Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Targeted Victimization: Exploring Linear and Curvilinear Associations Between Social Network Prestige and Victimization

  • Empirical Research
  • Published:
Journal of Youth and Adolescence Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Are early adolescent victims of peer-directed aggression youth who hold prominent positions in the social hierarchy or those who are socially marginalized? The present study tackles this question by testing for linear and curvilinear relationships between social network prestige and physical and relational forms of peer victimization for boys and girls. Participants were 952 middle schoolers (age range = 10–14 years; 49.9 % girls; 44 % Latino). Participants nominated victims and friends; friendship nominations were used to calculate social network prestige. Both hypotheses received support, with variation by gender. Girls high in social network prestige were highly victimized. For boys, those both high and low in social network prestige were highly victimized, whereas those at mid-levels of social network prestige were low in victimization. The findings are discussed in relation to a social dominance model of peer-directed aggression, and the practical implications are discussed in relation to protecting youth who are frequent targets of peer victimization.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adler, P. A., & Adler, P. (1995). Dynamics of inclusion and exclusion in preadolescent cliques. Social Psychology Quarterly, 58, 145–162. doi:10.2307/2787039.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ahn, H.-J., & Rodkin, P. C. (2014). Classroom-level predictors of the social status of aggression: Friendship centralization, friendship density, teacher–student attunement, and gender. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106, 1144–1155. doi:10.1037/a0036091.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berger, C., & Dijkstra, J. K. (2013). Competition, envy, or snobbism? How popularity and friendships shape antipathy networks of adolescents. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 23, 586–595. doi:10.1111/jora.12048.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burt, R. S. (1987). A note on missing network data in the general social survey. Social Networks, 9, 63–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Camodeca, M., Goossens, F. A., Terwogt, M. M., & Schuengel, C. (2002). Bullying and victimization among school-age children: Stability and links to proactive and reactive aggression. Social Development, 11, 332–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caravita, S. C. S., Pöyhönen, V., Rajala, I., & Salmivalli, C. (2011). The architecture of high status among Finnish youth. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 29, 668–679. doi:10.1111/j.2044-835X.2011.02034.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Closson, L. M. (2009). Aggressive and prosocial behaviors within early adolescent friendship cliques: What’s status got to do with it? Merrill Palmer Quarterly, 55, 406–435. doi:10.1353/mpq.0.0035.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, J. S. (1990). Foundations of social theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crick, N. R., Casas, J. F., & Ku, H. C. (1999). Relational and physical forms of peer victimization in preschool. Developmental Psychology, 35, 376–385. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.35.2.376.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Crick, N. R., & Dodge, K. A. (1996). Social information-processing mechanisms in reactive and proactive aggression. Child Development, 67, 993–1002.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • de Bruyn, E. H., Cillessen, A. H. N., & Wissink, I. B. (2010). Associations of peer acceptance and perceived popularity with bullying and victimization in early adolescence. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 30, 543–566. doi:10.1177/0272431609340517.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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, 401–413. doi:10.1111/j.1532-7795.2009.00594.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drury, K., Bukowski, W. M., Velásquez, A. M., & Stella-Lopez, L. (2012). Victimization and gender identity in single-sex and mixed-sex schools: Examining contextual variations in pressure to conform to gender norms. Sex Roles, 69, 442–454. doi:10.1007/s11199-012-0118-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dyches, K. D., & Mayeux, L. (2012). Functions, targets, and outcomes of specific forms of social aggression: A daily diary study. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 173, 63–89.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ellickson, P. L., & Hawes, J. A. (1989). An assessment of active versus passive methods for obtaining parental consent. Evaluation Review, 13, 45–55. doi:10.1177/0193841x8901300104.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Faris, R., & Felmlee, D. (2014). Casualties of social combat: School networks of peer victimization and their consequences. American Sociological Review, 79, 228–257. doi:10.1177/0003122414524573.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fox, C. L., & Boulton, M. J. (2006). Friendship as a moderator of the relationship between social skills problems and peer victimisation. Aggressive Behavior, 32, 110–121. doi:10.1002/ab.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garandeau, C. F., Lee, I. A., & Salmivalli, C. (2014). Inequality matters: Classroom status hierarchy and adolescents’ bullying. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 43, 1123–1133. doi:10.1007/s10964-013-0040-4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Giang, M. T., & Graham, S. (2008). Using latent class analysis to identify aggressors and victims of peer harassment. Aggressive Behavior, 34, 203–213. doi:10.1002/ab.20233.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Graham, S., Bellmore, A. D., & Mize, J. (2006). Peer victimization, aggression, and their co-occurrence in middle school: Pathways to adjustment problems. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 34, 363–378. doi:10.1007/s10802-006-9030-2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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, 279–309. doi:10.1353/mpq.2003.0013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodges, E. V., Boivin, M., Vitaro, F., & Bukowski, W. M. (1999). The power of friendship: Protection against an escalating cycle of peer victimization. Developmental Psychology, 35, 94–101. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.35.1.94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hodges, E. V., & Perry, D. G. (1999). Personal and interpersonal antecedents and consequences of victimization by peers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 677–685. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.76.4.677.