Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Peer relations are increasingly important during early adolescence. Early adolescents spend considerable time among same-age others in school and during extracurricular activities. In these contexts, collective norms emerge, which guide behavior and determine how individuals can gain status and peer acceptance. Social networks shape young people’s attitudes, behavior, and identity development, while behavior and norms influence the dynamics of peer relations. The articles included in the special issue advance our understanding of the role of social networks in early adolescence by focusing on different types of peer relationships (friendship, bullying, collaboration choices in sports) associated with various outcomes (academic achievement and ambitions, aggression, prosocial behavior, self-judgment, social-emotional outcomes, and physical ability) and spanning diverse social contexts (US, UK, China, Germany, Hungary). This introduction to the special issue underscores the significance of social networks in early adolescence and highlights the unique contributions of the included studies.

Keywords

early adolescence peer influence peer selection social networks positive and negative ties behavioral contagion

The Importance of Peer Relations in Early Adolescence

Early adolescence (10–14 years of age) is a developmental period when peer relations become increasingly important (Hartup, 1993). On the one hand, early adolescents spend considerable time among same-age others in school and during extracurricular activities. On the other hand, this period is characterized by significant psychosocial changes and a shift in social reliance from parents to peers, as early adolescents begin to seek social and emotional support from their peer groups (Vijayakumar & Pfeifer, 2020). They increasingly seek social acceptance and emotional support from same-age others, driven by developmental changes, including heightened self-awareness, an increased need for autonomy, and evolving socio-cognitive abilities (Brown & Larson, 2009; East et al., 1987; Oberle et al., 2010).

Peers provide a sense of belonging and serve as a critical context for learning social and emotional skills (Prati et al., 2021; Roeser et al., 2000; Rubin et al., 2015). Positive peer interactions are linked to higher self-esteem and well-being, while negative experiences, such as peer rejection or bullying, can contribute to emotional distress and maladaptive behaviors (Mitic et al., 2021; Oberle et al., 2010; Rubin et al., 2011). In line with these developments, early adolescence is a period when youth become especially susceptible to peer influence and increasingly adhere to peer group norms that are in constant development (Laursen & Veenstra, 2021; Steinberg & Monahan, 2007; Veenstra, 2025). The significance of peer influence has been found for a wide range of adaptive and maladaptive behaviors; including academic achievement and motivation, prosocial and antisocial behavior, delinquency, and substance use (Brechwald & Prinstein, 2011).

Social network analysis is a widely applied tool for studying peer relations, as it inherently focuses on interdependent relationships between individuals. Recent advances in statistical models allow for disentangling important mechanisms underlying the co-development of social networks and early adolescents’ behavior: peer influence and the drivers of relationship choices (Steglich et al., 2010; Steglich & Snijders, 2022; Veenstra et al., 2013).

The studies included in this special issue contribute to this literature. They investigate positive (Piera Pi-Sunyer et al., 2024; Qin et al., 2024; Renick & Schaefer, 2025; Vit et al., 2024) as well as negative peer relationships (Pistocchi et al., 2024) among early adolescents. Most of them focus on peer relations in schools (Holler & Schüßler, 2024; Pistocchi et al., 2024; Qin et al., 2024; Vit et al., 2024), one study examines close ties in an out-of-school summer program (Renick & Schaefer, 2025), while another takes into account friendship relations in general (Piera Pi-Sunyer et al., 2024). Half of the studies investigate the drivers of peer selection and how peers influence each other (Holler & Schüßler, 2024; Qin et al., 2024; Vit et al., 2024), the other half focuses on the association between peer relations and different psychological, social-emotional, and academic outcomes (Piera Pi-Sunyer et al., 2024; Pistocchi et al., 2024; Renick & Schaefer, 2025).

Positive and Negative Peer Relationships

Positive peer relations, such as friendships, are important for a wide range of positive and negative outcomes in adolescence. It has been long emphasized that the impact of peer relations is not just a dyadic effect, but the structure and the dynamics of peer relations matters for both individual and collective outcomes (Coleman, 1960, 1994). Having high-quality friendships and being liked by peers are positively associated with increased social capital (Coleman, 1987; Cook, 2014; Frank et al., 2013), cognitive and social developmental outcomes, while being rejected is a risk factor for internalizing and externalizing problems and maladaptive psychosocial functioning (Hartup, 1996).

Contributing to the literature on the effect of positive relationships, the study by Piera Pi-Sunyer et al. (2024) in this special issue investigates the association between perceived friendship quality and self-judgements among adolescent girls from London. Confirming the beneficial psychological effects of having supportive peer relationships, they find that higher perceived friendship quality is associated with higher positive self-judgement and lower negative self-judgements. This association holds similarly for early and mid-adolescents.

Renick and Schaefer’s (2025) study in this special issue examines how peer relations and social-emotional outcomes develop within an out-of-school program serving Latine adolescents in California. They find that during the program, the number of positive ties increases, and there is a cross-sectional association between close ties to peers and social-emotional outcomes such as mattering, connection, and program climate perception.

Peer relations, however, are not always positive; an increasing number of studies focus on various types of negative relations, such as antipathies and bullying (Harrigan et al., 2020; Veenstra & Huitsing, 2021). The high prevalence of bullying among young people is a serious challenge faced by most societies (Biswas et al., 2020). Bullying is a recurring ill-intentioned act that occurs between one or more bullies and their victim, characterized by a real or perceived power imbalance (Olweus, 1993). Bullying is not an isolated behaviour; it is embedded in group processes and status hierarchies of adolescents (Huitsing & Veenstra, 2012; Salmivalli et al., 1996). Therefore, social network analysis is a particularly fruitful approach for studying bullying behavior of early adolescents (Veenstra & Huitsing, 2021).

The study by Pistocchi et al. (2024) in this special issue contributes to a line of literature that focuses on intergroup bullying relationships (Fandrem et al., 2009; Kisfalusi et al., 2020; Kuldas et al., 2022; Tolsma et al., 2013). More specifically, it examines intra- and interreligious bullying among Muslim and non-Muslim German adolescents. Religiosity has been found to be an important determinant of adolescents’ peer relationships (Leszczensky & Pink, 2017). Pistocchi et al. (2024) show that bullying also often crosses religious group boundaries, and intra- and interreligious bullying might have different consequences for the victims. In line with previous studies (Juvonen et al., 2011), Pistocchi et al. (2024) find that bullying can be detrimental to students’ academic achievement, but show that it is mainly Muslim students who are vulnerable to the negative academic consequences of bullying, especially when bullied by non-Muslim peers.

The Declining Role of Parental Directing in Adolescents’ Friendship Choices

The declining reliance on parents during early adolescence is evidenced by the study of Qin et al. (2024) in this special issue. They find that while peer characteristics such as academic achievement, prosociality, and aggression are important determinants of adolescent friendships, friends also influence each other with regard to these behaviours. Despite the encouragement of parents to select high-achieving, prosocial, and less aggressive friends, parental direction had no impact on friendship selection.

Academic Achievement and Ambitions

Educational outcomes are influenced by the peer group individuals are part of. Being integrated into the social networks of positive and supportive peer relationships in an educational context and belonging to peer groups with pro-achievement norms have been found to have a positive effect on educational success (Coleman, 1988; Ivaniushina & Alexandrov, 2017; Stadtfeld et al., 2018).

Students are likely to have friends who have similar characteristics, attitudes, and behavior (Kandel, 1978; McPherson et al., 2001). Friendship homophily has been found with regard to a lot of school-related attitudes and behavior, such as academic achievement (Flashman, 2012; Kretschmer et al., 2018; Rambaran et al., 2017), problematic school behavior (Geven et al., 2013; Rambaran et al., 2017; Shin & Ryan, 2014a), achievement goals and academic motivation (Frank et al., 2008; Shin & Ryan, 2014a, 2014b), preferences for educational subjects (Raabe et al., 2019), and educational aspirations (Raabe & Wölfer, 2018). The similarity between the friends can be the result of at least two separate mechanisms: selection and peer influence. Whereas students are likely to select friends with similar educational attitudes and academic achievement, friends also influence each other’s academic achievement. Evidence has been found for both processes among adolescents (Altermatt & Pomerantz, 2005; Flashman, 2012; Fortuin et al., 2016; Gremmen et al., 2017; Laninga-Wijnen et al., 2019; Rambaran et al., 2017; Stark et al., 2017).

