Peer Relationships Flashcards
How do friendships differ to peer relationships?
Peers are people of approximately the same age and status
Friendships are intimate, reciprocated positive relationships between two people
How do friendships change with age?
At around 2 its mainly preferences the progresses into cooperative play
At around 3/4 best friendships are formed and they engage in pretend play - develop trust
5-8 : shared liking in activities - conflict and resolution
Overtime there is an increased role of shared values, admiration and loyalty
Level of importance and intimacy changes over time
Use of self exploration and experimentation in adolescence through making different friends
What are the benefits of friendship?
Affirmation
Support and validation when child feels lonely
Emotional support and security - especially in transition periods
Buffer - against problems with peers and teachers and unpleasant experiences
Children learn about norms through gossip etc and increase openness and critique to help each other expand and develop ideas
What are the costs of friendships?
Aggression and disruptiveness
Contagion of negative affect - listening to negativity can cause you to become negative
Alcohol and substance abuse - experiment with dangerous things - some will be more vulnerable to addiction which can be long term
Socialisation vs individual selection - influence the choices we make
What is the difference between cliques, crowds and gangs?
Cliques - friendship groups that children voluntarily form or join - similarities bind them
Crowds - groups of adolescents who have similar stereotyped reputations - may be assigned by peers - don’t necessarily have to interact
Gangs - cliques that engage in illegal activities
Factors influence choice of friends
Prosocial behaviour
Similar interests
Similar level of cognitive maturity
Cooperation and acceptance
Similar level of negative emotions and tendencies to attribute hostile intentions
Proximity (not so much with internet access)
Age (school segregation) and gender (reduces over time)
Race and ethnicity can also influence friendships
Mutual exchange of encouragement
Difficult to infer directionality of influence in friendship selection:
> similar people are more likely to be friends
> friends can influence people to act in similar ways
Most likely to be an equal combination of both
How does technology affect friendships
Greater anonymity – reduce social inhibitions (can be negative if goes too far)
Less emphasis on physical appearance
More control over interactions
Finding similar peers is much easier
24/7 access
It’s fun to share photos, videos and game together
rich get richer hypothesis
suggests that those with good social skills benefit from internet socialisation
Social compensation hypothesis and study to support
Implies that social media may be beneficial for lonely, depressed and socially anxious adolescents as they can spend time deliberating replies and may be more likely to disclose personal information online that in person.
Peter et al (2005) - these people prefer online conversation
Koutamanis et al (2013)
Conducted a longitudinal study involving nearly 700 Dutch
children and found that the more they used instant messaging the more comfortable they were introducing themselves to new people and suggesting to new friends to hang out.
Glick and Rose (2011)
Showed children with high quality friendships showed improved strategies for helping friends deal with social stressors.
Bagwell, Newcomb and Bukowski (1998)
Found children with a best friend at 10 showed greater college success, social lives higher self esteem, less psychopathology 13 years later.
Gender differences in friendships
Girls more likely to desire closeness and worry about abandonment, loneliness, peer evaluations and hurting others
Girls rely more on friends for advice
Girls friendships are more fragile and last less long
Cliques and social networks in adolescence
Number decrease with age and become more stable and variable
Importance of belonging to popular group and conforming to group norms reduces
Downwaard et al (2012)
Followed 1313 Dutch adolescents and found that those who affiliated with non conventional crowds were associated with consistent problem behvaiours, data came from self report.
Negative influences of cliques and social networks
Preadolescents and adolescents are more likely to rebel if their peers do.
The desire to be accepted and liked by peers can result in them doing out of character behvaiours to gain this.
Gangs provide members with a sense of belonging in but encourage/require members to engage in crime.
Youths with poor parental relationships are more likely to get involved with negative cliques or gangs.
The shared experiences of violence in the gang help shape their identity.
Bullying
Bullying can take four major forms; physical, verbal, social or cyber bullying.
Children engage in bullying to seem powerful and gain status but is influences by a range of factors.
Bullies tend to be callous and antisocial, susceptible to peer pressure, in higher social status and have harsh or insensitive parents.
Victims are likely to be rejected by peers, feel depressed and do poorly in school.
There is a bidirectional relationship between aggression and victimisation so its often the case bullies were bullied.
Sainio et al (2011)
Found that 3⁄4 of victims report having a classmate who defends them against bullies.
Overtime victimisation increases children’s aggression, withdrawal, depression and loneliness.
Sociometric status
Reflects the degree to which children are liked or disliked by their peers as a group. The system classifies people into five groups; popular, rejected, neglected, average or controversial.
Those who are popular or rejected tend to remain in the same category but others are fairly dynamic.
Similar studies have been done in other cultures finding the same patterns. Although in China children who are withdrawn, sensitive and shy were deemed socially competent and as leaders and liked by peers, most likely because their culture values self-effacing, withdrawn behvaiour.
Popular individuals
Different to just likeable as they tend to be more influential, not necessarily have more friends and show aggression (relational usually).
Relational aggression
Is kind of aggression that involves excluding others from the social group and attempting to do harm to other peoples relationships; spreading rumours about peers, withholding friendship to inflict harm, ignoring peers when angry or frustrated and trying to get one’s own way.
Rejected children
Children or adolescents who are liked by few peers and disliked by many peers.
They tend to differ in social motives and how they process social information and report more hostile solutions to social problems. This may be because of a a poorly developed TOM causing a lack of understanding.
Aggressive-rejected children are especially prone to physical aggression, disruptive behaviour, delinquency and negative behaviour such as hostility and threatening others.
A key question is whether peer rejection causes problems at school and in adjustment or whether children’s maladaptive behvaiour leads to both peer rejection and problems at school. Withdrawn- rejected children refers to rejected children that are social withdrawn, wary and often timid.
They are frequently victimised by peers and many feel isolated, lonely and depressed.
Neglected children
Children or adolescents who are infrequently mentioned as either liked or disliked, they aren’t noticed much by peers. It’s suggested they are usually socially competent but just withdrawn.
They tend to be less sociable and disruptive than average and receive less support from peers.