The architecture of high status among Finnish youth

British Journal of Developmental Psychology

Volumn 29, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 668-679

  Caravita, Simona C S ^a   Pöyhönen, Virpi ^b   Rajala, Irene ^b   Salmivalli, Christina ^b,c  

^a UNIVERSITÀ CATTOLICA DEL SACRO CUORE   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TURKU   (Finland)

^c UNIVERSITY OF STAVANGER   (Norway)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; AGE; ARTICLE; BEHAVIOR; CHILD; FEMALE; HUMAN; INDIVIDUALITY; MALE; PEER GROUP; PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL; SEX DIFFERENCE; SOCIAL ADAPTATION; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR; SOCIAL DESIRABILITY; SOCIAL DOMINANCE; SOCIOMETRIC STATUS;

ADOLESCENT; AGE FACTORS; CHILD; FEMALE; HIERARCHY, SOCIAL; HUMANS; INDIVIDUALITY; MALE; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; PEER GROUP; POWER (PSYCHOLOGY); SEX FACTORS; SOCIAL ADJUSTMENT; SOCIAL DESIRABILITY; SOCIAL DOMINANCE; SOCIAL IDENTIFICATION; SOCIOMETRIC TECHNIQUES;

EID: 80051768175     PISSN: 0261510X     EISSN: 2044835X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.2044-835X.2011.02034.x     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Adler, P. A., & Adler, P. (1998). Peer power. Preadolescent culture and identity. New Jersey Rutgers University Press.
2. Akaike, H. (1987). Factor analysis and the AIC. Psychometrika, 52, 317-332. doi:.
3. Andreou, E. (2006). Social preference, perceived popularity and social intelligence: Relations to overt and relational aggression. School Psychology International, 27, 339-351. doi:.
4. Byrne, B., Shavelson, R. J., & Muthén, B. (1989). Testing for the equivalence of factor covariance and mean structures: The issue of partial measurement invariance. Psychological Bulletin, 105, 456-466. doi:.
5. Caravita, S. C. S., Di Blasio, P., & Salmivalli, C. (2009). Unique and interactive effects of empathy and social status on involvement in bullying. Social Development, 18, 140-163. doi:.
6. Caravita, S. C. S., Di Blasio, P., & Salmivalli, C. (2010). Early adolescents' participation in bullying: Is ToM involved? Journal of Early Adolescence, 30, 138-170. doi:.
7. Cillessen, A. H. N. (2009). Sociometric methods. In K. H. Rubin, W. M. Bukowski, & B. Laursen (Eds.), Handbook of peer interactions, relationships and groups (pp. 82-99). NY Guilford.
8. Cillessen, A. H. N. (2011). Toward a theory of popularity. In A. H. N. Cillessen, D. Schwartz, & L. Mayeux (Eds.), Popularity in the peer system (pp. 273-299). New York, NY Guilford Press.
9. Cillessen, A. H. N., & Mayeux, L. (2004). From censure to reinforcement: Developmental changes in the association between aggression and social status. Child Development, 75, 147-163. doi:.
10. De Bruyn, E. H., Cillessen, A. H. N., & Wissink, I. (2010). Associations of peer acceptance and perceived popularity with bullying and victimization in early adolescence. Journal of Early Adolescence, 30, 543-566. doi:.
11. Dijkstra, J., Lindenberg, S., & Veenstra, R. (2007). 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. Developmental Psychology, 43, 1377-1389. doi:.
12. Dijkstra, J., Lindenberg, S., & Veenstra, R. (2008). Beyond the class norm: Bullying behavior of popular adolescents and its relation to peer acceptance and rejection. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 36, 1289-1299. doi:.
13. Dong, Q., Weisfeld, G., Boardway, R. H., & Shen, J. (1996). Correlates of social status among Chinese adolescents. Journal of Cross Cultural Psychology, 27, 476-493. doi:.
14. Hawley, P. (2002). Social dominance and prosocial and coercive strategies of resource control in preschoolers. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 26, 167-176. doi:.
