Choosing friends based on similarity or popularity? Friendship preferences of children exhibiting bullying and defending in late childhood

Abstract

This study examined whether children with high levels of bullying or defending rather choose similar or popular peers as friends in late childhood. We expected that friendship preferences of children were based on similarity in bullying and defending behaviors. Moreover, we assumed that children’s bullying behavior was associated with the tendency to seek out popular peers as friends. To test these hypotheses, we analyzed data from third- (M_age = 9.35 years) and fourth-grade (M_age = 10.46 years) students in China (N = 453, 54.79% boys at wave 1; N = 454, 54.35% boys at wave 2; N = 453, 54.05% boys at wave 3). Longitudinal social network analysis revealed that children’s level of bullying behavior was associated with their likelihood of choosing popular peers as friends, while defending behavior was related to a tendency to select peers with similar levels of defending as friends. The study sheds light on “whom” children with bullying or defending behaviors select for affiliation within Chinese culture, and has implications for prevention and intervention of school bullying.

Keywords

Bullying defending popularity friendship late childhood

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Andrews

N. C.

(2023). A model of peer aggression and victimization on the social spectrum: A relational perspective. Developmental Review, 69, 101088. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2023.101088

Bahns

A. J.

Pickett

K. M.

Crandall

C. S.

(2012). Social ecology of similarity: Big schools, small schools and social relationships. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 15(1), 119–131. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430211410751

Block

(2015). Reciprocity, transitivity, and the mysterious three-cycle. Social Networks, 40, 163–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2014.10.005

Bravo

Ortega-Ruiz

Veenstra

Engels

M. C.

Romera

E. M.

(2022). Friendship selection and influence processes for popularity in early and mid-adolescents. Journal of Adolescence, 94(1), 45–56. https://doi.org/10.1002/jad.12004

Choukas-Bradley

Giletta

Cohen

G. L.

Prinstein

M. J.

(2015). Peer influence, peer status, and prosocial behavior: An experimental investigation of peer socialization of adolescents’ intentions to volunteer. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 44, 2197–2210. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-015-0373-2

Dijkstra

J. K.

Berger

Lindenberg

(2011). Do physical and relational aggression explain adolescents’ friendship selection? The competing roles of network characteristics, gender, and social status. Aggressive Behavior, 37(5), 417–429. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.20402

Dijkstra

J. K.

Cillessen

A. H. N.

Borch

(2013). Popularity and adolescent friendship networks: Selection and influence dynamics. Developmental Psychology, 49(7), 1242–1252. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030098

Duffy

A. L.

Penn

Nesdale

Zimmer-Gembeck

M. J.

(2017). Popularity: Does it magnify associations between popularity prioritization and the bullying and defending behavior of early adolescent boys and girls? Social Development, 26(2), 263–277. https://doi.org/10.1111/sode.12206

Gaffney

Ttofi

M. M.

Farrington

D. P.

(2021). What works in anti-bullying programs? Analysis of effective intervention components. Journal of School Psychology, 85, 37–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2020.12.002

10.

Gini

Albiero

Benelli

Altoe

(2008). Determinants of adolescents’ active defending and passive bystanding behavior in bullying. Journal of Adolescence, 31(1), 93–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2007.05.002

11.

Gommans

Cillessen

A. H. N.

(2015). Nominating under constraints: A systematic comparison of unlimited and limited peer nomination methodologies in elementary school. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 39(1), 77–86. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025414551761

12.

Huitsing

Snijders

T. A. B.

Van Duijn

M. A. J.

Veenstra

(2014). Victims, bullies, and their defenders: A longitudinal study of the coevolution of positive and negative networks. Development and Psychopathology, 26(3), 645–659. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579414000297

13.

Huitsing

Veenstra

(2012). Bullying in classrooms: Participant roles from a social network perspective. Aggressive Behavior, 38(6), 494–509. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21438

14.

LaFontana

K. M.

Cillessen

A. H. N.

(2010). Developmental changes in the priority of perceived status in childhood and adolescence. Social Development, 19(1), 130–147. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9507.2008.00522.x

15.

Lambe

L. J.

Craig

W. M.

(2022). The co-evolution of friendship, defending behaviors, and peer victimization: A short-term longitudinal social network analysis. Social Development, 31(4), 984–1000. https://doi.org/10.1111/sode.12599

16.

Laninga-Wijnen

Malamut

S. T.

Garandeau

C. F.

Salmivalli

(2023). Does defending affect adolescents’ peer status, or vice versa? Testing the moderating effects of empathy, gender, and anti-bullying norms. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 33(3), 913–930. https://doi.org/10.1111/jora.12847

17.

