Aggressive and Prosocial? Examining Latent Profiles of Behavior, Social Status, Machiavellianism, and Empathy

Journal of Youth and Adolescence

Volumn 44, Issue 12, 2015, Pages 2230-2244

  Berger, Christian ^a   Batanova, Milena ^b   Cance, Jessica Duncan ^c  

^a PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATÓLICA DE CHILE   (Chile)

^b TUFTS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN   (United States)

Author keywords

Aggression; Empathy; Machiavellianism; Perspective taking; Prosocial; Social status

Indexed keywords

AGGRESSION; CHILD; CHILD BEHAVIOR; CHILE; EMPATHY; FEMALE; HUMAN; LONGITUDINAL STUDY; MACHIAVELLIANISM; MALE; PEER GROUP; PSYCHOLOGY; SELF REPORT; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR; STATISTICAL MODEL;

AGGRESSION; CHILD; CHILD BEHAVIOR; CHILE; EMPATHY; FEMALE; HUMANS; LONGITUDINAL STUDIES; MACHIAVELLIANISM; MALE; MODELS, STATISTICAL; PEER GROUP; SELF REPORT; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR;

EID: 84946494375     PISSN: 00472891     EISSN: 15736601     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10964-015-0298-9     Document Type: Article

References (89)

1. Allen, J. P., Porter, M. R., McFarland, F. C., Marsh, P., & McElhaney, K. B. (2005). The two faces of adolescents’ success with peers: Adolescent popularity, social adaptation, and deviant behavior. Child Development,76, 747–760. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2005.00875.x
2. Allsopp, J., Eysenck, H. J., & Eysenck, S. B. G. (1991). Machiavellianism as a component in psychoticism and extraversion. Personality and Individual Differences, 12, 29–41. doi:10.1016/0191-8869(91)90129-Y.
3. Andreou, E. (2004). Bully/victim problems and their association with Machiavellianism and self-efficacy in Greek primary school children. The British Journal of Educational Psychology,74(2), 297–309. doi:10.1348/000709904773839897
4. Arsenio, W. F., & Lemerise, E. A. (2004). Aggression and moral development: Integrating social information processing and moral domain models. Child Development,75, 987–1002. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2004.00720.x
5. Batanova, M. D., & Loukas, A. (2011). Social anxiety and aggression in early adolescents: Examining the moderating roles of empathic concern and perspective taking. Journal of Youth and Adolescence,40(11), 1534–1543. doi:10.1007/s10964-011-9634-x
6. Bereczkei, T., Birkas, B., & Kerekes, Z. (2010). The presence of others, prosocial traits, Machiavellianism: A personality x situation approach. Social Psychology,41(4), 238–245. doi:10.1027/1864-9335/a000032
7. Berger, C. (2011). Agresividad, prosocialidad y estatus social: Identificando perfiles admirados entre preadolescentes chilenos. Magis, Revista Internacional de Investigacion en Educacion,4, 357–368.
8. Berger, C., & Palacios, D. (2014). Associations between prosocial behavior, machiavellianism, and social status: Effects of peer norms and classroom social contexts. Journal of Latino/Latinamerican Studies, 6(1), 19–30.
9. Berger, C., & Rodkin, P. (2012). Group influences on individual aggression and prosociality: Early adolescents who change peer affiliations. Social Development,21(2), 396–413. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9507.2011.00628.x
10. Butovskaya, M. L., Timentschik, V. M., & Burkova, V. N. (2007). Aggression, conflict resolution, popularity, and attitude to school in Russian adolescents. Aggressive Behavior,33, 170–183. doi:10.1002/ab.20197
11. Caravita, S., Di Blasio, P., & Salmivalli, C. (2009). Unique and interactive effects of empathy and social status on involvement in bullying. Social Development,18(1), 140–163. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9507.2008.00465.x
12. Caravita, S. C., Di Blasio, P., & Salmivalli, C. (2010). Early adolescents’ participation in bullying: Is ToM involved? Journal of Early Adolescence,30(1), 138–170. doi:10.1177/0272431609342983
13. Carlo, G., Hausmann, A., Christiansen, S., & Randall, B. A. (2003). Sociocognitive and behavioral correlates of a measure of prosocial tendencies for adolescents. Journal of Early Adolescence,23(1), 107–134. doi:10.1177/0272431602239132
14. Chang, L. (2004). The role of classroom norms in contextualizing the relations of children’s social behaviors to peer acceptance. Developmental Psychology, 40(5), 691–702. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.40.5.691.
15. Chen, B.-B., & Chang, L. (2012). Are “Machiavellian” Chinese children well-adapted in the peer group? The relationship between resource acquisition strategies and social functioning and status. Asian Journal of Social Psychology,15(2), 122–131. doi:10.1111/j.1467-839X.2012.01373.x
16. Christie, R., & Geis, F. L. (1970). Studies in Machiavellianism. New York: Academic Press.
17. Chung-Hall, J., & Chen, X. (2010). Aggressive and prosocial peer group functioning: Effects on children’s social, school, and psychological adjustment. Social Development,19, 659–680. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9507.2009.00556.x
18. Cillessen, A. H., & Borch, C. (2006). Developmental trajectories of adolescent popularity: A growth curve modelling analysis. Journal of Adolescence,29(6), 935–959.
19. Cillessen, A., & Mayeux, L. (2004). From censure to reinforcement: Developmental changes in the association between aggression and social status. Child Development,75, 147–163.
20. Cohen, D., & Strayer, J. (1996). Empathy in conduct-disordered and comparison youth. Developmental Psychology,32(6), 988–998. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.32.6.988
21. Crick, N. R., & Dodge, K. A. (1994). A review and reformulation of social information-processing mechanisms in children’s social adjustment. Psychological Bulletin,115(1), 74–101. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.115.1.74
22. Czibor, A., & Bereczkei, T. (2012). Machiavellian people’s success results from monitoring their partners. Personality and Individual Differences,53(3), 202–206. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2012.03.005
23. Davis, M. H. (1980). A multidimensional approach to individual differences in empathy. JSAS Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology,1980(10), 85.
24. Davis, M. H. (1983). Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a multidimensional approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,44, 113–126.
25. Davis, M. H. (1994). Empathy: A social psychological approach. Boulder: Westview Press.
26. De Kemp, R. A., Overbeek, G., de Wied, M., Engels, R. C., & Scholte, R. H. (2007). Early adolescent empathy, parental support, and antisocial behavior. The Journal of Genetic Psychology,168(1), 5–18. doi:10.3200/GNTP.168.1.5-18
27. Eccles, J. S., & Roeser, R. W. (2011). Schools as developmental contexts during adolescence. Journal of Research on Adolescence,21(1), 225–241.
28. Eisenberg, N., Eggum, N. D., & Di Giunta, L. (2010). Empathy-related responding: Associations with prosocial behavior, aggression, and intergroup relations. Social Issues and Policy Review,4(1), 143–180. doi:10.1111/j.1751-2409.2010.01020.x
29. Eisenberg, N., Zhou, Q., & Koller, S. (2001). Brazilian adolescents’ prosocial moral judgment and behavior: Relations to sympathy, perspective taking, gender-role orientation, and demographic characteristics. Child Development,72(2), 518–534. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00294
30. Ellis, W., & Zarbatany, L. (2007). Peer group status as a moderator of group influence on children’s deviant, aggressive, and prosocial behavior. Child Development,78, 1240–1254.
31. Erath, S. A., Pettit, G. S., Dodge, K. A., & Bates, J. E. (2009). Who dislikes whom, and for whom does it matter: Predicting aggression in middle childhood. Social Development,18, 577–596. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9507.2008.00497.x
32. Fernandez, A. M., Dufey, M., & Kramp, U. (2011). Testing the psychometric properties of the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI) in Chile: Empathy in a different cultural context. European Journal of Psychological Assessment,27(3), 179–185. doi:10.1027/1015-5759/a000065
33. Garandeau, C. F., & Cillessen, A. H. (2006). From indirect aggression to invisible aggression: A conceptual view on bullying and peer group manipulation. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 11(6), 612–625. doi:10.1016/j.avb.2005.08.005.
