Social Psychology of Education

, Volume 14, Issue 1, pp 23–39

The role of attractiveness and aggression in high school popularity

  • Casey Borch
  • Allen Hyde
  • Antonius H. N. Cillessen
Article

Abstract

This study examines the effects of physical attractiveness and aggression on popularity among high school students. Previous work has found positive relationships between aggression and popularity and physical attractiveness and popularity. The current study goes beyond this work by examining the interactive effects of physical attractiveness and aggression on popularity. Controlling for race and gender, the results indicate that attractive students are seen as more physically and relationally aggressive than those who are less attractive. We also found that those who are both physically attractive and aggressive are perceived to be more popular than those without such characteristics. However, the same interaction showed the opposite effect when predicting sociometric popularity instead of perceived popularity. These results contribute to the understanding of the differences between those who are well-liked (sociometric popularity) and those who are socially visible (perceived popularity), and the unique predictors of these two dimensions of status in the peer group.

Keywords

Popularity Aggression Physical attractiveness Adolescent development Sociometric popularity 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Adler P.A., Adler P. (1998) Peer power: preadolescent culture and identity. Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, NJGoogle Scholar
  2. Aiken L.S., West S.G. (1991) Multiple regression: testing and interpreting interactions. Sage, Newbury Park, CAGoogle Scholar
  3. Asch S.E. (1946) Forming impressions of personality. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 41: 258–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Becker B.E., Luthar S.S. (2007) Peer-perceived admiration and social preference: Contextual correlates of positive peer regard among suburban and urban adolescents. Journal of Research on Adolescence 17: 117–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Berger J., Fisek M.H. (2006) Diffuse status characteristics and the spread of status value: A formal theory. American Journal of Sociology 111: 1038–1079CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Buss D.M. (1987) Mate selection criteria: An evolutionary perspective. In: Crawford C., Krebs D.L. (eds) Sociobiology and psychology: Ideas, issues, and applications. Hillsdale, NJ, Lawrence, Erlbaum, pp 335–351Google Scholar
  7. Cillessen A.H.N., Mayeux L. (2004) From censure to reinforcement: Developmental changes in the association between aggression and social status. Child Development 75: 147–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cillessen A.H.N., Rose A.J. (2005) Understanding popularity in the peer system. Current Directions in Psychological Science 14: 102–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cillessen A.H.N., Borch C. (2006) Developmental trajectories of adolescent popularity: A growth curve modeling analysis. Journal of Adolescence 29: 935–959Google Scholar
  10. Cillessen A.H.N., Borch C. (2008) Analyzing social networks in adolescence. In: Card N., Selig J., Little T. (eds) Modeling dyadic and interdependent data in the developmental and behavioral sciences. Routledge, New York, pp 61–86Google Scholar
  11. Crick J.D., Grotpeter J.K. (1995) Relational aggression, gender, and social-psychological adjustment. Child Development 66: 710–722CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. De Bruyn E.H., van den Boom D.C. (2005) Interpersonal behavior, peer popularity, and self-esteem in early adolescence. Social Development 14: 555–573CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Eagly A.H., Ashmore R.D., Makhijani M.G., Longo L.C. (1991) What is beautiful is good, but . . . : A meta-analytic review of research on the physical attractiveness stereotype. Psychological Bulletin 110: 109–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Feingold A. (1992) Good-looking people are not what we think. Psychological Bulletin 111: 304–341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hawley P.H., Johnson S.E., Mize J.A., McNamara K.A. (2007) Physical attractiveness in preschoolers: Relationships with power, status, aggression, and social skills. Journal of School Psychology 45: 499–521CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jackson L.A., Hunter J.E., Hodge C.N. (1995) Physical attractiveness and intellectual competence: A meta-analytic review. Social Psychology Quarterly 58: 108–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jussim L., Harber K.D. (2005) Teacher expectations and self-fulfilling prophecies: Knowns and unknowns, resolved and unresolved controversies. Personality and Social Psychology Review 9: 131–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kanazawa S., Kovar J.L. (2004) Why beautiful people are more intelligent. Intelligence 32: 227–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. LaFontana K.M., Cillessen A.H.N. (2002) Children’s stereotypes of popular and unpopular peers: A multi-method assessment. Developmental Psychology 38: 635–647CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lease A.M., Kennedy C.A., Axelrod J.L. (2002a) Dimensions of social status in preadolescent peer groups: Likeability, perceived popularity, and social dominance. Social Development 11: 508–533CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lease A.M., Kennedy C.A., Axelrod J.L. (2002b) Children’s social constructions of popularity. Social Development 11: 87–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Mazur A. (1985) A biosocial model of status in primate groups. Social Forces 64: 377–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Merton R.K. (1949) Social theory and social structure. Ill. Free Press, GlencoeGoogle Scholar
  24. Mulford M., Orbell J., Shatto C., Stockard J. (1998) Physical attractiveness, opportunity, and success in everyday exchange. American Journal of Sociology 103: 1565–1592CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Rose A.J., Swenson L.P., Waller E.M. (2004) Overt and relational aggression and perceived popularity: Developmental differences in concurrent and prospective relations. Developmental Psychology 40: 378–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Rosenthal R., Jacobson L. (1968) Pygmalion in the classroom. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  27. Rosenthal R. (1976) Experimenter effects on behavioral research (2nd ed.). Irvington, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  28. Shelley R.K. (2001) How performance expectations rise from sentiments. Social Psychology Quarterly 64: 72–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Smith M. (1980) Meta-analysis of research on teacher expectation. Evaluation in Education 4: 53–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Symons D. (1979) The evolution of human sexuality. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  31. Webster M. Jr., Driskell J.E. Jr. (1983) Beauty as status. American Journal of Sociology 89: 140–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Casey Borch
    • 1
  • Allen Hyde
    • 2
  • Antonius H. N. Cillessen
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of SociologyUniversity of Alabama at BirminghamBirminghamUSA
  2. 2.University of ConnecticutStorrsUSA
  3. 3.Radboud Universiteit NijmegenNijmegenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations