Dyadic Peer Interactions: the Impact of Aggression on Impression Formation with New Peers
- 123 Downloads
Little is known about youth’s initial interactions with previously unfamiliar peers and how aggression can affect behavior in these interactions. We observed previously unfamiliar youth engaging in a dyadic activity to determine how tendencies toward aggression related to behavior within the activity (i.e., collaboration) and how collaboration affected initial impression formation. From a dyadic perspective, we assessed how similarities versus differences in tendencies toward aggression affected the nature of the interaction. Participants were 108 5th grade dyads (M = 11.13 years; 50% female; 67% White), observed in a laboratory session. Teachers rated individuals’ aggression; ratings were used to calculate dyadic-level aggression (the discrepancy between partners). Observers rated dyads’ collaboration during the interaction and participants reported perceptions about their partner after the interaction. Results indicated that collaboration mediated the link between discrepancy in aggression and peers’ perceptions of one another. Specifically, dyads more discrepant in their aggression collaborated less and had less positive perceptions of one another. Results highlight the importance of considering a dyadic perspective and indicate a potential intervention point to improve youth’s peer relationships.
KeywordsAggression Collaboration Impression formation Dyad
The research was supported by in part by funds from the T. Denny Sanford Foundation and by the T. Denny Sanford School of Social and Family Dynamics. Additional support was provided for Naomi Andrews from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. This article is based on a dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for Naomi Andrews’ doctoral degree at Arizona State University.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest.
This study received ethics approval from the Arizona State University Institutional Review Board. All aspects of this study were conducted according to the ethical guidelines of the American Psychological Association.
Informed consent was obtained from all participating teachers, as well as from children’s parents/guardians. Assent was also obtained from all children.
- Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Reading: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
- Arbuckle, J. L. (1996). Full information estimation in the presence of incomplete data. In G. A. Marcoulides & R. E. Schumacker (Eds.), Advanced structural equation modeling: issues and techniques (pp. 243–277). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.Google Scholar
- Bagwell, C. L., Molina, B. S. G., Pelham, W. E., & Hoza, B. (2001). Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder and problems in peer relations: predictions from childhood to adolescence. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 40, 1285–1292. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004583-200111000-00008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Bayley, N. (1969). The Bayley scales of infant development. Training and scoring manual. Google Scholar
- Boivin, M., Brendgen, M., Vitaro, F., Forget-Dubois, N., Feng, B., Tremblay, R. E., & Dionne, G. (2013). Evidence of gene-environment correlation for peer difficulties: disruptive behaviors predict early peer relation difficulties in school through genetic effects. Development and Psychopathology, 25, 79–92. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579412000910.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Boulton, M. J. (2013). The effects of victim of bullying reputation on adolescents’ choice of friends: mediation by fear of becoming a victim of bullying, moderation by victim status, and implications for befriending interventions. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 114, 146–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2012.05.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Boxer, P., Guerra, N. G., Huesmann, L. R., & Morales, J. (2005). Proximal peer-level effects of a small-group selected prevention on aggression in elementary school children: an investigation of the peer contagion hypothesis. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 33, 325–338. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-005-3568-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 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, 447–469. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9507.2009.00562.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Choi, J., Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. (2011). Relationships among cooperative learning experiences, social interdependence, children’s aggression, victimization, and prosocial behaviors. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 41, 976–1003. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2011.00744.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Coie, J. D., Cillessen, A. H., Dodge, K. A., Hubbard, J. A., Schwartz, D., Lemerise, E. A., & Bateman, H. (1999). It takes two to fight: a test of relational factors and a method for assessing aggressive dyads. Developmental Psychology, 35, 1179–1188. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-16126.96.36.1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Espelage, D. L., & Holt, M. K. (2001). Bullying and victimization during early adolescence: Peer influences and psychosocial correlates. In Bullying behavior: Current issues, research, and interventions (pp. 123–142). Binghampton: Haworth Maltreatment and Trauma Press/The Haworth Press.Google Scholar
- Hawley, P. H., & Vaughn, B. E. (2003). Aggression and adaptive functioning: the bright side to bad behavior. MerrillPalmer Quarterly, 49, 239–242.Google Scholar
- Leaper, C. (1994). Childhood gender segregation: Causes and consequences. San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
- Mouttapa, M., Valente, T., Gallaher, P., Rohrbach, L. A., & Unger, J. B. (2004). Social network predictors of bullying and victimization. Adolescence, 39, 315–335.Google Scholar
- Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2012). Mplus user’s guide (7th ed.). Los Angeles: Muthén & Muthén.Google Scholar
- Rodkin, P. C., & Ahn, H.-J. (2009). Social networks derived from affiliations and friendships, multi-informant and self-reports: stability, concordance, placement of aggressive and unpopular children, and centrality. Social Development, 18, 556–576. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9507.2008.00505.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Sijtsema, J. J., Ojanen, T., Veenstra, R., Lindenberg, S., Hawley, P. H., & Little, T. D. (2009). Forms and functions of aggression in adolescent friendship selection and influence: a longitudinal social network analysis. Social Development, 19, 515–534. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9507.2009.00566.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Stenseng, F., Belsky, J., Skalicka, V., & Wichstrøm, L. (2014). Preschool social exclusion, aggression, and cooperation: a longitudinal evaluation of the need-to-belong and the social-reconnection hypotheses. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 40, 1637–1647. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167214554591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Thelen, E., & Smith, L. B. (1998). Dynamic systems theories. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons Inc..Google Scholar
- Wang, F. M., Chen, J. Q., Xiao, W. Q., Ma, Y. T., & Zhang, M. (2012). Peer physical aggression and its association with aggressive beliefs, empathy, self-control, and cooperation skills among students in a rural town of China. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 27, 3252–3267. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260512441256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar