Empirical
Articles
Vaughn,
B. E., Vollenweider, M., Bost, K. K., Azria-Evans, M. R., &
Snider, J. B. (2003). Negative Interactions and Social Competence
for Preschool Children in Two Samples: Reconsidering the Interpretation
of Aggressive Behavior for Young Children. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly,
49, 245-278.
Abstract:
Two samples of preschool children (471 attending Head Start, 472
in a community sample) were observed with regard to their initiations
of negative interactions. Scores for three dimensions of aggression
viewed as salient by preschool teachers were also derived from
observational data. Observation and sociometric assessments were
used to characterize children's social competence. Normative declines
in negative behavior and aggression scales were observed for some
measures. Children attending Head Start programs tended to have
higher scores for negative initiations and for one aggression
scale, but these results are qualified by significant gender by
sample interactions. Further analyses revealed coherence among
the negative behavior and aggression variables; however, for the
most part, aggression and negative behavior measures were positive
predictors of social competence in both samples. We conclude that
aggression and negative interactions per se need not be construed
as evidence of low social competence for preschool children and
that, to the extent that conflicts among preschoolers may be a
source of social cognitive growth, such behaviors may have a positive
impact on social development at these ages.
Return
to table of contents
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.
Abstract:
Self- and other-reported characteristics of children who varied
in their use of coercive (aggressive) and prosocial (cooperative)
strategies of resource control were studied in a sample of over
1,700 children. Based on self-reported use of coercive and prosocial
strategies of resource control, the children were categorized
as bistrategic controllers (Machiavellians), coercive controllers,
prosocial controllers, noncontrollers, or typicals. Self-reported
positive characteristics (e.g., agreeableness), negative characteristics
(e.g., hostility), and self-assessments (e.g., social self-concept)
were measured as well as peer ratings of aggression and peer regard
(e.g., likability, popularity) and teacher ratings of agreeableness,
aggression, and social acceptance. As hypothesized, the subtypes
differed across these variables in predictable ways. Specifically,
Machiavellians (i.e., those using both strategies of resource
control) emerged as possessing positive and negative characteristics
and, despite their aggression, Machiavellians were socially central,
liked by peers, socially skilled, and well adjusted. The utility
of an evolutionary perspective to resource control and social
competence is discussed as an additional model of aggression.
Return
to table of contents
Prinstein,
M. J., Cillessen, A. H. (2003). Forms and Functions of Adolescent
Peer Aggression Associated With High Levels of Peer Status. Merrill-Palmer
Quarterly, 49, 310-342.
Abstract:
Concurrent (Study 1) and longitudinal (Study 2) associations between
adolescents' aggression, victimization, and high status were examined
to test the hypothesis that forms and functions of aggression
most likely to affect the status hierarchy will be associated
with reputation-based measures of popularity. In Study 1, 235
10th -grade adolescents' overt, relational, and reputational forms
of aggression and victimization were assessed. Functions of aggression
(instrumental, reactive, bullying) within each form were also
examined. Results supported the general prediction that aggression
is associated with high peer-perceived popularity, but low likability
(i.e., social preference) among peers. Significant curvilinear
trends revealed a subtle association between aggression and low
levels of popularity as well. Regarding forms and functions, results
indicated that both the provocateurs and targets of reputational
aggression had high levels of peer-perceived popularity; proactive
uses of aggression were also associated with high popularity among
adolescents, while reactive aggression was associated with low
social preference. Longitudinal analyses of the same participants
in Study 2 indicated that high peer-perceived popularity and low
social preference predicted all forms of aggressive behavior over
a 17-month interval. Overall, the results reveal complex associations
between aggression and status that help to explain possible social
reinforcement associated with aggression and clarify the pattern
of heterogeneous aggressive behaviors exhibited by adolescents
at various points along the status continuum.
Return
to table of contents
Little,
T. D., Braune, J., Jones, S. M., Nock, M. K., & Hawley, P.
H. (2003). Rethinking Aggression: A Typological Examination of
the Functions of Aggression. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 49, 343-369.
Abstract:
We compared five subgroups of aggressive youth (n = 1,723, Grades
5 through 10) on a number of adjustment correlates. The subgroups
were determined by the self-reported functions (i.e., "why")
of their aggressive behavior: (a) an "instrumental"
group who were high on instrumental reasons only; (b) a "reactive"
group who were high on reactive reasons only; (c) a "both"
group who were high on both dimensions; (d) a "typical"
group who were moderate on both dimensions; and (e) a "neither"
group who were low on both dimensions. The reactive and both groups
showed consistent maladaptive patterns across the adjustment correlates.
The instrumental and typical groups both showed generally adaptive
and well-adjusted patterns. Surprisingly, the neither group revealed
high levels of aggressive acts and showed consistent maladaptive
patterns on the correlates. These distinct profiles highlight
the utility of a typological approach to classifying aggressive
youth and have implications for both assessment and intervention.
Return
to table of contents
Commentaries
Underwood,
M. K. (2003). The Comity of Modest Manipulation, the Importance
of Distinguishing Among Bad Behaviors. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly,
49, 373-389.
Abstract:
The papers in this special issue argue that aggression is not
always bad, that some forms of aggression have some positive correlates.
How can we reconcile these claims and these results with a large
body of previous data showing that physical aggression is related
to maladjustment? This commentary will consider four issues in
relation to these four investigations. First, how exactly is aggression
defined, both conceptually and operationally? Second, for whom
might aggressive behavior have a bright side? How does aggression
relate to adjustment differently for girls and for boys, and for
children from different ethnic and socioeconomic groups? Third,
do specific forms of aggressive behavior relate to truly positive
correlates, and might these relations depend on the developmental
period in question? Last and perhaps most importantly, what specific
social processes might account for when aggressive behavior is
and is not maladaptive?
Return
to table of contents
Bukowski,
W. M. (2003). What Does It Mean to Say That Aggressive Children
Are Competent or Incompetent? Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 49, 390-400.
Abstract:
In contrast to the view that the association between aggression
and competence (i.e., the capacity to compete in the company of
others) is negative and linear, the present papers indicate that
(a) children whose level of aggression is moderately above the
mean show the highest level of competence whereas competence is
lowest in children who show no signs of aggression or whose aggression
is high and undifferentiated; (b) that the association between
aggression and competence is moderated by the function the aggression
serves; and (c) that moderately aggressive children are given
status within the peer system even though other children do not
typically like them. The association between aggression and competence
needs to be understood according to basic aspects of group process
such as dominance, resource control, and regulation of retaliatory
gestures between group members. Although children who show moderate
levels of aggression may be given status and power within the
peer group, it does not mean they are adjusted or that they will
receive or benefit from the affection or kindness from their peers.
Return
to table of contents