Laninga-Wijnen

Harakeh

Steglich

C. E. G.

Dijkstra

J. K.

Veenstra

Vollebergh

W. A. M.

(2017). The norms of popular peers moderate friendship dynamics of adolescent aggression. Child Development, 88(4), 1265–1283. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12650

18.

Lansu

T. A.

(2023). How popularity goal and popularity status are related to observed and peer-nominated aggressive and prosocial behaviors in elementary school students. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 227, 105590. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2022.105590

19.

Xie

Shi

(2012). Chinese and American children’s perceptions of popularity determinants: Cultural differences and behavioral correlates. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 36(6), 420–429. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025412446393

20.

Lindenberg

(2006). Prosocial behavior, solidarity, and framing processes. In Fetchenhauer

Flache

Buunk

Lindenberg

(Eds.), Solidarity and prosocial behavior (pp. 23–44). Springer US. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-28032-4_2

21.

Logis

H. A.

Rodkin

P. C.

Gest

S. D.

Ahn

H.-J.

(2013). Popularity as an organizing factor of preadolescent friendship networks: Beyond prosocial and aggressive behavior. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 23(3), 413–423. https://doi.org/10.1111/jora.12033

22.

Merrin

G. J.

Haye

K. D. L.

Espelage

D. L.

Ewing

Tucker

J. S.

Hoover

Green

H. D.

(2018). The co-evolution of bullying perpetration, homophobic teasing, and a school friendship network. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 47, 601–618. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-017-0783-4

23.

Miklikowska

Tilton-Weaver

Burk

W. J.

(2022). With a little help from my empathic friends: The role of peers in the development of empathy in adolescence. Developmental Psychology, 58(6), 1156–1162. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0001347

24.

Murray-Close

Hoza

Hinshaw

S. P.

Arnold

L. E.

Swanson

Jensen

P. S.

Hechtman

Wells

(2010). Developmental processes in peer problems of children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in the multimodal treatment study of children with ADHD: Developmental cascades and vicious cycles. Development and Psychopathology, 22(4), 785–802. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579410000465

25.

Ojanen

Findley-Van Nostrand

(2014). Social goals, aggression, peer preference, and popularity: Longitudinal links during middle school. Developmental Psychology, 50(8), 2134–2143. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037137

26.

Ojanen

Grönroos

Salmivalli

(2005). An interpersonal circumplex model of children’s social goals: Links with peer-reported behavior and sociometric status. Developmental Psychology, 41(5), 699–710. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.41.5.699

27.

Ojanen

Sijtsema

J. J.

Rambaran

A. J.

(2013). Social goals and adolescent friendships: Social selection, deselection, and influence. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 23(3), 550–562. https://doi.org/10.1111/jora.12043

28.

Olweus

(2013). School bullying: Development and some important challenges. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 9(1), 751–780. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-050212-185516

29.

Palacios

Dijkstra

J. K.

Berger

Huisman

Veenstra

(2022). Disentangling dyadic and reputational perceptions of prosociality, aggression, and popularity in explaining friendship networks in early adolescence. Social Development, 31(3), 699–714. https://doi.org/10.1111/sode.12565

30.

Paluck

E. L.

Shepherd

Aronow

P. M.

(2016). Changing climates of conflict: A social network experiment in 56 schools. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(3), 566–571. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1514483113

31.

Pan

Garandeau

C. F.

Salmivalli

Zhang

(2023). The dynamic associations between social dominance goals and bullying from middle to late childhood: The moderating role of classroom bystander behaviors. Journal of Educational Psychology, 115(2), 349–362. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000776

32.

Pan

Zhang

Garandeau

C. F.

Salmivalli

Zhang

(2020). Classroom status hierarchy moderates the association between social dominance goals and bullying behavior in middle childhood and early adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 49, 2285–2297. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-020-01285-z

33.

Peets

Pöyhönen

Juvonen

Salmivalli

(2015). Classroom norms of bullying alter the degree to which children defend in response to their affective empathy and power. Developmental Psychology, 51(7), 913–920. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039287

34.

Pouwels

J. L.

van Noorden

T. H. J.

Caravita

S. C. S.

(2019). Defending victims of bullying in the classroom: The role of moral responsibility and social costs. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 84, 103831. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2019.103831

35.

Pöyhönen

Juvonen

Salmivalli

(2010). What does it take to stand up for the victim of bullying? The interplay between personal and social factors. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 56(2), 143–163. https://doi.org/10.1353/mpq.0.0046

36.

