Skip to main content
Top
Gepubliceerd in: Journal of Youth and Adolescence 9/2016

15-04-2016 | Empirical Research

Status Differences in Target-Specific Prosocial Behavior and Aggression

Auteurs: Leanna M. Closson, Shelley Hymel

Gepubliceerd in: Journal of Youth and Adolescence | Uitgave 9/2016

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail

Abstract

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.
Literatuur
go back to reference Adler, P. A., & Adler, P. (1998). Peer power: Preadolescent culture and identity. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press. Adler, P. A., & Adler, P. (1998). Peer power: Preadolescent culture and identity. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
go back to reference Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple Regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple Regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
go back to reference 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., 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
go back to reference Bjorkqvist, K., Osterman, K., & Kaukiainen, A. (2000). Social intelligence—empathy = aggression? Aggression and Violent Behavior, 5(2), 191–200.CrossRef Bjorkqvist, K., Osterman, K., & Kaukiainen, A. (2000). Social intelligence—empathy = aggression? Aggression and Violent Behavior, 5(2), 191–200.CrossRef
go back to reference Blatchford, P., Edmonds, S., & Martin, C. (2003). Class size, pupil attentiveness, and peer relations. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 15–36.CrossRefPubMed Blatchford, P., Edmonds, S., & Martin, C. (2003). Class size, pupil attentiveness, and peer relations. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 15–36.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference 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., & 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.
go back to reference 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 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
go back to reference Card, N. A., & Hodges, E. V. E. (2010). It takes two to fight in school, too: A social relations model of the psychometric properties and relative variance of dyadic aggression and victimization in middle school. Social Development, 19(3), 447–469.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Card, N. A., & Hodges, E. V. E. (2010). It takes two to fight in school, too: A social relations model of the psychometric properties and relative variance of dyadic aggression and victimization in middle school. Social Development, 19(3), 447–469.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
go back to reference 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 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
go back to reference 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.CrossRefPubMed 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.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference 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 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
go back to reference Crick, N. R., & Grotpeter, J. K. (1995). Relational aggression, gender, and social-psychological adjustment. Child Development, 66, 710–722.CrossRefPubMed Crick, N. R., & Grotpeter, J. K. (1995). Relational aggression, gender, and social-psychological adjustment. Child Development, 66, 710–722.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference 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. 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.
go back to reference Grover, R. L., Nangle, D. W., Serwik, A., & Zeff, K. R. (2007). Girl friend, boy friend, girlfriend, boyfriend: Broadening our understanding of heterosocial competence. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 36(4), 491–502.CrossRefPubMed Grover, R. L., Nangle, D. W., Serwik, A., & Zeff, K. R. (2007). Girl friend, boy friend, girlfriend, boyfriend: Broadening our understanding of heterosocial competence. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 36(4), 491–502.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Hawley, P. H. (1999). The ontogenesis of social dominance: A strategy-based evolutionary perspective. Developmental Review, 19, 97–132.CrossRef Hawley, P. H. (1999). The ontogenesis of social dominance: A strategy-based evolutionary perspective. Developmental Review, 19, 97–132.CrossRef
go back to reference 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 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
go back to reference Hawley, P. H. (2014). The duality of human nature: Coercion and prosociality in youths’ hierarchy ascension and social success. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 23(6), 433–438. doi:10.1177/0963721414548417.CrossRef Hawley, P. H. (2014). The duality of human nature: Coercion and prosociality in youths’ hierarchy ascension and social success. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 23(6), 433–438. doi:10.​1177/​0963721414548417​.CrossRef
go back to reference Hinde, R. A., & Stevenson-Hinde, J. (1987). Interpersonal relationships in child development. Developmental Review, 7, 1–21.CrossRef Hinde, R. A., & Stevenson-Hinde, J. (1987). Interpersonal relationships in child development. Developmental Review, 7, 1–21.CrossRef
go back to reference Hymel, S., Bowker, A., & Woody, E. (1993). Aggressive versus withdrawn unpopular children: Variations in peer and self-perceptions in multiple domains. Child Development, 64(3), 879–896.CrossRefPubMed Hymel, S., Bowker, A., & Woody, E. (1993). Aggressive versus withdrawn unpopular children: Variations in peer and self-perceptions in multiple domains. Child Development, 64(3), 879–896.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference 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. 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.
go back to reference 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 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
go back to reference 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. (1998). The nature of children’s stereotypes of popularity. Social Development, 7(3), 301–320.CrossRef