15. Hymel, S., Closson, L. M., Caravita, S. C. S., & Vaillancourt, T. (2010). Social status among peers: From sociometric attraction to peer acceptance to perceived popularity. In P. K. Smith & C. H. Hart (Eds.), Handbook of childhood social development (2nd ed., pp. 375-392). Malden, MA Wiley/Blackwell.
16. Keltner, D., Gruenfeld, D. H., & Anderson, C. (2003). Power, approach, and inhibition. Psychological Review, 110, 265-284. doi:.
17. Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. (2nd ed). New York, NY Guilford Press.
18. LaFontana, K. M., & Cillessen, A. H. N. (2002). Children's perceptions of popular and unpopular peers: A multimethod assessment. Developmental Psychology, 38, 635-647. doi:.
19. 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. doi:.
20. Lease, M., Musgrove, K., & Axelrod, J. L. (2002). Dimensions of social status in preadolescent peer groups: Likability, perceived popularity and social dominance. Social Development, 11, 508-533. doi:.
21. Mayeux, L., Sandstrom, M., & Cillessen, A. (2008). Is being popular a risky proposition? Journal of Research on Adolescence, 18, 49-74. doi:.
22. Mazur, A. (1985). A biosocial model of status in face-to-face primate groups. Social Forces, 64, 377-402.
23. Moyer, K. E. (1976). The psychobiology of aggression. New York, NY Harper & Row.
24. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (19982006). Mplus user's guide. 4th ed. Los Angeles, CA Muthen & Muthen.
25. Parkhurst, J. T., & Hopmeyer, A. (1998). Sociometric popularity and peer-perceived popularity: Two distinct dimensions of peer status. Journal of Early Adolescence, 18, 125-144. doi:.
26. Rose, A. J., Click, G. C., & Smith, R. L. (2011). Popularity and gender: The two cultures of boys and girls. In A. H. N. Cillessen, D. Schwartz, & L. Mayeux (Eds.), Popularity in the peer system (pp. 103-122). New York, NY Guilford Press.
27. Rose, A., Swenson, L., & Waller, E. (2004). Overt and relational aggression and perceived popularity: Developmental differences in concurrent and prospective relations. Developmental Psychology, 40, 378-387. doi:.
28. Rubin, K. H., Bukowski, W. M., & Parker, J. G. (2006). Peer interactions, relationships, and groups. In W. Daon (Series Ed.) & N. Eisenberg (Vol. Ed.), Handbook of child psyhcology: Social, emotional, and personality development (6th ed., Vol. 3., pp. 571-645). New York Wiley.
29. Sandstrom, M., & Cillessen, A. (2006). Likeable versus popular: Distinct implications for adolescent adjustment. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 30, 305-314. doi:.
30. Savin-Williams, R. C. (1977). Dominance in a human adolescent group. Animal Behaviour, 25, 400-406. doi:.
31. Savin-Williams, R. C. (1979). Dominance hierarchies in groups of early adolescents. Child Development, 50, 923-935. Retrieved from.
32. Schwarz, G. (1978). Estimating the dimension of a model. Annals of Statistics, 6, 461-464. Retrieved from.
33. Schwartz, D., Tom, S. R., Chang, L., Xu, Y., Duong, M. T., & Kelly, B. M. (2010). Popularity and acceptance as distinct dimensions of social standing for Chinese children in Hong Kong. Social Development, 19, 681-697. doi:.
34. Segal, N. L., Weisfeld, G. E., & Weisfeld, C. C. (Eds.) (1997). Uniting psychology and biology: Integrative perspectives on human development. Washington, DC American Psychological Association.
35. Vaillancourt, T., & Hymel, S. (2006). Aggression and social status: The moderating roles of sex and peer-valued characteristics. Aggressive Behavior, 32, 396-408. doi:.
36. Weisfeld, G. E., Bloch, S. A., & Ivers, J. W. (1983). A factor analytic study of peer-perceived dominance in adolescent boys. Adolescence, 18, 229-243.
37. Weisfeld, G. E., Bloch, S. A., & Ivers, J. W. (1984). Possible determinants of social dominance among adolescent girls. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 144, 115-129.