Pronk

Olthof

Goossens

F. A.

Krabbendam

(2019). Differences in adolescents’ motivations for indirect, direct, and hybrid peer defending. Social Development, 28(2), 414–429. https://doi.org/10.1111/sode.12348

37.

Rambaran

J. A.

Dijkstra

J. K.

Veenstra

(2020). Bullying as a group process in childhood: A longitudinal social network analysis. Child Development, 91(4), 1336–1352. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13298

38.

Ripley

R. M.

Snijders

T. A. B.

Boda

Voros

Preciado

(2018). Manual for RSIENA (May 24, 2018). Department of Statistics, Nuffield College, University of Oxford.

39.

Ruggieri

Friemel

Sticca

Perren

Alsaker

(2013). Selection and influence effects in defending a victim of bullying: The moderating effects of school context. Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences, 79, 117–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.05.060

40.

Salmivalli

(2010). Bullying and the peer group: A review. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 15(2), 112–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2009.08.007

41.

Salmivalli

Lagerspetz

Björkqvist

Österman

Kaukiainen

(1996). Bullying as a group process: Participant roles and their relations to social status within the group. Aggressive Behavior, 22(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2337(1996)22:1<1::AID-AB1>3.0.CO;2-T

42.

Salmivalli

Voeten

(2004). Connections between attitudes, group norms, and behaviour in bullying situations. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 28(3), 246–258. https://doi.org/10.1080/01650250344000488

43.

Samson

J. E.

Delgado

M. A.

Louis

D. F.

Ojanen

(2022). Bullying and social goal-setting in youth: A meta-analysis. Social Development, 31(4), 945–961. https://doi.org/10.1111/sode.12595

44.

Sentse

Kiuru

Veenstra

Salmivalli

(2014). A social network approach to the interplay between adolescents’ bullying and likeability over time. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 43(9), 1409–1420. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-014-0129-4

45.

Sentse

Kretschmer

Salmivalli

(2015). The longitudinal interplay between bullying, victimization, and social status: Age-related and gender differences. Social Development, 24(3), 659–677. https://doi.org/10.1111/sode.12115

46.

Shin

(2017). Friendship dynamics of adolescent aggression, prosocial behavior, and social status: The moderating role of gender. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 46, 2305–2320. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-017-0702-8

47.

Shin

(2022). The role of perceived bullying norms in friendship dynamics: An examination of friendship selection and influence on bullying and victimization. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 46(5), 432–442. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025419868533

48.

Sijtsema

J. J.

Lindenberg

S. M.

Veenstra

(2010). Do they get what they want or are they stuck with what they can get? Testing homophily against default selection for friendships of highly aggressive boys. The TRAILS study. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 38, 803–813. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-010-9402-5

49.

Sijtsema

J. J.

Rambaran

J. A.

Caravita

S. C. S.

Gini

(2014). Friendship selection and influence in bullying and defending: Effects of moral disengagement. Developmental Psychology, 50(8), 2093–2104. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037145

50.

Snijders

T. A. B.

van de Bunt

G. G.

Steglich

C. E. G.

(2010). Introduction to stochastic actor-based models for network dynamics. Social Networks, 32(1), 44–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2009.02.004

51.

Steinberg

L. D.

(2020). Adolescence (12th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.

52.

Tseng

W.-L.

Banny

A. M.

Kawabata

Crick

N. R.

Gau

S.-F.

(2013). A cross-lagged structural equation model of relational aggression, physical aggression, and peer status in a Chinese culture. Aggressive Behavior, 39(4), 301–315. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21480

53.

Veenstra

Dijkstra

J. K.

Steglich

Van Zalk

M. H. W.

(2013). Network-behavior dynamics introduction. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 23(3), 399–412. https://doi.org/10.1111/jora.12070

54.

Veenstra

Laninga-Wijnen

(2022). Peer network studies and interventions in adolescence. Current Opinion in Psychology, 44, 157–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2021.09.015

55.

Viechtbauer

(2010). Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor package. Journal of Statistical Software, 36(3), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v036.i03

56.

Volk

A. A.

Veenstra

Espelage

D. L.

(2017). So you want to study bullying? Recommendations to enhance the validity, transparency, and compatibility of bullying research. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 36, 34–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2017.07.003

57.

Wiertsema

Vrijen

van der Ploeg

Sentse

Kretschmer

(2023). Bullying perpetration and social status in the peer group: A meta-analysis. Journal of Adolescence, 95(1), 34–55. https://doi.org/10.1002/jad.12109

58.

Wright

M. F.

Shi

(2014). Chinese adolescents’ social status goals: Associations with behaviors and attributions for relational aggression. Youth & Society, 46(4), 566–588. https://doi.org/10.1177/0044118X12448800