go back to reference LaFontana, K. M., & Cillessen, A. H. N. (2002). Children’s perceptions of popular and unpopular peers: A multimethod assessment. Developmental Psychology, 38(5), 635–647.CrossRefPubMed LaFontana, K. M., & Cillessen, A. H. N. (2002). Children’s perceptions of popular and unpopular peers: A multimethod assessment. Developmental Psychology, 38(5), 635–647.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference 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 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
go back to reference 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., Kennedy, C. A., & Axelrod, J. L. (2002a). Children’s social constructions of popularity. Social Development, 11(1), 87–109.CrossRef
go back to reference 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 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
go back to reference Li, Y., & Wright, M. F. (2014). Adolescents’ social status goals: Relationships to social status insecurity, aggression, and prosocial behavior. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 43, 146–160.CrossRefPubMed Li, Y., & Wright, M. F. (2014). Adolescents’ social status goals: Relationships to social status insecurity, aggression, and prosocial behavior. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 43, 146–160.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference 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 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
go back to reference Maccoby, E. E. (1990). Gender and relationships: A developmental account. American Psychologist, 45(4), 513–520.CrossRefPubMed Maccoby, E. E. (1990). Gender and relationships: A developmental account. American Psychologist, 45(4), 513–520.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference 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. (1997). The meaning of meanness: Popularity, competition, and conflict among junior high school girls. Sociology of Education, 70, 175–191.CrossRef
go back to reference Merten, D. E. (2004). Securing her experience: Friendship versus popularity. Feminism and Psychology, 14(3), 361–365.CrossRef Merten, D. E. (2004). Securing her experience: Friendship versus popularity. Feminism and Psychology, 14(3), 361–365.CrossRef
go back to reference Newcomb, A. F., Bukowski, W. M., & Pattee, L. (1993). Children’s peer relations: A meta-analytic review of popular, rejected, neglected, controversial, and average sociometric status. Psychological Bulletin, 113, 99–128.CrossRefPubMed Newcomb, A. F., Bukowski, W. M., & Pattee, L. (1993). Children’s peer relations: A meta-analytic review of popular, rejected, neglected, controversial, and average sociometric status. Psychological Bulletin, 113, 99–128.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Ojanen, T., & Findley-Van Nostrand, D. (2014). Social goals, aggression, peer preference, and popularity: Longitudinal links during middle school. Developmental Psychology, 50(8), 2134–2143.CrossRefPubMed Ojanen, T., & Findley-Van Nostrand, D. (2014). Social goals, aggression, peer preference, and popularity: Longitudinal links during middle school. Developmental Psychology, 50(8), 2134–2143.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Peets, K., Hodges, E. V. E., & Salmivalli, C. (2008). Affect-congruent social-cognitive evaluations and behaviors. Child Development, 79(1), 170–185.CrossRefPubMed Peets, K., Hodges, E. V. E., & Salmivalli, C. (2008). Affect-congruent social-cognitive evaluations and behaviors. Child Development, 79(1), 170–185.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Pellegrini, A. D. (2002). Affiliative and aggressive dimensions of dominance and possible functions during early adolescence. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 7, 21–31.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
go back to reference Peugh, J. L. (2010). A practical guide to multilevel modeling. Journal of School Psychology, 48, 85–112.CrossRefPubMed Peugh, J. L. (2010). A practical guide to multilevel modeling. Journal of School Psychology, 48, 85–112.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference 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 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
go back to reference Raudenbush, S., Bryk, A., & Congdon, R. (2009). HLM for Windows. Version 6.08. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International Inc. Raudenbush, S., Bryk, A., & Congdon, R. (2009). HLM for Windows. Version 6.08. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International Inc.
go back to reference 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 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
go back to reference 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. 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.
go back to reference Savin-Williams, R. C. (1979). Dominance hierarchies in groups of early adolescents. Child Development, 50(4), 923–935.CrossRef Savin-Williams, R. C. (1979). Dominance hierarchies in groups of early adolescents. Child Development, 50(4), 923–935.CrossRef
go back to reference Statistics Canada (2007). 2006 Community Profiles. 2006 Census. Statistics Canada Catalogue No. 92-591-XWE. Ottawa. Released 13 March 2007. Statistics Canada (2007). 2006 Community Profiles. 2006 Census. Statistics Canada Catalogue No. 92-591-XWE. Ottawa. Released 13 March 2007.
go back to reference Vaillancourt, T., & Hymel, S. (2006). Aggression and social status: The moderating role of sex and peer-valued characteristics. Aggressive Behavior, 32, 396–408.CrossRef Vaillancourt, T., & Hymel, S. (2006). Aggression and social status: The moderating role of sex and peer-valued characteristics. Aggressive Behavior, 32, 396–408.CrossRef
go back to reference 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. 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.
go back to reference Veenstra, R., Lindenberg, S., Zijlstra, B. J. H., 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.CrossRefPubMed Veenstra, R., Lindenberg, S., Zijlstra, B. J. H., 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.CrossRefPubMed
Metagegevens
Titel
Status Differences in Target-Specific Prosocial Behavior and Aggression
Auteurs
Leanna M. Closson
Shelley Hymel
Publicatiedatum
15-04-2016
Uitgeverij
Springer US
Gepubliceerd in
Journal of Youth and Adolescence / Uitgave 9/2016
Print ISSN: 0047-2891
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-6601
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-016-0481-7

Andere artikelen Uitgave 9/2016

Journal of Youth and Adolescence 9/2016 Naar de uitgave