Vit et al.’s (2024) study in this special issue contributes to this line of literature by analyzing peer influence on academic achievement and ambitions. In contrast to previous studies that focused on educational expectations in a more distant future among middle adolescents (Kretschmer & Roth, 2021; Lorenz et al., 2020), this study investigates school subject-related academic ambitions (in mathematics and Hungarian literature) among early adolescents in Hungarian elementary schools. They find that early adolescents tend to adjust both their academic ambitions and their achievement to that of their friends. The exact mechanisms, however, differ in the case of the two subjects: for ambitions and achievement in Hungarian literature, high-performing students are especially influential, while for mathematics, lower-performing students seem to have more influence on their friends. Qin et al. (2024), using achievement scores calculated from multiple subjects, find a similar tendency as Vit et al. (2024) found for mathematics: among the studied Chinese adolescents, peer influence was stronger among low-achieving students.

Studies in this special issue also confirm that academic achievement is an important characteristic on which early adolescents base their friendship choices. Qin et al. (2024) find that adolescents tend to select friends with similar school performance but are also attracted to high-achieving peers. Vit et al.’s (2024) finding aligns with this result but shows that this association might be subject-specific; they find a similar pattern in the case of achievement in Hungarian literature but no effect in the case of mathematics.

Physical Ability

Academic achievement is only one of the many factors that play a role in early adolescents’ status hierarchies. While sports performance and physical ability have been found to be an important predictor of status among adolescents (Bocskor, 2022; Chase & Dummer, 1992; Coleman, 1961; Dunn et al., 2007; Hollett et al., 2020), it has received much less attention among social network scholars than academic achievement. A recent study by Prochnow et al. (2020) reviews studies that investigate the impact of peer networks on children and adolescents’ physical activity. The article by Holler and Schüßler (2024) in this special issue takes a different approach: analyzing high school data from Germany, they investigate how physical ability is associated with collaboration networks in physical education. They find that controlling for liking relations and gender, adolescents tend to select high and similarly performing peers as team partners. Their article also connects to a line of literature that underscores the important role of peer-perceived characteristics in shaping social relations (Boda et al., 2020; Grow et al., 2016; Kisfalusi et al., 2018, 2020); they find that only peer-perceived physical ability is associated with team partner nominations, physical self-concept and teacher rating of physical ability are not.

Methodological Advances in Social Network Analysis

In the last decades, statistical methods have been developed for the analysis of social networks. Standard statistical methods (e.g., ordinary least squares and logistic regression) assume independence among actors and ties; therefore, they cannot model network dependencies. In social networks, however, several underlying social mechanisms (e.g., reciprocity, transitivity, homophily) structure the formation of ties between actors. Statistical methods in social network analysis explicitly model the dependence among ties and, therefore, are able to disentangle various mechanisms of tie formation. The two most widely applied cross-sectional and longitudinal methods are exponential random graph models (ERGMs, Lusher et al., 2013; Robins et al., 2007) and stochastic actor-oriented models (SAOMs, Snijders et al., 2010; Steglich et al., 2010). SAOMs are especially suitable to separate selection and influence processes in social networks, that is, to disentangle whether peers with similar characteristics are more likely to form ties with each other over time (selection), or whether peers become more similar over time to peers they are connected to (peer influence) (Steglich et al., 2010; Steglich & Snijders, 2022). Two of the papers published in this special issue apply longitudinal SAOMs to analyze the co-evolution of friendships and different student characteristics such as academic achievement, ambitions, aggression, and prosocial behavior (Qin et al., 2024; Vit et al., 2024), while one paper uses ERGMs to investigate the association between physical ability and social relationships in physical education (Holler & Schüßler, 2024).

Conclusion

Articles in this special issue highlight that peer relations, peer influence, and peer selection are crucial for grasping how early adolescents navigate their social worlds within and beyond school settings. It is important to emphasize that peer effects should not be simplified to group fixed effects. At the same time, peer effects go well beyond the dyad and therefore should not be handled merely as interpersonal influences either. The structure and the dynamics of peer relations, and the inherent interpendencies make the consideration of them in terms of social networks essential.

Social networks shape critical developmental outcomes, including academic achievement, emotional well-being, identity formation, and risk-taking behaviors (Brown & Larson, 2009; Piera Pi-Sunyer et al., 2024; Pistocchi et al., 2024; Qin et al., 2024; Renick & Schaefer, 2025; Vit et al., 2024). Structural mechanisms inherent in early adolescents’ social networks regulate their social integration, exclusion, and collective behavioral patterns. In this process, group norms, informal status hierarchies, and multiplex social ties develop (Holler & Schüßler, 2024; Qin et al., 2024; Rubin et al., 2015; Vit et al., 2024). By examining peer influence within social structures, researchers can better understand how early adolescents adopt behaviors, attitudes, and social roles in ways that extend beyond simple one-on-one interactions. Additionally, out-of-school contexts, such as extracurricular activities and digital social spaces, complicate these dynamics, highlighting the need for multiplex network-based approaches to early adolescent socialization (Hooijsma et al., 2020; Renick & Schaefer, 2025; Veenstra et al., 2023).

Future research on social networks in early adolescence faces significant methodological and ethical challenges. The rise of social media has introduced new layers of complexity, as early adolescents’ interactions are increasingly hybrid, blending online and offline exchanges in ways that reshape influence and selection processes (Nesi et al., 2018). Decreasing willingness to survey participation, ethical concerns, and limited researcher access to social media information create obstacles for studying social network mechanisms (Livingstone & Third, 2017; Molina & Borgatti, 2021). Moreover, multiplexity complicates traditional network analysis, requiring more sophisticated methods to capture the simultaneous effects of friendship, competition, collaboration, and digital engagement (Hooijsma et al., 2020; Vörös & Snijders, 2017). Addressing these challenges requires interdisciplinary approaches that integrate computational social science, developmental psychology, and ethical research frameworks to ensure that studies on early adolescent social networks remain both methodologically rigorous, socially responsible, and informative for educational policy.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: The authors acknowledge the support of the Swedish Research Council (VR grant no. 2023-06105).

ORCID iDs

Dorottya Kisfalusi

Károly Takács

Author Biographies

Dorottya Kisfalusi is a senior research fellow at the HUN-REN Centre for Social Sciences in Budapest, Hungary and the Institute for Analytical Sociology, Linköping University, Norrköping, Sweden. Her current research interests include educational inequalities, school segregation, discrimination, positive and negative peer relationships among children and adolescents, school bullying and victimization, interethnic relations, and ethnic classification processes.

Károly Takács is professor at the Institute for Analytical Sociology, Linköping University, Norrköping, Sweden and at the HUN-REN Centre for Social Sciences in Budapest, Hungary. His research interests are the theoretical, experimental, and empirical analysis of social networks in relation to problems of honest communication, social norms, cooperation, academic achievement, inequalities, and conflict.

References

Altermatt

E. R.

Pomerantz

E. M.

(2005). The implications of having high-achieving versus low-achieving friends: A longitudinal analysis. Social Development, 14(1), 61–81. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9507.2005.00291.x

Biswas

Scott

J. G.

Munir

Thomas

H. J.

Huda

M. M.

Hasan

M. M.

David de Vries

Baxter

Mamun

A. A.

(2020). Global variation in the prevalence of bullying victimisation amongst adolescents: Role of peer and parental supports. eClinicalMedicine, 20(March), Article 100276. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2020.100276

Bocskor

Á.

(2022). Reputational status dynamics from a mixed methods perspective: Coolness and popularity in a Hungarian primary school sample. Youth & Society, 54(6), 1051–1076. https://doi.org/10.1177/0044118X211012815

Boda

Néray

Snijders

T. A. B.

(2020). The dynamics of interethnic friendships and negative ties in secondary school: The role of peer-perceived ethnicity. Social Psychology Quarterly, 83(4), 342–362. https://doi.org/10.1177/0190272520907594

Brechwald

W. A.

Prinstein

M. J.

(2011). Beyond homophily: A decade of advances in understanding peer influence processes. Journal of Research on Adolescence: The Official Journal of the Society for Research on Adolescence, 21(1), 166–179. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-7795.2010.00721.x

Brown

B. B.

Larson

(2009). Peer relationships in adolescence. In Lerner

R. M.

Steinberg

(Eds.), Handbook of adolescent psychology: Contextual influences on adolescent development (3rd ed., Vol. 2, pp. 74–103). John Wiley & Sons, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470479193.adlpsy002004

Chase

M. A.

Dummer

G. M.

(1992). The role of sports as a social status determinant for children. Research Quarterly for Exercise & Sport, 63(4), 418–424. https://doi.org/10.1080/02701367.1992.10608764

Coleman

J. S.

(1960). The adolescent subculture and academic achievement. American Journal of Sociology, 65(4), 337–347. https://doi.org/10.1086/222722

Coleman

J. S.

(1961). The adolescent society. The social life of the teenager and its impact on education. Free Press.

10.

Coleman

J. S.

(1987). The creation and destruction of social capital: Implications for the law symposium on schools and society. Notre Dame Journal of Law, Ethics, and Public Policy, 3(3), 375–404. https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ndjlepp/vol3/iss3/3

11.

Coleman

J. S.

(1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. Supplement: Organizations and Institutions: Sociological and Economic Approaches to the Analysis of Social Structure. American Journal of Sociology, 94, S95–S120. https://doi.org/10.1086/228943

12.

Coleman

J. S.

(1994). Foundations of social theory. Harvard University Press.

13.

Cook

K. S.

(2014). Social capital and inequality: The significance of social connections. In McLeod

J. D.

Lawler

E. J.

Schwalbe

(Eds.), Handbook of the social psychology of inequality (pp. 207–227). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9002-4_9

14.

Dunn

J. C.

Dunn

J. G. H.

Bayduza

(2007). Perceived athletic competence, sociometric status, and loneliness in elementary school children. Journal of Sport Behavior, 30(3), 249–269.

15.

East

P. L.

Hess

L. E.

Lerner

R. M.

(1987). Peer social support and adjustment of early adolescent peer groups. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 7(2), 153–163. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431687072003

16.

Fandrem

Strohmeier

Roland

(2009). Bullying and victimization among native and immigrant adolescents in Norway the role of proactive and reactive aggressiveness. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 29(6), 898–923. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431609332935

17.

Flashman

(2012). Academic achievement and its impact on friend dynamics. Sociology of Education, 85(1), 61–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038040711417014

18.

Fortuin

van Geel

Vedder

(2016). Peers and academic achievement: A longitudinal study on selection and socialization effects of in-class friends. The Journal of Educational Research, 109(1), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2014.917257

19.

Frank

K. A.

Muller

Mueller

A. S.

(2013). The embeddedness of adolescent friendship nominations: The formation of social capital in emergent network structures. AJS; American journal of sociology, 119(1), 216–253. https://doi.org/10.1086/672081

20.

Frank

K. A.

Muller

Schiller

K. S.

Riegle‐Crumb

Mueller

A. S.

Crosnoe

Pearson

(2008). The social dynamics of mathematics coursetaking in high school. American Journal of Sociology, 113(6), 1645–1696. https://doi.org/10.1086/587153

21.

Geven

Weesie

van Tubergen

(2013). The influence of friends on adolescents’ behavior problems at school: The role of ego, alter and dyadic characteristics. Social Networks, 35(4), 583–592. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2013.08.002

22.

Gremmen

M. C.

Dijkstra

J. K.

Steglich

Veenstra

(2017). First selection, then influence: Developmental differences in friendship dynamics regarding academic achievement. Developmental Psychology, 53(7), 1356–1370. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000314

23.

Grow

Takács

Pál

(2016). Status characteristics and ability attributions in Hungarian school classes: An exponential random graph approach. Social Psychology Quarterly, 79(2), 156–167. https://doi.org/10.1177/0190272516643052

24.

