Empirical test of bullies' status goals: assessing direct goals, aggression, and prestige

The literature suggests that status goals are one of the driving motivations behind bullying behavior, yet this conjecture has rarely if ever been examined empirically. This study assessed status goals in three ways, using dyadic network analysis to analyze the relations and goals among 10-11 and 14-15 year olds in 22 school classes (N boys=225; N girls=277). As a validation bullies were contrasted with victims. Bullies had direct status goals (measured with the Interpersonal Goal Inventory for Children) and showed dominance as measured with proactive aggression. Moreover, as predicted from a goal perspective, bullying behavior was related to prestige in terms of perceived popularity. In contrast, victims lacked status goals, were only reactively aggressive, and low on prestige. That being popular is not the same as being liked could be shown by the fact that bullies were just as rejected as victims by their classmates. Eighth-grade bullies had more direct status goals than fourth-grade bullies, possibly indicating that striving for the popularity component of status increases in early adolescence.     

All you need is love: Is the sociometer especially sensitive to one's mating capacity?

Self‐esteem has been proposed to serve as a sociometer, a gauge of one's value as a relationship partner. Based on evolutionary reasoning, we hypothesized that the sociometer is particularly sensitive to “capacity rejection” in the mating domain. Capacity rejection implies that one has low potential to be an acceptable mate now and in the future. In Study 1, participants received no feedback or negative feedback regarding their capacity for being an acceptable mate or friend. Although participants in both mate and friend conditions felt rejected, only those in the mate condition exhibited significantly lower state self‐esteem. In Study 2, we examined sex differences in attributes relevant to mate capacity. Participants were given no feedback or negative feedback regarding their capacity as a mate: Some were told that their low mate capacity is due to their physical attractiveness whereas others were told it is due to their competence and status. Among men, state self‐esteem was lower only after competence and status‐based rejection; among women, state self‐esteem was lower only after physical attractiveness‐based rejection. In both studies, additional results revealed that even while self‐esteem decreased, positive beliefs about the self were maintained, suggesting that feelings and beliefs about the self react differently to rejection. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Bullying and victimization in elementary schools: a comparison of bullies, victims, bully/victims, and uninvolved preadolescents

Research on bullying and victimization largely rests on univariate analyses and on reports from a single informant. Researchers may thus know too little about the simultaneous effects of various independent and dependent variables, and their research may be biased by shared method variance. The database for this Dutch study was large (N = 1,065) and rich enough to allow multivariate analysis and multi-source information. In addition, the effect of familial vulnerability for internalizing and externalizing disorders was studied. Gender, aggressiveness, isolation, and dislikability were most strongly related to bullying and victimization. Among the many findings that deviated from or enhanced the univariate knowledge base were that not only victims and bully/victims but bullies as well were disliked and that parenting was unrelated to bullying and victimization once other factors were controlled.     

Same-gender and cross-gender peer acceptance and peer rejection and their relation to bullying and helping among preadolescents: comparing predictions from gender-homophily and goal-framing approaches

The relation between bullying and helping and same-gender and cross-gender peer acceptance and peer rejection was examined in a sample of preadolescents aged 11 and 12 years (N=1,065). The authors tested predictions from a gender-homophily approach vs. predictions from a goal-framing approach in which acceptance and rejection are seen as being generated by approach and avoidance goals, respectively. For preadolescents, both approaches predicted a central role for gender, but the gender-homophily approach predicted symmetrical effects for acceptance and rejection, whereas the goal-framing approach predicted strong asymmetries. The data supported the goal-framing approach. The most important findings were that for preadolescents, acceptance is much more frequent and much more gendered than rejection; the absolute impact of helping on acceptance is much larger than that of bullying (and vice versa for rejection); for acceptance, there is a prototypicality effect (i.e., boys accept bullying girls better than nonbullying girls, and girls accept helping boys better than nonhelping boys); and for acceptance, there is a cross-gender ignorance effect (i.e., boys ignore helping in girls, and girls ignore bullying in boys).