Individual and Peer Group Factors in the Stability of Social Status, Antisocial, and Prosocial Behaviors

  • Tamara J. Ferguson
  • Antonius H. N. Cillessen
Part of the Recent Research in Psychology book series (PSYCHOLOGY)

Abstract

The purpose of this chapter is threefold. First, we wish to ascertain which individual differences in children’s behaviors and personality characteristics account for why some children in a peer group remain rejected over time, while others shift to a more favorable status. However, we wish to emphasize that, although child characteristics are of obvious importance in the emergence and maintenance of status, far too little empirical attention has been given to the role that the peer group plays in status emergence and maintenance. Thus, in our second section, we briefly describe preliminary results confirming the self-perpetuating nature of children’s peer relations. In the third section, we then examine the role that the peer group plays more specifically in eliciting aggressive and prosocial behaviors.

Keywords

Triad 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Asher, S. R., & Coie, J. D. (Eds.). (1990). Peer rejection in childhood. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Berndt, T. J., & Ladd, G. W. (Eds.) (1989). Peer relationships in Child Development. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  3. Block, J. H., & Block, J. (1980). The role of ego-control and ego-resiliency in the organization of behavior. In 4W. A. Collins (Ed.), Minnesota symposium on child psychology (Vol. 30, pp. 39–101). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  4. Bukowski, W. M., & Newcomb, A. F. (1984). Stability and determinants of sociometric status and friendship choice: a longitudinal perspective. Developmental Psychology, 20, 941–952.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cairns, R. B., Cairns, B. D., Neckerman, H. J., Gest, S. D., & Gariépy, J. L. (1988). Social networks and aggressive behavior: Peer support or peer rejection? Developmental Psychology, 24, 815-823.Google Scholar
  6. Cillessen, A. H. N. (199). The self-perpetuating nature of children’s peer relationships. (Doctoral dissertation). University of Nijmegen.Google Scholar
  7. Cillessen, A. H. N., & Ferguson, T. J. (Under review). Social competence and adjustment differences between boys whose status changes versus remains stable across time.Google Scholar
  8. Cillessen, A. H. N., & Ferguson, T. J. (1989). Self-perpetuating processes in children’s peer relationships. In B. H. Schneider, G. Attili, J. Nadel, & R. Weissberg (Eds.), Social competence in developmental perspective (pp. 203–221). Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  9. Coie, J. D. (1987a). An analysis of aggressive episodes; age and peer status differences. Baltimore, MD: Biennial Meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, April.Google Scholar
  10. Coie, J. D. (1987b). Peer status and aggression. Baltimore, MD: Biennial Meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, April.Google Scholar
  11. Coie, J. D. (1990). Toward a theory of peer rejection. In S. R. Asher & J. D. Coie (Eds.), Peer rejection in childhood (pp. 365–401). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Coie, J. D., & Dodge, K. A. (1983). Continuities and changes in children’s social status: a five-year longitudinal study. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 29, 261–282.Google Scholar
  13. Coie, J. D., Dodge, K. A., & Coppotelli, H. (1982). Dimensions and types of social status: a cross-age perspective. Developmental Psychology, 18, 557–570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Coie, J. D., Dodge, K. A., & Kupersmidt, J. (1990). Peer group behavior and social status. In S. R. Asher & J. D. Coie (Eds.), Peer rejection in childhood (pp. 17–59). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Darley, J. M., & Fazio, R. H. (1980). Expectancy confirmation processes arising in the interaction sequence. American Psychologist, 35, 867–881.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dodge, K. A. (1983). Behavioral antecedents of peer social status. Child Development, 54, 1386–1399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dodge, K. A. (1986). A social information processing model of social competence in children. In M. Perlmutter (Ed.), Minnesota symposium on child psychology (Vol. 18, pp. 77–125). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  18. Hymel, S., Wagner, E., & Butler, L. J. (1990). Reputational bias: view from the peer group. In S. R. Asher & J. D. Coie (Eds.), Peer rejection in childhood (pp. 156–186). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Ladd, G. W. (1983). Social networks of popular, average, and rejected children in school settings. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 29, 238–307.Google Scholar
  20. Snyder, M. (1981). On the self-perpetuating nature of social stereotypes. In D. L. Hamilton (Ed.), Cognitive processes in stereotyping and intergroup behavior (pp. 183–212). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  21. Van Lieshout, C. F. M., & Ferguson, T. J. (1991). Relaties met leeftijdgenoten in het onderwijs [Peer relationships in educational settings]. Paedagogische Studiën, 68, 45–55.Google Scholar
  22. Wright, J. C., Giammarino, M., & Parad, H. W. (1986). Social status in small groups: individual-group similarity and the social “misfit.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 523–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tamara J. Ferguson
  • Antonius H. N. Cillessen

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations