Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel
Peer cliques form an important context for the social development of adolescents. Although clique members are often similar in social status, also within cliques, status differences exist. How differences in social status between clique members are related to behaviors of its individual members is rather unknown. This study examined to what extent the relationship of individual social status (i.e., perceived popularity) with aggression and prosocial behavior depends on the level of internal clique hierarchy. The sample consists of 2674 adolescents (49.8 % boys), with a mean age of 14.02. We focused specifically on physical and relational aggression, and practical and emotional support, because these behaviors have shown to be of great importance for social relationships and social standing among adolescents. The internal status hierarchy of cliques was based on the variation in individual social status between clique members (i.e., clique hierarchization) and the structure of status scores within a clique (pyramid shape, inverted pyramid, or equal distribution of social status scores) (i.e., clique status structure). The results showed that differences in aggressive and prosocial behaviors were particularly moderated by clique status structure: aggression was stronger related to individual social status in (girls’) cliques where the clique status structure reflected an inverted pyramid with relatively more high status adolescents within the clique than low status peers, and prosocial behavior showed a significant relationship with individual social status, again predominantly in inverted pyramid structured (boys’ and girls’) cliques. Furthermore, these effects differed by types of gender cliques: the associations were found in same gender but not mixed-gender cliques. The findings stress the importance of taking into account internal clique characteristics when studying adolescent social status in relationship to aggression and prosociality.
Adler, P. A., & Adler, P. (1998). Peer power: Preadolescent culture and identity. Piscataway, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
Asher, S. R., & McDonald, K. L. (2009). The behavioral basis of acceptance, rejection, and perceived popularity. In K. H. Rubin, W. M. Bukowski, & B. Laursen (Eds.), Handbook of peer interactions, relationships, and groups (pp. 232–248). New York, NY: Guilford.
Borgatti, S. P., Everett, M. G., & Johnson, J. C. (2013). Analyzing social networks. London: Sage.
Brown, B. B. (1990). Peer groups and peer cultures. In G. R. Elliott (Ed.), At the threshold: The developing adolescent (pp. 171–196). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Brown, B. B. (2004). Adolescents’ relationships with peers. Handbook of Adolescent Psychology, 2, 363–394.
Buhrmester, D. (1996). Need fulfillment, interpersonal competence, and the developmental contexts of early adolescent friendship. In W. M. Bukowski, A. F. Newcomb, & W. W. Hartup (Eds.), The company they keep: Friendship in childhood and adolescence (pp. 158–185). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Byrne, D. E. (1971). The attraction paradigm. New York, NY: Academic Press.
Coie, J. D., Dodge, K. A., & Kupersmidt, J. B. (1990). Peer group behavior and social status. In J. D. Coie (Ed.), Peer rejection in childhood (pp. 17–59). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Corsaro, W. A., & Eder, D. (1990). Children’s peer cultures. Annual Review of Sociology,. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.102.3.458.
Crick, N. R., Werner, N. E., Casas, J. F., O’Brien, K. M., Nelson, D. A., Grotpeter, J. K., & Markon, K. (1999). Childhood aggression and gender: A new look at an old problem. In D. Bernatein (Ed.), Gender and motivation vol. 45 of the Nebraska symposium on motivation (pp. 75–142). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
De Winter, A. F., Oldehinkel, A. J., Veenstra, R., Brunnekreef, J. A., Verhulst, F. C., & Ormel, J. (2005). Evaluation of non-response bias in mental health determinants and outcomes in a large sample of pre-adolescents. European Journal of Epidemiology, 20(2), 173–181. doi: 10.1007/s10654-004-4948-6. CrossRefPubMed
Dijkstra, J. K., Lindenberg, S., Verhulst, F. C., Ormel, J., & Veenstra, R. (2009). The relation between popularity and aggressive, destructive, and norm-breaking behaviors: Moderating effects of athletic abilities, physical attractiveness, and prosociality. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 19(3), 401–413. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-7795.2009.00594.x. CrossRef
Everett, M. G., & Borgatti, S. P. (1998). Analyzing clique overlap. Connections, 21(1), 49–61.
Hallinan, M. T. (1980). Patterns of cliquing among youth. In J. R. Smith (Ed.), Friendship and social relations in children (pp. 321–342). Piscataway, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Hymel, S., Vaillancourt, T., McDougall, P., & Renshaw, P. D. (2002). Peer acceptance and rejection in childhood. In P. K. Smith & C. H. Hart (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of childhood social development (pp. 265–284). Malden: Blackwell.
Kupersmidt, J. B., DeRosier, M. E., & Patterson, C. P. (1995). Similarity as the basis for children’s friendships: The roles of sociometric status, aggressive and withdrawn behavior, academic achievement and demographic characteristics. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 12(3), 439–452. doi: 10.1177/0265407595123007. CrossRef
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. CrossRef
Lindenberg, S. (1996). Continuities in the theory of social production functions. Verklarende Sociologie: Opstellen Voor Reinhard Wippler (pp. 169–184). Amsterdam: Thesis Publishers.
Maccoby, E. E., & Jacklin, C. N. (1974). The psychology of sex differences. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., & Cook, J. M. (2001). Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology,. doi: 10.1146/annurev.soc.27.1.415.
Moffitt, T. E., Caspi, A., Rutler, M., & Silva, P. A. (2002). Sex differences in antisocial behaviour: Conduct disorder, delinquency, and violence in the Dunedin longitudinal study. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pellegrini, A. D., & Archer, J. (2005). Sex differences in competitive and aggressive behavior: A view from sexual selection theory. In B. J. Ellis & D. F. Bjorklund (Eds.), Origins of the social mind: Evolutionary psychology and child development (pp. 219–244). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Porter, M. A., Onnela, J., & Mucha, P. J. (2009). Communities in networks. Notices of the AMS, 56(9), 1082–1097.
Putallaz, M., & Bierman, K. L. (2004). Aggression, antisocial behavior, and violence among girls: A developmental perspective. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Rasbash, J., Charlton, C., Browne, W. J., Healy, M., & Cameron, B. (2009). MLwiN version 2.1. Bristol: Centre for Multilevel Modelling, University of Bristol.
Rubin, K. H., Bukowski, W. M., & Parker, J. G. (2006). Peer interactions, relationships, and groups. In R. M. Lerner (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 3, social, emotional, and personality development (6th ed., pp. 571–645). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Salkind, N. J. (2008). Encyclopedia of educational psychology. London: Sage. CrossRef
Salkind, N. J., & Rasmussen, K. (2008). Encyclopedia of educational psychology. London: Sage. CrossRef
Savin-Williams, R., & Berndt, T. J. (1990). Friendship and peer relations. In G. R. Elliott (Ed.), At the threshold: The developing adolescent (pp. 277–307). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Sherif, M., & Sherif, C. W. (1953). Groups in harmony and tension; an integration of studies of intergroup relations. Oxford: Harper.
Underwood, M. K. (2003). Social aggression among girls. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Wilkinson, R., & Pickett, K. (Eds.). (2009). The spirit level: Why more equal societies almost always do better. London: Allen Lane.
- Structure Matters: The Role of Clique Hierarchy in the Relationship Between Adolescent Social Status and Aggression and Prosociality
Jan Kornelis Dijkstra
- Springer US