thirteen'

Hi everyone – I located an interesting study on child-parent relationships that I believe is extremely relevant to the movie “Thirteen”. The title of the study is “Lying behavior, family functioning, and adjustment in early adolescence,” and although it’s packed with information (some more relevant, some less) it explores several noteworthy correlations regarding child lying and the quality of a parent-child relationship in areas such as (a) communication, (b) trust, and (c) alienation. Not surprisingly, an increase in lying was strongly correlated with less communication and trust, as well as greater alienation. Although relatively intuitive, the researchers provided an intriguing explanation for this phenomenon by suggesting that when a parent knows a child is lying (and has lied several times in the past), the child loses credibility. The parent thus becomes frustrated and chooses to avoid engaging the child, believing conversation will get them both nowhere.

I believe this explanation is emphasized in the movie, particularly after Mel picks up the two girls from ‘the library’. Mel asks the two how studying went and Tracy immediately responds saying she was researching a biosphere project. Evie then explains that she’s researching advance physics. Mel quickly nods her head, acknowledging both responses, and there is an eerie silence between the three of them as they walk towards the car (before the scene cuts to inside the house). It’s as is Mel understands these are thinly veiled lies (advance physics in middle school? Really?) and simply doesn’t want to engage them anymore.

The explanation provided in the study shouldn’t by any means be taken as the only explanation, and in fact, though the study addresses concerns with causality, there are several ‘chicken or egg’ dilemmas that are left unaddressed (i.e. does alienation lead to feelings of betrayal that increases lying which, in turn, decreases trust?)

Nevertheless, it’s a relatively short read and worth looking into if you’re interested in adding some more psyc analysis to your thoughts on “Thirteen”.

Link to study via ProQuest: http://proquest.umi.com/pqdlink?Ver=1&Exp=03-30-2015&FMT=7&DID=1164232161&RQT=309&cfc=1

I tried to comment on Shari's post about the NY Times bullying article, but for some reason it didn't work, so I'm putting it here. As someone who hopes to work in education, this article raised a lot of questions/concerns for me. First, how does a teacher show concern and care for a student while upholding professional teacher-student relationships? How can teachers show that they care, when school days are often not set up with time for adult-student mentoring or non-academic conversations? When something like this occurs, who is accountable? How should responsibility be assigned, and by whom? What makes a school a safe place, and how can a safe, caring school be molded?

On a slightly related note, I've been thinking about "Thirteen." There were tons of memorable moments, but one that struck me was the scene where Tracy's teacher informed her that she would have to repeat 7th grade. The thing that bothered me was that none of Tracy's teachers had apparently bothered to give her warning before she failed, or to ask why she had so suddenly changed. Were those teachers oblivious? Was it a matter of not caring? Did they notice and care but not know how to act? If they had acted--which is possible, since it probably doesn't make for exciting cinema--why did their attempts fail? It seems to relate to the article on bullying, because the girl who committed suicide had been bullied for only three months, and in the movie, Tracy's destructiveness happened in about four months. She easily could have been killed or killed herself accidentally any number of times. It shows that within a relatively short period of time, it is easy for a "normal" child/teen to undergo huge changes--and huge consequences--while adults are still trying to decide on a course of action.

NPR Interview with Nikki Reed

I found an interview that NPR did with Nikki Reed, the co-writer and girl who played Evie in Thirteen, which was done after the movie came out. Nikki talks about the way she portrayed her personal experiences in the film versus what her actual life was like. It's about five minutes long, but she has incredible insights and I really suggest listening to it:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1407189

Bullying and suicide...what should a parent's role be?

I saw this really interesting, really sad article on NY Times.com:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/30/us/30bully.html?pagewanted=1&ref=general&src=me

On the one hand, the article brings up important issues surrounding peer influence. A teenage girl actually committed suicide after being bullied and harassed by her classmates. On the other hand, I think the article also brings up questions about what kind of roleparents/guardians/teachers should/can play when their teen is being bullied. How can/should adults intervene in adolescents' peer relations? Could the teenage girl's death have been prevented?

Since we are talking about parenting this week-- I wanted to link you to some good footage from the movie 13, which I REALLY would like you all to see--
while this is a clip about the "making" of the movie- there is loads of good stuff in it-- pay very close attention at 5:15-- critical point in the movie!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HEAc1k4BDkE

The joys of being a pre-teen

Here's an article on the "Baby Bratz" (is it possible to say that as a singular noun?) with a thong:
http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/story?section=news/bizarre&id=3765173

It carries a BOTTLE. And wears a THONG. Here's a picture:

http://www.weblogsinc.com/common/images/5607149836182359.JPG?0.19433504057705142

But, frankly, just seeing the dolls themselves is enough to freak me out:
http://z.about.com/d/toys/1/5/L/9/Babyz.jpg

Hmmmm.

In other news, some words of wisdom from Mike Jeffries, CEO of Hollister, Aeropostale, and Abercrombie and Fitch, excerpted from a Salon.com article:

Our first bump came when I mentioned the 2002 uproar over the company's thongs for middle-school girls, which had "Eye Candy" and "Wink Wink" printed on their fronts. "That was a bunch of bullshit," he said, sweating profusely. "People said we were cynical, that we were sexualizing little girls. But you know what? I still think those are cute underwear for little girls. And I think anybody who gets on a bandwagon about thongs for little girls is crazy. Just crazy! There's so much craziness about sex in this country. It's nuts! I can see getting upset about letting your girl hang out with a bunch of old pervs, but why would you let your girl hang out with a bunch of old pervs?"

I still think those are cute underwear for little girls.
Oh, okay.
Source

Relevant Articles from Jezebel

Jezebel is a daily blog that is an off-shoot of Gawker, a popular NYC blog. It caters to Vassar sort of women, but not in that annoying preachy/angry feminist sort of way. While their tag line is, "Celebrity, Sex, Fashion for Women," they often delve deeper than Cosmo (and actually critique the majority of magazines for women). While I was browsing the site last night, I came across two different articles that seemed relevant to what we've been discussing in class.

The first one discusses aggression in women, in relation to sports.
http://jezebel.com/5498948/women-behaving-badly-unsportsmanlike-behavior-sparks-debate

And the second one referenced the article below, which is a study recently conducted on "Early Predictors of Girls' Adolescent Sexual Activity"
http://www.girlsinc.org/resources/girls-shape-the-future.html