have shown that parents view shy, wary, and anxious behavior as indicating social immaturity and thus often express negative attitudes toward the behavior (e.g., Hane et al., 2008; Rubin et al., 2009; Tani et al., 2014; van Zalk et al., 2011). When children display shy behavior in social settings, parents tend to respond with worry, disappointment, and rejection (Chen et al., 1998; Rubin et al., 2002; Tani et al., 2014). Moreover, parents may use high‐power and coercive strategies, such as direct command, reprimand, and punishment, in their interactions with children in an effort to help them reduce shy behavior (Chen et al., 1998; Rubin et al., 1999).
In many group‐oriented cultures, children are encouraged to learn behaviors that are conducive to interpersonal harmony and group well‐being, such as cooperation, conforming to social norms, and self‐constraint, whereas independence, self‐direction, and positive self‐regard are not highly valued in socialization (Greenfield et al., 2006). Accordingly, shyness seems to be more accepted in group‐oriented cultures than in Western individualistic cultures. Chen, Rubin et al. (1997), for example, found in a sample of school‐age children in China that shyness was positively associated with maternal acceptance and negatively associated with maternal rejection. Chen et al. (1997) reported that shyness was negatively associated with parental high‐power parenting attitudes (e.g., “I do not allow my child to question my decisions,” “I believe that scolding and criticism make my child improve”) in Chinese children. Kim et al. (2008) found shyness was positively associated with social support from parents in Korea, whereas the association was not significant in Australian children. These results indicate that, unlike their Western counterparts, shy children in East Asia receive parental support, experience little pressure from parents to change their behavior, and, in general, live in a relatively desirable social environment.
Different cultural values are also reflected in peer attitudes toward social withdrawal. In Western societies, shyness is typically associated with negative peer attitudes, such as peer rejection or exclusion, because shy children are often seen by peers as incompetent and deviant (Rubin et al., 2009). In societies where social assertiveness and self‐expression are less valued, peers tend to have more positive perceptions of shyness and are more likely to accept shy children. Different peer attitudes toward children’s shyness have been found in a series of studies conducted by Chen and colleagues in the early 1990s in Canada and China (e.g., Chen et al., 1992; Chen et al., 1997). In an observational study conducted in 1996–1997 with samples of four‐year‐olds, Chen, DeSouza et al. (2006) found that peers were more likely to use direct demands, verbal teasing, or other negative social strategies when making voluntary initiations to shy children than to non‐shy children in Canada, whereas peers used similar strategies in their initiations to shy and non‐shy children in China. When shy children made social initiation, peers were more likely to display overt rejection, disagreement, and intentionally ignoring in Canada but responded more positively by showing approval and support in China.
It should be noted that social attitudes toward shyness in Chinese children have become increasingly negative in recent years as China has changed rapidly to a competitive market‐oriented society in which individual assertiveness and initiative‐taking are required to adapt and achieve success in the environment. For example, Chen and colleagues (2014) and Yan et al. (2016) found in urban Chinese samples that children’s shyness was positively associated with parental power‐assertive parenting and negatively associated with parental support. In addition, several recent studies showed that shyness in childhood and adolescence was positively associated with peer rejection in urban China (e.g., Chen et al., 2005; Liu et al., 2015; Liu et al., 2018).
Developmental outcomes.
According to the contextual‐developmental perspective, culture may affect the functional meaning of children’s behaviors as indicated in their developmental outcomes. In societies where shyness is viewed as an undesirable characteristic, children who display shy behavior may receive negative social evaluations, which in turn may make the children feel frustrated and distressed. The adverse social environment and negative reactions of shy children in turn may result in the development of adjustment problems. In societies in which shyness is viewed as more normal or even desirable, however, shy children may receive social support, which helps them learn skills to function in the society, form social relationships, and develop self‐confidence and positive self‐regard. In this environment, shyness may be associated with less problems and more positive developmental outcomes.
Shyness is generally associated with adjustment problems, including social incompetence, academic difficulties, negative self‐regard, and other internalizing problems in Western cultures (e.g., Hughes & Coplan, 2010; Rubin et al., 2009; Schmidt & Buss, 2010). Liu and colleagues (2015), for example, found that shyness is associated with loneliness and depressive symptoms in Canadian children. In a 19‐year longitudinal study, Asendorpf et al. (2008) found that children rated as shy by their parents at 4 to 6 years old experienced more difficulties in establishing career and first stable partnership at the age of 23. Gest (1997) found in a longitudinal study with an American sample that shyness in childhood was associated with poor social relationships, low quality of life, and emotional distress in early adulthood.
Shyness seems to be associated with fewer negative outcomes in more collectivistic and less competitive societies. Kerr et al. (1996), for example, found that shyness was not related to career stability, income, or education level in Swedish men, though it predicted later marriage and parenthood. Kerr and colleagues (1996) explained that Swedish society was not highly competitive due to the well‐established support and welfare system. Moreover, the egalitarian values endorsed in the society might guide people to view shy behavior positively and thus reduced the differences between shy and the non‐shy men. Chen and colleagues (2009, 2020) explored, in a Chinese sample, how behavioral inhibition in toddlerhood, a temperamental antecedent of shyness, was related to social and school adjustment in childhood and adolescence. The results indicated that children who were inhibited at two years of age showed more positive social outcomes, such as peer preference and social integration, and positive school attitudes and academic achievement at age seven. Moreover, inhibited children in China continued to function competently in social and school adjustment in late adolescence. The data on behavioral inhibition in these studies were collected in early 1990s. Recent research (e.g., An & Eggum‐Wilkens, 2019; Liu et al., 2015; Liu et al., 2018; Nelson et al., 2015) suggested similar relations between shyness and adjustment problems in Chinese and North American children. In a study with Indian children, Bowker and Raja (2011) found that shyness was positively associated with loneliness and socioemotional difficulties, although the magnitude of the associations appeared smaller than that in North America. Taken together, findings from research programs in different countries indicate that cultural values may shape, to various extents, the developmental significance of shyness in terms of its relations with adjustment outcomes.
Xu and colleagues (2007) identified two distinct types of shyness in Chinese children, anxious shyness and the regulated shyness. Anxious shyness is a type of shyness that has been studied extensively in Western societies; anxious‐shy children experience fear and low self‐confidence in social situations and are concerned about social evaluation. In contrast, regulated shyness refers to acquiescent, nonassertive, and unassuming behaviors such as “behaving modestly” and “not showing‐off,” in social interactions. Different from anxious‐shy children, regulated‐shy children constrain their social initiative and activities in order to fit in the group and maintain group harmony. It is argued that children displaying regulated shyness are perceived as well‐behaved and polite (Özdemir & Cheah, 2015). A common feature of anxious shyness and regulated shyness is the low frequency of interactions that children display in social settings. According to Xu and Krieg (2014), however, the two types of shyness are associated with different adjustment outcomes. Research results have indicated that regulated shyness is positively associated with higher peer preference, effortful control, and prosocial behavior, and negatively associated with loneliness and internalizing problems, whereas anxious shyness is positively associated with social and psychological difficulties (Xu et al., 2007; Xu et al., 2014; Xu et al., 2008). Özdemir and colleagues (2015) also identified these two types of shyness and found that they were similarly associated with indexes of adjustment among