An Examination of Reciprocal Associations Between Social Preference, Popularity, and Friendship during Early Adolescence

Empirical Research
  • 39 Downloads

Abstract

Getting along with peers becomes increasingly important to health and well-being during early adolescence (10–14 years). Young adolescents may succeed with peers when they are well-liked by and popular among the larger peer group (or at the group-level of social complexity). They might also fare well with peers when they are able to form numerous mutual and high quality friendships (at the dyadic-level of social complexity). Theory emphasizes the interrelatedness of different types of peer experiences, but few longitudinal studies have examined the interplay among and between group- and dyadic-level peer experiences in the same study. As a result, it is not known whether group-level peer experiences are predictors of dyadic-level peer experiences, and/or vice versa. To address this limitation, this study examined the prospective and reciprocal relations between four indices of peer experiences, preference (or being highly liked and not disliked by peers), popularity (or having a reputation as popular), friendship quantity (or having many mutual friends), and friendship or relationship quality, during early adolescence. Participants were 271 adolescents (49% girls; Mage = 11.52 years) who completed peer nominations of preference and popularity, a self-report measure of friendship quality, and nominated friends at two waves (Wave 1: November, Grade 6; Wave 2: October, Grade 7). Structural equation modeling indicated that friendship quantity predicted increases in preference and popularity and that friendship quality predicted increases in friendship quantity. Initial popularity was associated with decreases in preference. The importance of these findings for future research is discussed along with study limitations.

Keywords

Social preference Popularity Friendship Peers Early adolescence 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge the students, principals, teachers, and counselors who participated in this study and funding by NICHD (1R03 HD056524-01; PI: Julie Bowker). Jamie Ostrov is also acknowledged for his helpful comments on an earlier draft.

Authors’ Contributions

M.S. conceived of the study, performed statistical analyses, interpreted the data, and drafted the manuscript; J.B. participated in the design of the study, was involved in the collection of data, assisted in statistical analyses and interpretation of the data, and helped to revise the manuscript. Both authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Data Sharing Declaration

The dataset generated and analyzed during the current study are not publicly available but are available from the second author on reasonable request.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

This study was supported by a NICHD grant (1R03 HD056524-01) awarded to Julie Bowker. NICHD had no involvement in the study design, data collection, analyses, or interpretation of results. NICHD also had no involvement in the writing or submission of this manuscript.The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

This study was approved by the University at Buffalo, The State University of New York Institutional Review Board (IRB).

Informed Consent

Written parent consent and adolescent assent was obtained for all participants in the study.

