Abstract
The healthy context paradox indicates that in “healthy” contexts, with lower bullying or victimization norms, victimization experiences would unexpectedly exacerbate adolescents’ adjustment difficulties, yet the underlying mechanisms remain unclear, particularly from the clique perspective. The current 2-year longitudinal multilevel study attempts to examine the conditional effects of both clique structure (i.e., status hierarchy) and clique norms (i.e., aggression norms) on the relationship between individual victimization and aggressive behavior. The sample consisted of 691 Chinese junior high school students (Mage = 12.74, SD = 0.43; 55.6% boys), who were identified to belong to 153 cliques with sizes varying from 3 to 12 students (Msize = 5.08, SD = 1.89), according to the social cognitive map. Participants completed peer-nominated measures at two time points, two years apart. The multilevel models revealed that it was in less hierarchical cliques with lower aggression that victimized adolescents would exhibit more relational forms of aggression (rather than overt forms) two years later. More intriguingly, contrary results were found in all-girls cliques and all-boys cliques. Specifically, victimized girls’ overt and relational aggression was higher in cliques with less hierarchy and lower aggression, whereas, in cliques with more hierarchy and higher aggression, victimized boys’ relational aggression was higher, which conforms to the healthy context paradox and the peer contagion hypothesis, respectively. These findings highlight that egalitarian cliques with low aggression would promote aggressive behavior of victimized adolescents, especially for girls rather than for boys, which in turn has crucial implications for anti-bullying interventions.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bandura, A. (1973). Aggression: A social learning theory analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Bjorkqvist, K., Osterman, K., & Kaukiainen, A. (1992). The development of direct and indirect aggressive strategies in males and females. In K. Bjorkqvist & P. Niemela (Eds.), Of mice and women: Aspects of female aggression (pp. 51–64). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
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.
Cairns, R. B., Cairns, B. D., Neckerman, H. J., Gest, S. D., & Gariepy, J.-L. (1988). Social networks and aggressive behavior: Peer support or peer rejection? Developmental Psychology, 24(6), 815–823.
Casper, D. M., Card, N. A., & Barlow, C. (2020). Relational aggression and victimization during adolescence: A meta-analytic review of unique associations with popularity, peer acceptance, rejection, and friendship characteristics. Journal of Adolescence, 80, 41–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2019.12.012.
Chen, G., Zhao, Q., Dishion, T., & Deater-Deckard, K. (2018). The association between peer network centrality and aggression is moderated by moral disengagement. Aggressive Behavior, 44(6), 571–580. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21776.
Chen, X., Rubin, K. H., & Sun, Y. (1992). Social reputation and peer relationships in Chinese and Canadian children: A cross-cultural study. Child Development, 63(6), 1336–1343. https://doi.org/10.2307/1131559.
Crick, N. R. (1996). The role of overt aggression, relational aggression, and prosocial behavior in the prediction of children’s future social adjustment. Child Development, 67, 2317–2327.
Dishion, T. J., & Tipsord, J. M. (2011). Peer contagion in child and adolescent social and emotional development. Annual Review of Psychology, 62(1), 189–214. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.100412.
Ellis, W., Zarbatany, L., Chen, X., Kinal, M., & Boyko, L. (2018). Peer groups as a context for school misconduct: The moderating role of group interactional style. Child Development, 89(1), 248–263. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12722.
Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7, 117–140. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872675400700202.
Gaffney, H., Ttofi, M. M., & Farrington, D. P. (2021). What works in anti-bullying programs? Analysis of effective intervention components. Journal of School Psychology, 85, 37–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2020.12.002.
Garandeau, C. F., & Salmivalli, C. (2019). Can healthier contexts be harmful? A new perspective on the plight of victims of bullying. Child Development Perspectives, 13(3), 147–152. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12331.
Gini, G., Holt, M., Pozzoli, T., & Marino, C. (2020). Victimization and somatic problems: The role of class victimization levels. Journal of School Health, 90(1), 39–46. https://doi.org/10.1111/josh.12844.
Guimond, F. A., Brendgen, M., Correia, S., Turgeon, L., & Vitaro, F. (2018). The moderating role of peer norms in the associations of social withdrawal and aggression with peer victimization. Developmental Psychology, 54(8), 1519–1527. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000539.
Harris, J. R. (1995). Where is the child’s environment? A group socialization theory of development. Psychological Review, 102(3), 458–489. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.102.3.458.
Hawker, D. S. J., & Boulton, M. J. (2000). Twenty years’ research on peer victimization and psychosocial maladjustment: A meta-analytic review of cross-sectional studies. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, and Allied Disciplines, 41(4), 441–455. https://doi.org/10.1111/1469-7610.00629.
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. https://doi.org/10.1353/mpq.2003.0013.
Huitsing, G., Lodder, G. M. A., Oldenburg, B., Schacter, H. L., Salmivalli, C., Juvonen, J., & Veenstra, R. (2019). The healthy context paradox: Victims’ adjustment during an anti-bullying intervention. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 28(9), 2499–2509. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-018-1194-1.
James, K., Watts, S. J., & Evans, S. Z. (2020). Fairness, social support, and school violence: racial differences in the likelihood of fighting at school. Crime & Delinquency, 66(12), 1655–1677. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128719890269.
LaFontana, K. M., & Cillessen, A. H. N. (2010). Developmental changes in the priority of perceived status in childhood and adolescence. Social Development, 19, 130–147. 10.1111/j.1467–9507.2008.00522.x.
Laninga-Wijnen, L., Harakeh, Z., Garandeau, C. F., Dijkstra, J. K., Veenstra, R., & Vollebergh, W. A. M. (2019). Classroom popularity hierarchy predicts prosocial and aggressive popularity norms across the school year. Child Development, 90(5), 637–653. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13228.
Lerner, M. J. (1970). The desire for justice and reactions to victims. In J. Macaulay & L. Berkowitz (Eds.), Altruism and helping behavior (pp. 205–229). New York, NY: Academic Press.
Li, C., Zhao, Q., Dai, W., & Zhang, Y. (2021). Victims become covert aggressors: Gender differences in the mediating effects of rumination on anger and sadness. The Journal of Psychology, 155(4), 441–456. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.2021.1901254.
Little, T. D. (2013). Longitudinal structural equation modeling. New York: Guilford Press.
Maas, C. J. M., & Hox, J. J. (2005). Sufficient sample sizes for multilevel modeling. Methodology, 1(3), 86–92. https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-2241.1.3.85.
Masten, A. S., Morison, P., & Pellegrini, D. S. (1985). A revised class play method of peer assessment. Developmental Psychology, 21(3), 523–533. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.21.3.523.
Midgley, C., Thai, S., Lockwood, P., Kovacheff, C., & Page-Gould, E. (2021). When every day is a high school reunion: Social media comparisons and self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 121(2), 285–307. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000336.
Morrow, M. T., Hubbard, J. A., & Sharp, M. K. (2019). Preadolescents’ daily peer victimization and perceived social competence: Moderating effects of classroom aggression. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 48(5), 716–727. https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2017.1416618.
Neal, J. W., & Cappella, E. (2012). An examination of network position and childhood relational aggression: Integrating resource control and social exchange theories. Aggressive Behavior, 38(2), 126–140. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21414.
Ostrov, J. M., & Godleski, S. A. (2010). Toward an integrated gender-linked model of aggression subtypes in early and middle childhood. Psychological Review, 117(1), 233–242. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018070.
Pan, B., Zhang, L., Ji, L., Garandeau, C. F., Salmivalli, C., & Zhang, W. (2020). Classroom status hierarchy moderates the association between social dominance goals and bullying behavior in middle childhood and early adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 49(11), 2285–2297. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-020-01285-z.
Pan, B., Li, T., Ji, L., Malamut, S., Zhang, W., & Salmivalli, C. (2021). Why does classroom-level victimization moderate the association between victimization and depressive symptoms? The “healthy context paradox” and two explanations. Child Development, 92(5), 1836–1854. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13624.
Pattiselanno, K., Dijkstra, J., Steglich, K., Vollebergh, C., & Veenstra, W. (2015). Structure matters: The role of clique hierarchy in the relationship between adolescent social status and aggression and prosociality. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 44(12), 2257–2274. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-015-0310-4.
Peugh, J. L. (2010). A practical guide to multilevel modeling. Journal of School Psychology, 48(1), 85–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2009.09.002.
Salmivalli, C. (2010). Bullying and the peer group: A review. Aggression & Violent Behavior, 15(2), 112–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2009.08.007.
Schacter, H. L., & Juvonen, J. (2015). The effects of school-level victimization on self-blame: Evidence for contextualized social cognitions. Developmental Psychology, 51(6), 841–847. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000016.
Shi, B., & Xie, H. (2012). Socialization of physical and social aggression in early adolescents’ peer groups: High-status peers, individual status, and gender. Social Development, 21(1), 170–194. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9507.2011.00621.x.
Smith, P. K., & Robinson, S. (2019). How does individualism-collectivism relate to bullying victimisation? International Journal of Bullying Prevention, 1, 3–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42380-018-0005-y.
Talmor, D., Hirschberger, G., Seeman, S., Ein-Dor, T., & Mikulincer, M. (2019). Implicit aggression following exposure to people with physical disabilities: The costs of inhibiting self-protective processes. Motivation and Emotion, 43(4), 554–562. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-019-09757-x.
Wang, J. H., Kiefer, S. M., Smith, N. D. W., Huang, L., Gilfix, H. L., & Brennan, E. M. (2020). Associations of early adolescents’ best friendships, peer groups, and coolness with overt and relational aggression. Journal of Early Adolescence, 40(6), 828–856. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431619874400.
Wang, Q. (2004). The emergence of cultural self-constructs: Autobiographical memory and self-description in European American and Chinese children. Developmental Psychology, 40, 3–15. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.40.1.3.
Whipp, A. M., Vuoksimaa, E., Bolhuis, K., de Zeeuw, E. L., Korhonen, T., Mauri, M., Pulkkinen, L., Rimfeld, K., Rose, R. J., Beijsterveldt, C E. M., van, Bartels, M., Plomin, R., Tiemeier, H., Kaprio, J. & Boomsma, D. I. (2021). Teacher-rated aggression and co-occurring behaviors and emotional problems among schoolchildren in four population-based European cohorts. PLoS ONE, 16(4), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0238667.
Zhao, Q., & Li, C. (2022). Victimized adolescents’ aggression in cliques with different victimization norms: The healthy context paradox or the peer contagion hypothesis. Journal of School Psychology, 92, 66–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2022.03.001.
Acknowledgements
We are grateful to the adolescents who participated, and to the research assistants who assisted with data collection.
Authors' Contributions
Z.Q. conceived of the study, participated in the design, the statistical analysis, interpretation of the data and drafted the article; L.C. participated in the data collection, the design, and interpretation of the data. Both authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Funding
This work was supported by the Western Project of National Social Science Fund [grant number 21XSH012], and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [grant number 2020TS009].
Data Sharing and Declaration
The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are not publicly available but are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no competing interests.
Ethical Approval
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed Consent
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Additional information
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Zhao, Q., Li, C. The Roles of Clique Status Hierarchy and Aggression Norms in Victimized Adolescents’ Aggressive Behavior. J Youth Adolescence 51, 2328–2339 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-022-01677-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-022-01677-3