Harrigan

N. M.

Labianca

Agneessens

(2020). Negative ties and signed graphs research: Stimulating research on dissociative forces in social networks. Social Networks, 60(4), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2019.09.004

25.

Hartup

W. W.

(1993). Adolescents and their friends. New Directions for Child Development, 1993(60), 3–22. https://doi.org/10.1002/cd.23219936003

26.

Hartup

W. W.

(1996). The company they keep: Friendships and their developmental significance. Child Development, 67(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.2307/1131681

27.

Holler

Schüßler

(2024). Gauging acceptance: A multifaceted examination of physical ability and its role for peer networks in adolescent physical education. The Journal of Early Adolescence. OnlineFirst. https://doi.org/10.1177/02724316241265459

28.

Hollett

Brock

S. J.

Grimes

J. R.

Cosgrove

(2020). Is knowledge really power? Characteristics contributing to social status during group work in physical education. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 25(1), 16–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/17408989.2019.1671325

29.

Hooijsma

Huitsing

Kisfalusi

Dijkstra

J. K.

Flache

Veenstra

(2020). Multidimensional similarity in multiplex networks: Friendships between same- and cross-gender bullies and same- and cross-gender victims. Network Science, 8(1), 79–96. https://doi.org/10.1017/nws.2020.1

30.

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

31.

Ivaniushina

Alexandrov

(2017). Anti-school attitudes, school culture and friendship networks. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 39(5), 698–716. https://doi.org/10.1080/01425692.2017.1402674

32.

Juvonen

Wang

Espinoza

(2011). Bullying experiences and compromised academic performance across middle school grades. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 31(1), 152–173. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431610379415

33.

Kandel

D. B.

(1978). Homophily, selection and socialization in adolescent friendships. American Journal of Sociology, 84(2), 427–436. https://doi.org/10.1086/226792

34.

Kisfalusi

Janky

Takács

(2018). Double standards or social identity? The role of gender and ethnicity in ability perceptions in the classroom. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 39(5), 745–780. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431618791278

35.

Kisfalusi

Pál

Boda

(2020). Bullying and victimization among majority and minority students: The role of peers’ ethnic perceptions. Social Networks, 60(2), 48–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2018.08.006

36.

Kretschmer

Leszczensky

Pink

(2018). Selection and influence processes in academic achievement—More pronounced for girls? Social Networks, 52(1), 251–260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2017.09.003

37.

Kretschmer

Roth

(2021). Why do friends have similar educational expectations? Separating influence and selection effects. European Sociological Review, 37(2), 201–217. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcaa042

38.

Kuldas

Foody

O’Higgins Norman

(2022). Does ethnicity of victims and bullies really matter? Suggestions for further research on intra-ethnic bullying/victimisation. International Journal of Bullying Prevention, 4(4), 243–254. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42380-021-00088-5

39.

Laninga-Wijnen

Gremmen

M. C.

Dijkstra

J. K.

Veenstra

Vollebergh

W. A. M.

Harakeh

(2019). The role of academic status norms in friendship selection and influence processes related to academic achievement. Developmental Psychology, 55(2), 337–350. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000611

40.

Laursen

Veenstra

(2021). Toward understanding the functions of peer influence: A summary and synthesis of recent empirical research. Journal of Research on Adolescence: The Official Journal of the Society for Research on Adolescence, 31(4), 889–907. https://doi.org/10.1111/jora.12606

41.

Leszczensky

Pink

(2017). Intra- and inter-group friendship choices of christian, Muslim, and non-religious youth in Germany. European Sociological Review, 33(1), 72–83. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcw049

42.

Livingstone

Third

(2017). Children and young people’s rights in the digital age: An emerging agenda. New Media & Society, 19(5), 657–670. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816686318

43.

Lorenz

Boda

Salikutluk

Jansen

(2020). Social influence or selection? Peer effects on the development of adolescents’ educational expectations in Germany. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 41(5), 643–669. https://doi.org/10.1080/01425692.2020.1763163

44.

Lusher

Koskinen

Robins

(Eds.), (2013). Exponential random graph models for social networks: Theories, methods, and applications. Cambridge University Press.

45.

McPherson

Smith-Lovin

Cook

J. M.

(2001). Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology, 27(1), 415–444. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.27.1.415

46.

