Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel
The online version of this article (https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-019-01080-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Measures of social network position provide unique social and relational information yet have not been used extensively by researchers who study peer relationships. This study explored two measures—social network prestige and social network centrality—to improve conceptualization of their similarities, differences, and meaning within a peer relationships context. Prestige and centrality were computed from friendship nominations (N = 396 6th graders; 48% girls; 49% White) and participants nominated peers on several social indicators (e.g., aggressive, popular). Two example classroom networks were examined to visually depict social network position. Associations between measures of social network position and social indicators were examined using correlations and latent profile analysis. Latent profile analysis identified three profiles based on the social indicators, which differentially related to prestige and centrality. Overall, prestigious youth were generally well-liked, prosocial, and leaders, whereas central youth were powerful and aggressive. The results strengthen the conceptualization of these network-based measures, allowing them to be more readily used by peer relationships researchers to understand youth’s interaction patterns and behaviors.
Log in om toegang te krijgen
Met onderstaand(e) abonnement(en) heeft u direct toegang:
Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc.
Andrews, N. C. Z., Hanish, L. D., Updegraff, K. A., Martin, C. L., & Santos, C. E. (2016). Targeted victimization: exploring linear and curvilinear associations between social network prestige and victimization. Journal of Youth Adolescence, 45, 1772–1785. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-016-0450-1. CrossRef
Bakk, Z., & Vermunt, J. K. (2016). Robustness of stepwise latent class modeling with continuous distal outcomes. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 23, 21–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2014.955104.
Bonacich, P. (1987). Power and centrality: a family of measures. American Journal of Sociology, 92, 1170–1182. CrossRef
Borgatti, S. P., & Halgin, D. S. (2011). On network theory. Organization Science, 22, 1168–1181. CrossRef
Butts, C. T. (2008). Social network analysis: a methodological introduction. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 11(1), 13–41. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-839X.2007.00241.x. CrossRef
Butts, C. T. (2013). sna: Tools for social network analysis. R package version 2.3-1. http://cran.r-project.org/package=sna.
Cairns, R. B., Cairns, B. D., Neckerman, H. J., Gest, S. D., & Gariepy, J. (1988). Social networks and aggressive behavior: peer support or peer rejection? Developmental Psychology, 24, 815–823. CrossRef
Cillessen, A. H. N. (2007). New perspectives on social networks in the study of peer relations. New Directions for Child Adolescent Development, 118, 91–100. CrossRef
Csardi, R., & Nepusz, T. (2006). The igraph software package for complex network research. Inter Journal Complex Systems, 1695, http://igraph.org.
Dawes, M., & Malamut, S. (2018). No one is safe: victimization experiences of high-status youth. Adolescent Research Review, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40894-018-0103-6.
Dubow, E. F. (1988). Aggressive behavior and peer social status of elementary school children. Aggressive Behavior, 14, 315–324. CrossRef
Enders, C. K. (2013). Dealing with missing data in developmental research. Child Development Perspectives, 7, 27–31. CrossRef
Freeman, L. C. (1978). Centrality in social networks: conceptual clarification. Social Networks, 1, 215–239. CrossRef
Kornienko, O., & Granger, D. A. (2018). Peer networks, psychobiology of stress response, and adolescent development. In R. Hopcroft (Ed.), The oxford handbook of evolution, biology, and society (pp. 327–348). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Kornienko, O., Santos, C. E., & Updegraff, K. A. (2015). Friendship networks and ethnic-racial identity development: contributions of social network analysis. In: C. E. Santos, A. J. Umaña-Taylor (Eds.), Studying ethnic identity: methodological and conceptual approaches across disciplines. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Kreager, D. A., Rulison, K., & Moody, J. (2011). Delinquency and the structure of adolescent peer groups. Criminology, 49, 95–127. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2010.00219.x. CrossRef
Magnusson, D. (1998). The logic and implications of a person-oriented approach. In R. B. Cairns, L. R. Bergman & J. Kagan (Eds), Methods and models for studying the individual (pp. 33–64). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
McDonald, K. L., & Asher, S. R. (2018). Peer acceptance, peer rejection, and popularity: social-cognitive and behavioral perspectives. In W. M. Bukowski, B. Laursen & K. H. Rubin (Eds), Handbook of peer interactions, relationships, and groups (pp. 429–446). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Musiał, K., Kazienko, P., & Bródka, P. (2009). User position measures in social networks. The 3rd SNA-KDD Workshop’09, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1145/1731011.1731017.
Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2012). Mplus user’s guide. 7th ed. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
Poulin, F., & Dishion, T. J. (2008). Methodological issues in the use of peer sociometric nominations with middle school youth. Social Development, 17, 908–921. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9507.2008.00473.x. CrossRef
Ray, G. E., Graham, J. A., & Cohen, R. (2003). The importance of relationship information for children’s evaluations of peers and social situations. In J. Z. Arlsdale (Ed.), Trends in social psychology (pp. 17–36). New York, NY: Nova Science Publishers.
Reynolds, A. D., & Crea, T. M. (2015). Peer influence processes for youth delinquency and depression. Journal of Adolescent, 43, 83–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2015.05.013. CrossRef
Robins, G., & Morris, M. (2007). Advances in exponential random graph (p*) models. Soc Netw orks, 29, 169–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2006.08.004. CrossRef
Rodkin, P. C., & Ahn, H.-J. (2009). Social networks derived from affiliations and friendships, multi-informant and self-reports: stability, concordance, placement of aggressive and unpopular children, and centrality. Social Development, 18, 556–576. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9507.2008.00505.x. CrossRef
Salancik, G. R. (1995). Wanted: a good network theory of organization. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 345–349. CrossRef
Scott, J. (2000). Social network analysis: a handbook. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc.
van der Ploeg, R., Steglich, C., & Veenstra, R. (2019). The way bullying works: how new ties facilitate the mutual reinforcement of status and bullying in elementary schools. Social Networks, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2018.12.006.
Veenstra, R., Dijkstra, J. K., & Kreager, D. A. (2018). Pathways, networks, and norms: a sociological perspective on peer research. In W. M. Bukowski, B. Laursen & K. H. Rubin (Eds), Handbook of peer interactions, relationships and groups. 2nd ed (pp. 45–63). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: methods and application. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. CrossRef
Zhang, F., You, Z., Fan, C., Gao, C., Cohen, R., Hsueh, Y., & Zhou, Z. (2014). Friendship quality, social preference, proximity prestige, and self-perceived social competence: interactive influences on children’s loneliness. Journal of School Psychology, 52, 511–526. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2014.06.001. CrossRef
Zhao, Y., Yu, H., Zhang, W., Zhang, W., & Zhu, Z. (2015). A social network model with proximity prestige property. Journal of Applied Analysis Computation, 5, 177–188. https://doi.org/10.11948/2015016.
- Prestigious Youth are Leaders but Central Youth are Powerful: What Social Network Position Tells us About Peer Relationships
Naomi C. Z. Andrews
- Springer US
Journal of Youth and Adolescence
A Multidisciplinary Research Publication
Print ISSN: 0047-2891
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-6601