References

  1. Asher, S. R., & McDonald, K. L. (2009). The behavioral basis of acceptance, rejection, and perceived popularity. In K. H. Rubin, W. Bukowski & B. Laursen (Eds.), Handbook of peer interactions, relationships, and groups: Social, emotional, and personality development in context (pp. 232–248). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  2. Badaly, D., Schwartz, D., & Gorman, A. H. (2012). Social status, perceived social reputations, and perceived dyadic relationships in early adolescence. Social Development, 21, 482–500.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9507.2011.00646.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bowker, J. C., Adams, R. E., Bowker, M. H., Fisher, C., & Spencer, S. V. (2015). Same- and other-sex popularity and preference during early adolescence. Journal of Early Adolescence, 36, 704–722.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431615581417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brendgen, M., Little, T. D., & Krappmann, L. (2000). Rejected children and their friends: A shared evaluation of friendship quality? Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 46, 45–70.Google Scholar
  5. Bukowski, W. M., Hoza, B., & Boivin, M. (1993). Popularity, friendship, and emotional adjustment during early adolescence. New Directions for Child Development, 60, 23–37.  https://doi.org/10.1002/cd.23219936004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bukowski, W. M., Hoza, B., & Boivin, M. (1994). Measuring friendship quality during pre- and early adolescence: The development and psychometric properties of the friendship qualities scales. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 11, 471–484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bukowski, W. M., Pizzamiglio, M. T., Newcomb, A. F., & Hoza, B. (1996). Popularity as an affordance for friendship: The link between group and dyadic experience. Social Development, 5, 189–202.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9507.1996.tb00080.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bukowski, W. M., Sippola, L. K., & Newcomb, A. F. (2000). Variations in patterns of attraction to same- and other-sex peers during early adolescence. Developmental Psychology, 36, 147–154.  https://doi.org/10.1037//0012-1649.36.2.147.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Cillessen, A. H. N. (2009). Sociometric methods. In K. H. Rubin, W. M. Bukowski & B. Laursen (Eds.), Handbook of peer interactions, relationships, and groups: Social, emotional, and personality development in context (pp. 82–99). New York: Guildford Press.Google Scholar
  10. Cillessen, A. H. N., & Borch, C. (2006). Developmental trajectories of adolescent popularity: A growth curve modelling analysis. Journal of Adolescence, 29, 935–959.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2006.05.005.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Cillessen, A. H. N., & Mayeux, L. (2004). From censure to reinforcement: Developmental changes in the association between aggression and social status. Child Development, 75, 147–163.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2004.00660.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.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.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.18.4.557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Demir, M., & Urberg, K. A. (2004). Friendship and adjustment among adolescents. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 88, 68–82.  https://doi.org/10.1015/j.jecp.2004.02.006.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Dijkstra, J. K., Cillessen, A. H. N., & Borch, C. (2013). Popularity and adolescent friendship networks: Selection and influence dynamics. Developmental Psychology, 49, 1242–1252.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030098.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Dijkstra, J. K., Cillessen, A. H. N., Lindenberg, S., & Veenstra, R. (2010). Basking in reflected glory and its limits: Why adolescents hang out with popular peers. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 20, 942–958.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-7795.2010.00671.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Eder, D. (1985). The cycle of popularity: Interpersonal relations among female adolescents. Sociology of Education, 58, 154–165.  https://doi.org/10.2307/2112416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ellis, W., & Zarbatany, L. (2007). Explaining friendship formation and friendship stability: The role of children’s and friends’ aggression and victimization. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 53, 79–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gorman, A. H., Schwartz, D., Nakomoto, J., & Mayeux, L. (2011). Unpopularity and disliking among peers: Partially distinct dimensions of adolescents’ social experiences. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 32, 208–217.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2011.05.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Harrell, Jr., F. E. (2001). Regression modeling strategies. New York: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hinde, R. A. (1979). Towards understanding relationships. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  22. Hinde, R. A. (1987). Individuals, relationships and culture. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Kline, R. B. (2010). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). New York: Guildford Press.Google Scholar
  24. LaFontana, K. M., & Cillessen, A. H. N. (2002). Children’s perceptions of popular and unpopular peers: A multimethod assessment. Developmental Psychology, 38, 635–647.  https://doi.org/10.1037//0012-1649.38.5.635.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Landsford, J. E., Putallaz, M., Grimes, C. L., Schiro-Osman, K. A., Kupersmidt, J. B., & Coie, J. D. (2006). Perceptions of friendship quality and observed behaviors with friends: How do sociometrically rejected, average, and popular girls differ? Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 52, 694–719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lease, A. M., Kennedy, C. A., & Axelrod, J. L. (2002). Children’s social constructions of popularity. Social Development, 11, 87–109.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9507.00188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Litwack, S. D., Aikins, J. W., & Cillessen, A. H. N. (2012). The distinct roles of sociometric and perceived popularity in friendship: Implications for adolescent depressive affect and self-esteem. Journal of Early Adolescence, 32, 226–251.