Mitic

Woodcock

K. A.

Amering

Krammer

Stiehl

K. A. M.

Zehetmayer

Schrank

(2021). Toward an integrated model of supportive peer relationships in early adolescence: A systematic review and exploratory meta-analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 12(February), Article 589403. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.589403

47.

Molina

J. L.

Borgatti

S. P.

(2021). Moral bureaucracies and social network research. Social Networks, 67(October), 13–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2019.11.001

48.

Nesi

Choukas-Bradley

Prinstein

M. J.

(2018). Transformation of adolescent peer relations in the social media context: Part 1—A theoretical framework and application to dyadic peer relationships. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 21(3), 267–294. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10567-018-0261-x

49.

Oberle

Schonert-Reichl

K. A.

Thomson

K. C.

(2010). Understanding the link between social and emotional well-being and peer relations in early adolescence: Gender-specific predictors of peer acceptance. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 39(11), 1330–1342. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-009-9486-9

50.

Olweus

(1993). Bullying at school: What we know and what we can do. Wiley.

51.

Piera Pi-Sunyer

Evans

Ratcliffe

Janaarthanan

Ahmed

Kuyken

Dalgleish

Blakemore

S.-J.

(2024). The relationship between perceived friendship quality and self-judgements in adolescent girls from London. The Journal of Early Adolescence. OnlineFirst. https://doi.org/10.1177/02724316241271327

52.

Pistocchi

Triventi

Agneessens

(2024). Interreligious bullying and academic achievement among Muslim and non-muslim early adolescents in Germany. The Journal of Early Adolescence. OnlineFirst. https://doi.org/10.1177/02724316241273445

53.

Prati

Tomasetto

Cicognani

(2021). Sense of community in early adolescents: Validating the scale of sense of community in early adolescents. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 41(2), 309–331. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431620912469

54.

Prochnow

Delgado

Patterson

M. S.

Meyer

M. R. U.

(2020). Social network analysis in child and adolescent physical activity research: A systematic literature review. Journal of Physical Activity and Health, 17(2), 250–260. https://doi.org/10.1123/jpah.2019-0350

55.

Qin

Laninga-Wijnen

Steglich

Zhang

Ren

Veenstra

(2024). Parents on the sidelines: The role of parental directing in Chinese adolescents’ friendship dynamics related to academic achievement, aggression, and prosocial behavior. The Journal of Early Adolescence. OnlineFirst. https://doi.org/10.1177/02724316241244419

56.

Raabe

I. J.

Boda

Stadtfeld

(2019). The social pipeline: How friend influence and peer exposure widen the STEM gender gap. Sociology of Education, 92(2), 105–123. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038040718824095

57.

Raabe

I. J.

Wölfer

(2018). What is going on around you: Peer milieus and educational aspirations. European Sociological Review, 35(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcy048

58.

Rambaran

J. A.

Hopmeyer

Schwartz

Steglich

Badaly

Veenstra

(2017). Academic functioning and peer influences: A short-term longitudinal study of network-behavior dynamics in middle adolescence. Child Development, 88(2), 523–543. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12611

59.

Renick

Schaefer

D. R.

(2025). Increasing ties to peers and improving social emotional outcomes: Insights from an out-of-school program serving latine young adolescents. The Journal of Early Adolescence. OnlineFirst. https://doi.org/10.1177/02724316251330907

60.

Robins

Pattison

Kalish

Lusher

(2007). An introduction to exponential random graph (p*) models for social networks. Social Networks, 29(2), 173–191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2006.08.002

61.

Roeser

R. W.

Eccles

J. S.

Sameroff

A. J.

(2000). School as a context of early adolescents’ academic and social-emotional development: A summary of research findings. The Elementary School Journal, 100(5), 443–471. https://doi.org/10.1086/499650

62.

Rubin

K. H.

Bukowski

W. M.

Bowker

J. C.

(2015). Children in peer groups. In Bornstein

M. H.

Leventhal

Lerner

R. M.

(Eds.), Handbook of child psychology and developmental science: Ecological settings and processes (7th ed., Vol. 4, pp. 175–222). John Wiley & Sons, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118963418.childpsy405

63.