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jamal, F., Bonell, C., Harden, A., & Lorenc, T. (2015). The social ecology of girls’ bullying practices: Exploratory research in two London schools. Sociology of Health & Illness, 37, 731–744. doi:10.1111/1467-9566.12231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kovacs, D. M., Parker, J. G., & Hoffman, L. W. (1996). Behavioral, affective, and social correlates of involvement in cross-sex friendship in elementary school. Child Development, 67, 2269–2286.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9507.2008.00522.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maccoby, E. E. (1998). The two sexes: Growing up apart, coming together. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McNeilly-Choque, M. K., Hart, C. H., Robinson, C. C., Nelson, L. J., & Olsen, S. F. (1996). Overt and relational aggression on the playground: Correspondence among different informants. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 11, 47–67. doi:10.1080/02568549609594695.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merten, D. E. (1997). The meaning of meanness: Popularity, competition, and conflict among junior high school girls. Sociology of Education, 70, 175–191. doi:10.2307/2673207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merten, D. E. (2004). Securing her experience: Friendship versus popularity. Feminism & Psychology, 14, 361–365. doi:10.1177/0959353504044635.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meter, D. J., & Card, N. A. (2015). Effects of defending: The longitudinal relations among peer-perceived defending of victimized peers, victimization, and liking. Social Development, 24, 734–747. doi:10.1111/sode.12129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mishna, F., Wiener, J., & Pepler, D. (2008). Some of my best friends: Experiences of bullying within friendships. School Psychology International, 29, 549–573. doi:10.1177/0143034308099201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moffitt, T. E. (1993). Adolescence-limited and life-course-persistent antisocial behavior: A developmental taxonomy. Psychological Review, 100, 674–701. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.100.4.674.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Monahan, K. C., & Booth-LaForce, C. (2015). Deflected pathways: Becoming aggressive, socially withdrawn, or prosocial with peers during the transition to adolescence. Journal of Research on Adolescence. doi:10.1111/jora.12190.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pattiselanno, K., Dijkstra, J. K., Steglich, C., Vollebergh, W., & Veenstra, R. (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, 2257–2274. doi:10.1007/s10964-015-0310-4.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Peeters, M., Cillessen, A. H. N., & Scholte, R. H. J. (2010). Clueless or powerful? Identifying subtypes of bullies in adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 39, 1041–1052. doi:10.1007/s10964-009-9478-9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Peets, K., & Hodges, E. V. E. (2014). Is popularity associated with aggression toward socially preferred or marginalized targets? Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 124, 112–123. doi:10.1016/j.jecp.2014.02.002.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pellegrini, A. D. (2001). The roles of dominance and bullying in the development of early heterosexual relationships. Journal of Emotional Abuse, 2, 63–73. doi:10.1300/J135v02n02_05.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pellegrini, A. D. (2002). Bullying, victimization, and sexual harassment during the transition to middle school. Educational Psychologist, 37, 151–163. doi:10.1207/S15326985EP3703_2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pellegrini, A. D., & Bartini, M. (2000). A longitudinal study of bullying, victimization, and peer affiliation during the transition from primary school to middle school. American Educational Research Journal, 37, 699–725. doi:10.2307/1163486.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reynolds, A. D., & Crea, T. M. (2015). Peer influence processes for youth delinquency and depression. Journal of Adolescence, 43, 83–95. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2015.05.013.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rodkin, P. C., & Berger, C. (2008). Who bullies whom? Social status asymmetries by victim gender. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 32, 473–485. doi:10.1177/0165025408093667.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodkin, P. C., Farmer, T. W., Pearl, R., & Van Acker, R. (2000). Heterogeneity of popular boys: Antisocial and prosocial configurations. Developmental Psychology, 36, 14–24. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.36.1.14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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, 378–387. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.40.3.378.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sainio, M., Veenstra, R., Huitsing, G., & Salmivalli, C. (2011). Victims and their defenders: A dyadic approach. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 35, 144–151. doi:10.1177/0165025410378068.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salmivalli, C., Lagerspetz, K., Bjorkqvist, K., Osterman, K., & Kaukiainen, A. (1996). Bullying as a group process: Participant roles and their relations to social status within the group. Aggressive Behavior, 22, 1–15. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-2337(1996)22:1<1:AID-AB1>3.0.CO;2-T.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Savin-Williams, R. C. (1979). Dominance hierarchies in groups of early adolescents. Child Development, 50, 923–935. doi:10.2307/1129316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, D. (2000). Subtypes of victims and aggressors in children’s peer groups. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 28, 181–192.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sentse, M., Kretschmer, T., & Salmivalli, C. (2015). The longitudinal interplay between bullying, victimization, and social status: Age-related and gender differences. Social Development, 24, 659–677. doi:10.1111/sode.12115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sentse, M., Scholte, R., Salmivalli, C., & Voeten, M. (2007). Person-group dissimilarity in involvement in bullying and its relation with social status. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 35, 1009–1019. doi:10.1007/s10802-007-9150-3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Serdiouk, M., Rodkin, P., Madill, R., Logis, H., & Gest, S. (2015). Rejection and victimization among elementary school children: The buffering role of classroom-level predictors. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 43, 5–17. doi:10.1007/s10802-013-9826-9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Storch, E. A., & Ledley, D. R. (2005). Peer victimization and psychosocial adjustment in children: Current knowledge and future directions. Clinical Pediatrics, 44, 29–38. doi:10.1177/000992280504400103.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Suthers, D. D., & Desiato, C. (2012). Exposing chat features through analysis of uptake between contributions. In 2012 45th Hawaii international conference on system sciences (pp. 3368–3377). doi:10.1109/HICSS.2012.274.

  • Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and application. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Young, R., & Sweeting, H. (2004). Adolescent bullying, relationships, well-being, and gender-atypical behavior: A gender diagnosticity approach. Sex Roles, 50, 525–537.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, F., You, Z., Fan, C., Gao, C., Cohen, R., Hsueh, Y., & Zhou, Z. (2014). Friendship quality, social preference, proximity prestige, and self-perceived social competence: Interactive influences on children’s loneliness. Journal of School Psychology, 52, 511–526. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2014.06.001.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmer-Gembeck, M. J., Pronk, R. E., Goodwin, B., Mastro, S., & Crick, N. R. (2013). Connected and isolated victims of relational aggression: Associations with peer group status and differences between girls and boys. Sex Roles, 68, 363–377. doi:10.1007/s11199-012-0239-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zosuls, K. M., Andrews, N. C. Z., Martin, C. L., England, D. E., & Field, R. D. (accepted). Developmental changes in the link between gender typicality and peer victimization. Sex Roles.

Download references

Acknowledgments

This article was submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for Naomi Andrews’ Master’s degree, and she would like to thank Laura D. Hanish, Carol Lynn Martin, and Kimberly A. Updegraff for their invaluable insights and guidance throughout this project.

Funding

The research was supported 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.

Author Contributions

NA conceived of the study, performed the statistical analyses and interpretation of the data, and led the writing of the manuscript. LH contributed to the conceptualization and writing of the study. KU and CM assisted in the conceptualization of the study and interpretation of findings, and reviewed early drafts. CS oversaw implementation and administration of the larger study from which this project is drawn, reviewed drafts and assisted with interpretation. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. T. Denny Sanford School of Social and Family Dynamics, Arizona State University, PO Box 873701, Tempe, AZ, 85287-3701, USA

    Naomi C. Z. Andrews, Laura D. Hanish, Kimberly A. Updegraff & Carol Lynn Martin

  2. College of Letters and Sciences, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA

    Carlos E. Santos

Authors
  1. Naomi C. Z. Andrews
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Laura D. Hanish
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kimberly A. Updegraff
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Carol Lynn Martin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Carlos E. Santos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Naomi C. Z. Andrews.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

The authors report no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institution and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

The study used passive consent, meaning that if parents did not specifically opt their child out of the study, consent was assumed. Of the total 1052 students enrolled in the school at the time of data collection, 61 parents requested that their child not participate. All students gave active assent prior to survey administration (4 students refused participation). The recruitment and consent procedures were approved by the participating school and by the university Institutional Review Board.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Andrews, N.C.Z., Hanish, L.D., Updegraff, K.A. et al. Targeted Victimization: Exploring Linear and Curvilinear Associations Between Social Network Prestige and Victimization. J Youth Adolescence 45, 1772–1785 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-016-0450-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-016-0450-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation