Top

Gepubliceerd in:

13-07-2020 | Empirical Research

Classroom Status Hierarchy Moderates the Association between Social Dominance Goals and Bullying Behavior in Middle Childhood and Early Adolescence

Auteurs: Bin Pan, Liang Zhang, Linqin Ji, Claire F. Garandeau, Christina Salmivalli, Wenxin Zhang

Gepubliceerd in: Journal of Youth and Adolescence | Uitgave 11/2020

Abstract

Social dominance goals represent desires to be powerful and prominent among peers. Previous studies have documented that endorsing social dominance goals is positively associated with bullying behavior. However, little is known about how classroom context moderates the social dominance goals–bullying association. The present study examined the role of classroom status hierarchy in the longitudinal association between social dominance goals and bullying in a sample of 1,603 children attending 17 grade 3 classrooms (n = 558, 46.2% girls, M_age = 9.33 years, SD = 0.44), 15 grade 4 classrooms (n = 491, 45.0% girls, M_age = 10.31 years, SD = 0.38) and 16 grade 7 classrooms (n = 554, 49.3% girls, M_age = 13.2 years, SD = 0.46) in China, followed for 1 year. Classroom peer status hierarchy was assessed by the within-classroom standard deviation in perceived popularity. Social dominance goals were obtained through self-reports. Bullying was measured via peer nomination. The multilevel models revealed that social dominance goals at Wave 1 predicted increases in bullying at Wave 2 only in classrooms with higher status hierarchies, after controlling for gender, grade, classroom size, and classroom gender distribution. These findings indicate that children who strive for social dominance goals are more likely to bully others when power is less equally distributed in the classroom.

vorige artikel Pubertal Synchrony and Depressive Symptoms: Differences by Race and Sex

volgende artikel Physical Fighting and Leisure Activities among Norwegian Adolescents—Investigating Co-occurring Changes from 2015 to 2018

Ahn, H. J., Garandeau, C. F., & Rodkin, P. C. (2010). Effects of classroom embeddedness and density on the social status of aggressive and victimized children. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 30(1), 76–101. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431609350922.CrossRef

Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: testing and interpreting interactions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Caravita, S. C., & Cillessen, A. H. N. (2012). Agentic or communal? Associations between interpersonal goals, popularity, and bullying in middle childhood and early adolescence. Social Development, 21(2), 376–395. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9507.2011.00632.x.CrossRef

Chen, G., Kong, Y., Deater-Deckard, K., & Zhang, W. (2018). Bullying victimization heightens cortisol response to psychosocial stress in Chinese children. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 46(5), 1051–1059. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-017-0366-6.CrossRefPubMed

Chen, L., Zhang, W., Ji, L., & Deater‐Deckard, K. (2019). Developmental trajectories of Chinese adolescents’ relational aggression: associations with changes in social‐psychological adjustment. Child Development, 90(6), 2153–2170. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13090.CrossRefPubMed

Cillessen, A. H. N., & Marks, P. (2011). Conceptualizing and measuring popularity. In A. Cillessen, D. Schwartz & L. Mayeux (Eds), Popularity in the peer system (pp. 25–56). New York, NY: Guilford.

Cillessen, A. H. N., & Mayeux, L. (2004). From censure to reinforcement: developmental changes in the association between aggression and social status. Child Development, 75(1), 147–163. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2004.00660.x.CrossRefPubMed

Custers, R., & Aarts, H. (2010). The unconscious will: how the pursuit of goals operates outside of conscious awareness. Science, 329(5987), 47–50. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1188595.CrossRefPubMed

de Bruyn, E. H., Cillessen, A. H. N., & Wissink, I. B. (2010). Associations of peer acceptance and perceived popularity with bullying and victimization in early adolescence. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 30(4), 543–566. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431609340517.CrossRef

Elgar, F. J., Pickett, K. E., Pickett, W., Craig, W., Molcho, M., Hurrelmann, K., & Lenzi, M. (2013). School bullying, homicide and income inequality: a cross-national pooled time series analysis. International Journal of Public Health, 58(2), 237–245. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00038-012-0380-y.CrossRefPubMed

Ellis, B. J., Volk, A. A., Gonzalez, J. M., & Embry, D. D. (2016). The meaningful roles intervention: an evolutionary approach to reducing bullying and increasing prosocial behavior. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 26(4), 622–637. https://doi.org/10.1111/jora.12243.CrossRefPubMed

Garandeau, C. F., Ahn, H. J., & Rodkin, P. C. (2011). The social status of aggressive students across contexts: the role of classroom status hierarchy, academic achievement, and grade. Developmental Psychology, 47(6), 1699–1710. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025271.CrossRefPubMed

Garandeau, C. F., Lee, I. A., & Salmivalli, C. (2014). Inequality matters: classroom status hierarchy and adolescents’ bullying. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 43(7), 1123–1133. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-013-0040-4.CrossRefPubMed

Garandeau, C. F., Yanagida, T., Vermande, M. M., Strohmeier, D., & Salmivalli, C. (2019). Classroom size and the prevalence of bullying and victimization: testing three explanations for the negative association. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 2125 https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02125.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Gest, S. D., & Rodkin, P. C. (2011). Teaching practices and elementary classroom peer ecologies. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 32(5), 288–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2011.02.004.CrossRef

Gommans, R., & Cillessen, A. H. N. (2015). Nominating under constraints: a systematic comparison of unlimited and limited peer nomination methodologies in elementary school. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 39, 77–86. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025414551761.CrossRef

Halevy, N., Chou, E. Y., & Galinsky, A. D. (2011). A functional model of hierarchy. Organizational Psychology Review, 1(1), 32–52. https://doi.org/10.1177/2041386610380991.CrossRef

Hawley, P. H. (1999). The ontogenesis of social dominance: a strategy-based evolutionary perspective. Developmental Review, 19(1), 97–132. https://doi.org/10.1006/drev.1998.0470.CrossRef

Huitsing, G., Snijders, T. A., Van Duijn, M. A., & Veenstra, R. (2014). Victims, bullies, and their defenders: a longitudinal study of the coevolution of positive and negative networks. Development and Psychopathology, 26(3), 645–659. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579414000297.CrossRefPubMed

Jarvinen, D. W., & Nicholls, J. G. (1996). Adolescents’ social goals, beliefs about the causes of social success, and satisfaction in peer relations. Developmental Psychology, 32(3), 435–441. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.32.3.435.CrossRef

Ji, L., Zhang, W., & Jones, K. (2016). Chinese children’s experience of and attitudes towards bullying and victimization: A cross-cultural comparison between China and England. In P. Smith, K. Kwak & Y. Toda. (Eds), School bullying in different cultures: Eastern and western perspectives (pp. 170–188). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

Julian, M. W. (2001). The consequences of ignoring multilevel data structures in nonhierarchical covariance modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 8(3), 325–352. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0803_1.CrossRef

Kiefer, S. M., & Wang, J. H. (2016). Associations of coolness and social goals with aggression and engagement during adolescence. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 44, 52–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2016.02.007.CrossRef

Kiefer, S., & Ryan, A. (2008). Striving for social dominance over peers: the implications for academic adjustment during early adolescence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(2), 417–428. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.100.2.417.CrossRef

Kuppens, S., Grietens, H., Onghena, P., Michiels, D., & Subramanian, S. V. (2008). Individual and classroom variables associated with relational aggression in elementary-school aged children: a multilevel analysis. Journal of School Psychology, 46(6), 639–660. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2008.06.005.CrossRefPubMed

LaFontana, K. M., & Cillessen, A. H. (2010). Developmental changes in the priority of perceived status in childhood and adolescence. Social Development, 19(1), 130–147. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9507.2008.00522.x.CrossRef

Laninga-Wijnen, L., Harakeh, Z., Dijkstra, J. K., Veenstra, R., & Vollebergh, W. (2020). Who sets the aggressive popularity norm in classrooms? It’s the number and strength of aggressive, prosocial, and bi-Strategic adolescents. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 48(1), 13–27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-019-00571-0.CrossRefPubMed

Laninga-Wijnen, L., Harakeh, Z., Garandeau, C. F., Dijkstra, J. K., Veenstra, R., & Vollebergh, W. A. (2019). Classroom popularity hierarchy predicts prosocial and aggressive popularity norms across the school year. Child Development, 90(5), 637–653. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13228.CrossRef

Li, Y., & Hu, Y. (2018). How to attain a popularity goal? Examining the mediation effects of popularity determinants and behaviors. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 47(9), 1842–1852. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-018-0882-x.CrossRefPubMed

Li, Y., Xie, H., & Shi, J. (2012). Chinese and American children’s perceptions of popularity determinants: cultural differences and behavioral correlates. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 36(6), 420–429. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025412446393.CrossRef

Lindenberg, S. (2013). Social rationality, self-regulation, and well-being: The regulatory significance of needs, goals, and the self. In R. Wittek, T. A. B. Snijders & V. Nee (Eds), Handbook of rational choice social research (pp. 72–112). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Little, T. D. (2013). Longitudinal structural equation modeling. New York: Guilford Press.

Melgar, N., & Rossi, M. (2012). A cross‐country analysis of the risk factors for depression at the micro and macro levels. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 71(2), 354–376. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1536-7150.2012.00831.x.CrossRef

Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2012). Mplus statistical modeling software. Los Angeles: Muthén & Muthén.

Niu, L., Jin, S., Li, L., & French, D. C. (2016). Popularity and social preference in Chinese adolescents: associations with social and behavioral adjustment. Social Development, 25(4), 828–845. https://doi.org/10.1111/sode.12172.CrossRef

Ojanen, T., Findley, D., & Fuller, S. (2012). Physical and relational aggression in early adolescence: associations with narcissism, temperament, and social goals. Aggressive Behavior, 38(2), 99–107. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21413.CrossRefPubMed

Ojanen, T., & Findley-Van Nostrand, D. (2014). Social goals, aggression, peer preference, and popularity: longitudinal links during middle school. Developmental Psychology, 50, 2134–2143. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037137.CrossRefPubMed

Olthof, T., Goossens, F. A., Vermande, M. M., Aleva, E. A., & van der Meulen, M. (2011). Bullying as strategic behavior: relations with desired and acquired dominance in the peer group. Journal of School Psychology, 49(3), 339–359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2011.03.003.CrossRefPubMed

Olweus, D. (2013). School bullying: development and some important challenges. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 9, 751–780. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-050212-185516.CrossRefPubMed

Pellegrini, A. D. (2002). Bullying, victimization, and sexual harassment during the transition to middle school. Educational Psychologist, 37(3), 151–163. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3703_2.CrossRef

Pellegrini, A. D., & Long, J. D. (2002). A longitudinal study of bullying, dominance, and victimization during the transition from primary school through secondary school. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 20(2), 259–280. https://doi.org/10.1348/026151002166442.CrossRef

Pickett, K. E., & Wilkinson, R. G. (2015). Income inequality and health: a causal review. Social Science & Medicine, 128, 316–326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.12.031.CrossRef

Pouwels, J. L., van Noorden, T. H., & Caravita, S. C. (2019). Defending victims of bullying in the classroom: the role of moral responsibility and social costs. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 84, 103831. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2019.103831.CrossRef

Reijntjes, A., Vermande, M., Olthof, T., Goossens, F. A., Van De Schoot, R., Aleva, L., & Van Der Meulen, M. (2013). Costs and benefits of bullying in the context of the peer group: a three wave longitudinal analysis. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 41(8), 1217–1229. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-013-9759-3.CrossRefPubMed

Rose, A. J., & Rudolph, K. D. (2006). A review of sex differences in peer relationship processes: potential trade-offs for the emotional and behavioral development of girls and boys. Psychological Bulletin, 132(1), 98–131. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.132.1.98.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Salmivalli, C., & Peets, K. (2008). Bullies, victims, and bully–victim relationships. In K. Rubin, W. Bukowski & B. Laursen (Eds), Handbook of peer interactions, relationships, and groups (pp. 322–340). New York: Guilford Press.

Salmivalli, C., & Voeten, M. (2004). Connections between attitudes, group norms, and behaviour in bullying situations. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 28(3), 246–258. https://doi.org/10.1080/01650250344000488.CrossRef

Schwartz, D., Tom, S. R., Chang, L., Xu, Y., Duong, M. T., & Kelly, B. M. (2010). Popularity and acceptance as distinct dimensions of social standing for Chinese children in Hong Kong. Social Development, 19(4), 681–697. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9507.2009.00558.x.CrossRef

Sijtsema, J. J., Lindenberg, S. M., Ojanen, T. J., & Salmivalli, C. (2020). Direct aggression and the balance between status and affection goals in adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-019-01166-0.CrossRefPubMed

Sijtsema, J. J., Veenstra, R., Lindenberg, S., & Salmivalli, C. (2009). Empirical test of bullies’ status goals: assessing direct goals, aggression, and prestige. Aggressive Behavior, 35(1), 57–67. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.20282.CrossRefPubMed

Smith, P. K., López-Castro, L., Robinson, S., & Görzig, A. (2019). Consistency of gender differences in bullying in cross-cultural surveys. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 45, 33–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2018.04.006.CrossRef

te Grotenhuis, M., Pelzer, B., Eisinga, R., Nieuwenhuis, R., Schmidt-Catran, A., & Konig, R. (2017). When size matters: advantages of weighted effect coding in observational studies. International Journal of Public Health, 62, 163–167. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00038-016-0901-1.CrossRef

Triandis, H. C. (1995). Individualism & collectivism. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Tseng, W. L., Banny, A. M., Kawabata, Y., Crick, N. R., & Gau, S. S. F. (2013). A cross‐lagged structural equation model of relational aggression, physical aggression, and peer status in a Chinese culture. Aggressive Behavior, 39(4), 301–315. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21480.CrossRefPubMed

Veenstra, R., Lindenberg, S., Zijlstra, B. J., De Winter, A. F., Verhulst, F. C., & Ormel, J. (2007). The dyadic nature of bullying and victimization: testing a dual‐perspective theory. Child Development, 78(6), 1843–1854. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.01102.x.CrossRefPubMed

Volk, A. A., Camilleri, J. A., Dane, A. V., & Marini, Z. A. (2012). Is adolescent bullying an evolutionary adaptation? Aggressive Behavior, 38(3), 222–238. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42380-018-0005-y.CrossRefPubMed

Wright, M. F., Li, Y., & Shi, J. (2014). Chinese adolescents’ social status goals: associations with behaviors and attributions for relational aggression. Youth & Society, 46(4), 566–588. https://doi.org/10.1177/0044118X12448800.CrossRef

Zhang, W., Chen, L., & Chen, G. (2016). Research on bullying in mainland China. In P. Smith, K. Kwak & Y. Toda. (Eds), School bullying in different cultures: Eastern and western perspectives (pp. 113–132). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Zwaan, M., Dijkstra, J. K., & Veenstra, R. (2013). Status hierarchy, attractiveness hierarchy and sex ratio: three contextual factors explaining the status–aggression link among adolescents. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 37(3), 211–221. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025412471018.CrossRef

Titel: Classroom Status Hierarchy Moderates the Association between Social Dominance Goals and Bullying Behavior in Middle Childhood and Early Adolescence
Auteurs: Bin Pan
Liang Zhang
Linqin Ji
Claire F. Garandeau
Christina Salmivalli
Wenxin Zhang
Publicatiedatum: 13-07-2020
Uitgeverij: Springer US
Gepubliceerd in: Journal of Youth and Adolescence / Uitgave 11/2020
Print ISSN: 0047-2891
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-6601
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-020-01285-z

Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

Abstract

Log in om toegang te krijgen

Andere artikelen Uitgave 11/2020

Conflict Resolution and Emotional Expression in Mother-Preadolescent Dyads: Longitudinal Associations with Children’s Socioemotional Development

Internalizing and Externalizing Behavior Problems and Student Engagement in Elementary and Secondary School Students

Effortful Control and Community Violence Exposure as Predictors of Developmental Trajectories of Self-serving Cognitive Distortions in Adolescence: A Growth Mixture Modeling Approach

Revealing the Transactional Associations among Teacher-Child Relationships, Peer Rejection and Peer Victimization in Early Adolescence

Black Girl Blues: The Roles of Racial Socialization, Gendered Racial Socialization, and Racial Identity on Depressive Symptoms among Black Girls

Peers and Homophobic Attitudes in Adolescence: Examining Selection and Influence Processes in Friendships and Antipathies