Rubin

K. H.

Bukowski

W. M.

Laursen

(2011). Handbook of peer interactions, relationships, and groups (1st ed.). Guilford Press.

64.

Salmivalli

Lagerspetz

Björkqvist

Österman

Kaukialnen

(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

65.

Shin

Ryan

A. M.

(2014a). Early adolescent friendships and academic adjustment: Examining selection and influence processes with longitudinal social network analysis. Developmental Psychology, 50(11), 2462–2472. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037922

66.

Shin

Ryan

A. M.

(2014b). Friendship networks and achievement goals: An examination of selection and influence processes and variations by gender. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 43(9), 1453–1464. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-014-0132-9

67.

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

68.

Stadtfeld

Vörös

Elmer

Boda

Raabe

I. J.

(2018). Integration in emerging social networks explains academic failure and success. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 116(3), Article 201811388. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1811388115

69.

Stark

T. H.

Leszczensky

Pink

(2017). Are there differences in ethnic majority and minority adolescents’ friendships preferences and social influence with regard to their academic achievement? Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft, 20(3), 475–498. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11618-017-0766-y

70.

Steglich

Snijders

T. A. B.

(2022). Stochastic network modeling as generative social science. In Gërxhani

De Graaf

Raub

(Eds.), Handbook of sociological science (pp. 73–99). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://www.elgaronline.com/edcollchap-oa/book/9781789909432/book-part-9781789909432-12.xml

71.

Steglich

Snijders

T. A. B.

Pearson

(2010). Dynamic networks and behavior: Separating selection from influence. Sociological Methodology, 40(1), 329–393. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9531.2010.01225.x

72.

Steinberg

Monahan

K. C.

(2007). Age differences in resistance to peer influence. Developmental Psychology, 43(6), 1531–1543. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.43.6.1531

73.

Tolsma

van Deurzen

Stark

T. H.

Veenstra

(2013). Who is bullying whom in ethnically diverse primary schools? Exploring links between bullying, ethnicity, and ethnic diversity in Dutch primary schools. Social Networks, 35(1), 51–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2012.12.002

74.

Veenstra

(2025). Harnessing peer influence: A summary and synthesis of social network and peer-led intervention research. International Journal of Behavioral Development. OnlineFirst. https://doi.org/10.1177/01650254251331201

75.

Veenstra

Bartogna

Laninga-Wijnen

(2023). The growth of longitudinal social network analysis: A review of the key data sets and topics in research on child and adolescent development. In Feinberg

M. E.

Osgood

D. W.

(Eds.), Teen friendship networks, development, and risky behavior (pp. 326–352). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197602317.003.0014

76.

Veenstra

Dijkstra

J. K.

Steglich

Van Zalk

M. H. W.

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

77.

Veenstra

Huitsing

(2021). Social network approaches to bullying and victimization. In P. Smith, & J. O'Higgins Norman (Eds.), The Wiley Blackwell Handbook of Bullying (Vol. 1, pp. 196-214). Wiley- Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118482650.ch11

78.

Vijayakumar

Pfeifer

J. H.

(2020). Self-disclosure during adolescence: Exploring the means, targets, and types of personal exchanges. Current Opinion in Psychology, 31(February), 135–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2019.08.005

79.

Vit

Bianchi

Castellani

Takács

(2024). Friends can help to aim high: Peer influence and selection effects on academic ambitions and achievement. The Journal of Early Adolescence. OnlineFirst. https://doi.org/10.1177/02724316241273427

80.

Vörös

Snijders

T. A. B.

(2017). Cluster analysis of multiplex networks: Defining composite network measures. Social Networks, 49(May), 93–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2017.01.002

Social Networks in Early Adolescence: Introduction to the Special Issue

Abstract

Keywords

The Importance of Peer Relations in Early Adolescence

Positive and Negative Peer Relationships

The Declining Role of Parental Directing in Adolescents’ Friendship Choices

Academic Achievement and Ambitions

Physical Ability

Methodological Advances in Social Network Analysis

Conclusion

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

Funding

ORCID iDs

Author Biographies

References