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431610387142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Markovic, A., & Bowker, J. C. (2015). Social surrogacy and adjustment: Exploring the correlates of having a “social helper” for shy and non-shy young adolescents. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 176, 110–129.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00221325.2015.1007916.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Markovic, A., & Bowker, J. C. (2017). Friends also matter: Examining friendship adjustment indices as moderators of anxious-withdrawal and trajectories of change in psychological maladjustment. Developmental Psychology, 53, 1462–1473.  https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000343.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Marks, P. E. L., Cillessen, A. H. N., & Crick, N. R. (2012). Popularity contagion among adolescents. Social Development, 21, 501–521.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9507.2011.00647.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Mayeux, L., Sandstrom, M. J., & Cillessen, A. H. N. (2008). Is being popular a risky proposition? Journal of Research on Adolescence, 18, 49–74.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-7795.2008.00550.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Meuwese, R., Cillessen, A. H. N., & Guroglu, B. (2016). Friends in high places: A dyadic perceptive on peer status as predictor of friendship quality and the mediating role of empathy and prosocial behavior. Social Development, 26, 503–519.  https://doi.org/10.1111/sode.12213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Moffitt, T. E. (1993). Adolescence-limited and life-course-persistent antisocial behavior: A developmental taxonomy. Psychological Review, 100, 674–701.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Muthén, L. K. & Muthén, B. O. (1998-2011). Mplus user’s guide. 6th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén. .Google Scholar
  35. Nangle, D. W., Erdley, C. A., Newman, J. E., Mason, C. A., & Carpenter, E. M. (2003). Popularity, friendship quantity, and friendship quality: Interactive influences on children’s loneliness and depression. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 32, 546–555.  https://doi.org/10.1207/S15374424JCCP3204_7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Parker, J. G., & Asher, S. R. (1993). Friendship and friendship quality in middle childhood: Links with peer group acceptance and feelings of loneliness and school dissatisfaction. Developmental Psychology, 29, 611–621.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.29.4.611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Parkhurst, J. T., & Hopmeyer, A. (1998). Sociometric popularity and peer-perceived popularity: Two distinct dimensions of peer status. Journal of Early Adolescence, 18, 125–144.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431698018002001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Pellegrini, A. D., & Long, J. D. (2002). A longitudinal study of bullying, dominance, and victimization during the transition from primary school through secondary school. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 20, 259–280.  https://doi.org/10.1348/026151002166442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Pearlin, L. I. (1983). Role strains and personal stress. In H. B. Kaplan (Ed.), Psychosocial stress: Trends in theory and research. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  40. Poorthuis, A. M. G., Thomaes, S., Denissen, J. J. A., van Aken, M. A. G., & de Castro, B. O. (2012). Prosocial tendencies predict friendship quality, but not for popular children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 112, 378–388.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2012.04.002.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Rose, A. J., & Rudolph, K. D. (2006). A review of sex differences in peer relationship processes: Potential trade-offs for the emotional and behavioral development of girls and boys. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 98–131.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.132.1.98.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  42. Rose, A. J., Swenson, L. P., & Carlson, W. (2004). Friendships of aggressive youth: Considering the influences of being disliked and of being perceived as popular. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 88, 25–45.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2004.02.005.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Rubin, K. H., Bukowski, W. M., & Bowker, J. C. (2015). Children in peer groups. In M. Guha (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology and developmental science: vol. 4. Ecological settings and processes (7th ed.). (pp. 321–412). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.Google Scholar
  44. Rubin, K. H., Bukowski, W. M., & Parker, J. G. (2006). Peer interactions, relationships, and groups. In N. Eisenberg, W. Damon & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Social, emotional, and personality development (6th ed.). (pp. 571–645). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.Google Scholar
  45. Schoffstall, C. L., & Cohen, R. (2011). Cyber aggression: The relation between online offenders and offline school competence. Social Development, 20, 587–604.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9507.2011.00609.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sullivan, H. S. (1953). The interpersonal theory of psychiatry. New York, NY: Norton.Google Scholar
  47. Thomas, K. K., & Bowker, J. C. (2013). An investigation of desired friendships during early adolescence. Journal of Early Adolescence, 33, 867–890.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431612469725.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Troop-Gordon, W., & Ranney, J. D. (2014). Popularity among same-sex and cross-sex peers: A process-oriented examination of links to aggressive behaviors and depressive affect. Developmental Psychology, 50, 1721–1733.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036417.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity at Buffalo, The State University of New YorkBuffaloUSA
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyUniversity at Buffalo, The State University of New YorkBuffaloUSA

Personalised recommendations