Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel
Previous studies exploring the link between social status and behavior have predominantly utilized measures that do not provide information regarding toward whom aggression or prosocial behavior is directed. Using a contextualized target-specific approach, this study examined whether high- and low-status adolescents behave differently toward peers of varying levels of status. Participants, aged 11–15 (N = 426, 53 % females), completed measures assessing aggression and prosocial behavior toward each same-sex grademate. A distinct pattern of findings emerged regarding the likeability, popularity, and dominance status of adolescents and their peer targets. Popular adolescents reported more direct aggression, indirect aggression, and prosocial behavior toward popular peers than did unpopular adolescents. Well-accepted adolescents reported more prosocial behavior toward a wider variety of peers than did rejected adolescents. Finally, compared to subordinate adolescents, dominant adolescents reported greater direct and indirect aggression toward dominant than subordinate peers. The results highlight the importance of studying target-specific behavior to better understand the status-behavior link.
Log in om toegang te krijgen
Met onderstaand(e) abonnement(en) heeft u direct toegang:
Adler, P. A., & Adler, P. (1998). Peer power: Preadolescent culture and identity. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple Regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Bjorkqvist, K., Lagerspetz, K. M. J., & Kaukiainen, A. (1992). Do girls manipulate and boys fight? Developmental trends in regard to direct and indirect aggression. Aggressive Behavior,18, 117–127. CrossRef
Bjorkqvist, K., Osterman, K., & Kaukiainen, A. (2000). Social intelligence—empathy = aggression? Aggression and Violent Behavior,5(2), 191–200. CrossRef
Bukowski, W. M., & Abecassis, M. (2007). Self, other, and aggression: The never-ending search for the roots of adaptation. In P. H. Hawley, T. D. Little, & P. C. Rodkin (Eds.), Aggression and adaptation: The bright side to bad behavior (pp. 185–207). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Bukowski, W. M., Gauze, C., Hoza, B., & Newcomb, A. F. (1993). Differences and consistency in relations with same-sex and other-sex peers during early adolescence. Developmental Psychology,29, 255–263. CrossRef
Carlo, G., Hausmann, A., Christiansen, S., & Randall, B. A. (2003). Sociocognitive and behavioral correlates of a measure of prosocial tendencies in adolescents. Journal of Early Adolescence,23(1), 107–134. CrossRef
Closson, L. M. (2009). Aggressive and prosocial behaviors within early adolescent friendship cliques: What’s status got to do with it? Merrill-Palmer Quarterly,55(4), 406–435. CrossRef
Fabes, R. A., Martin, C. L., & Hanish, L. D. (2009). In K. H. Rubin, W. M. Bukowksi, & B. Laursen (Eds.), Handbook of peer interactions, relationships, and groups (pp. 45–62). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Hawley, P. H. (1999). The ontogenesis of social dominance: A strategy-based evolutionary perspective. Developmental Review,19, 97–132. CrossRef
Hawley, P. H. (2003). Prosocial and coercive configurations of resource control in early adolescence: A case for the well-adapted Machiavellian. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly,49(3), 279–309. CrossRef
Hinde, R. A., & Stevenson-Hinde, J. (1987). Interpersonal relationships in child development. Developmental Review,7, 1–21. CrossRef
Hymel, S., Closson, L. M., Caravita, S. C. S., & Vaillancourt, T. (2010). Social status among peers: From sociometric attraction to peer acceptance to perceived popularity. In P. K. Smith & C. Hart (Eds.), Handbook of childhood social development (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Blackwell.
La Freniere, P., & Charlesworth, W. R. (1983). Dominance, attention, and affiliation in a preschool group: A nine-month longitudinal study. Ethology and Sociobiology,4, 55–67. CrossRef
LaFontana, K. M., & Cillessen, A. H. N. (1998). The nature of children’s stereotypes of popularity. Social Development,7(3), 301–320. CrossRef
LaFontana, K. M., & Cillessen, A. H. N. (2010). Developmental changes in the priority of perceived status in childhood and adolescence. Social Development,19(1), 130–147. CrossRef
Lease, A. M., Kennedy, C. A., & Axelrod, J. L. (2002a). Children’s social constructions of popularity. Social Development,11(1), 87–109. CrossRef
Lease, A. M., Musgrove, K. T., & Axelrod, J. L. (2002b). Dimensions of social status in preadolescent peer groups: Likability, perceived popularity, and social dominance. Social Development,11(4), 508–533. CrossRef
Little, T. D., Jones, S. M., Henrich, C. C., & Hawley, P. H. (2003). Disentangling the “whys” from the “whats” of aggressive behavior. International Journal of Behavioral Development,27(2), 122–133. CrossRef
Merten, D. E. (1997). The meaning of meanness: Popularity, competition, and conflict among junior high school girls. Sociology of Education,70, 175–191. CrossRef
Merten, D. E. (2004). Securing her experience: Friendship versus popularity. Feminism and Psychology,14(3), 361–365. CrossRef
Pellegrini, A. D. (2002). Affiliative and aggressive dimensions of dominance and possible functions during early adolescence. Aggression and Violent Behavior,7, 21–31. CrossRef
Puckett, M. B., Aikins, J. W., & Cillessen, A. H. N. (2008). Moderators of the association between relational aggression and perceived popularity. Aggressive Behavior,34, 1–14. CrossRef
Raudenbush, S., Bryk, A., & Congdon, R. (2009). HLM for Windows. Version 6.08. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International Inc.
Roseth, C. J., Pellegrini, A. D., Dupuis, D. N., Bohn, C. M., Hickey, M. C., Hilk, C. L., & Peshkam, A. (2011). Preschoolers’ bistrategic resource control, reconciliation, and peer regard. Social Development,20(1), 185–211. CrossRef
Salmivalli, C., Karna, A., & Poskiparta, E. (2009). From peer putdowns to peer support: A theoretical model and how it translated into a national anti-bullying program. In S. Shimerson, S. Swearer, & D. Espelage (Eds.), The handbook of bullying in schools: An international perspective (pp. 441–454). New York, NY: Routledge.
Savin-Williams, R. C. (1979). Dominance hierarchies in groups of early adolescents. Child Development,50(4), 923–935. CrossRef
Statistics Canada (2007). 2006 Community Profiles. 2006 Census. Statistics Canada Catalogue No. 92-591-XWE. Ottawa. Released 13 March 2007.
Vaillancourt, T., & Hymel, S. (2006). Aggression and social status: The moderating role of sex and peer-valued characteristics. Aggressive Behavior,32, 396–408. CrossRef
Vaughn, S., McIntosh, R., & Spencer-Rowe, J. (1991). Peer rejection is a stubborn thing: Increasing peer acceptance of rejected students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice,6(2), 83–88.
- Status Differences in Target-Specific Prosocial Behavior and Aggression
Leanna M. Closson
- Springer US