34. Gini, G. (2006). Social cognition and moral cognition in bullying: What’s wrong? Aggressive Behavior,32(6), 528–539. doi:10.1002/ab.20153
35. Gini, G., Pozzoli, T., & Hauser, M. (2011). Bullies have enhanced moral competence to judge relative to victims, but lack moral compassion. Personality and Individual Differences,50(5), 603–608. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2010.12.002
36. Gold, M. S., Bentler, P. M., & Kim, K. H. A. (2003). Comparison of maximum-likelihood and asymptotically distribution-free methods of treating incomplete nonnormal data. Structural Equation Modeling,10(1), 47–79.
37. Golmaryami, F. N., & Barry, C. T. (2009). The associations of self-reported and peer-reported relational aggression with narcissism and self-esteem among adolescents in a residential setting. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology,39, 128–133. doi:10.1080/15374410903401203
38. Hawley, P. H. (1999). The ontogenesis of social dominance: A strategy-based evolutionary perspective. Developmental Review,19, 97–132.
39. 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.
40. Hawley, P. H. (2006). Evolution and personality: A new look at Machiavellianism. Handbook of personality development (pp. 147–161). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
41. Hawley, P. H. (2007). Social dominance in childhood and adolescence: Why social competence and aggression may go hand in hand. In P. H. Hawley, T. D. Little, & P. Rodkin (Eds.), Aggression and adaptation: The bright side to bad behavior. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum and Associates.
42. Hawley, P. H., Little, T. D., & Pasupathi, M. (2002). Winning friends and influencing peers: Strategies of peer influence in late childhood. International Journal of Behavioral Development,26(5), 466–474. doi:10.1080/01650250143000427
43. Herrenkohl, T. I., Catalano, R. F., Hemphill, S. A., & Toumbourou, J. W. (2009). Longitudinal examination of physical and relational aggression as precursors to later problem behaviors in adolescents. Violence and Victimization,24, 3–19.
44. Jolliffe, D., & Farrington, D. P. (2006). Examining the relationship between low empathy and bullying. Aggressive Behavior,32(6), 540–550. doi:10.1002/ab.20154
45. Jolliffe, D., & Farrington, D. P. (2011). Is low empathy related to bullying after controlling for individual and social background variables? Journal of Adolescence,34(1), 59–71. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2010.02.001
46. Juvonen, J., & Galvan, A. (2008). Peer influence in involuntary social groups: Lessons from research on bullying. In M. Prinstein & K. Dodge (Eds.), Understanding peer influence in children and adolescents. Duke series in child development and public policy (pp. 225–244). New York: Guilford Press.
47. Juvonen, J., Wang, Y., & Espinoza, G. (2013). Physical aggression, spreading of rumors, and social prominence in early adolescence: Reciprocal effects supporting gender similarities? Journal of Youth and Adolescence,42, 1801–1810. doi:10.1007/s10964-012-9894-0
48. Kiefer, S., & Ryan, A. (2008). Striving for social dominance over peers: The implications for academic adjustment during early adolescence. Journal of Educational Psychology,100(2), 417–428. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.100.2.417
49. Li, Y., & Wright, F. (2014). Adolescents’ social status goals: Relationships to social status insecurity, aggression, and prosocial behavior. Journal of Youth and Adolescence,43(1), 146–160. doi:10.1007/s10964-013-9939-z
50. Mayeux, L., & Cillessen, A. H. (2008). It’s not just being popular, it’s knowing it, too: The role of self-perceptions of status in the associations between peer status and aggression. Social Development,17(4), 871–888. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9507.2008.00474.x
51. Mayeux, L., Sandstrom, M. J., & Cillessen, A. H. (2008). Is being popular a risky proposition? Journal of Research on Adolescence,18, 49–74.
52. Mchoskey, J. W. (1999). Machiavellianism, intrinsic versus extrinsic goals, and social interest: A self-determination theory analysis. Motivation and Emotion,23(4), 267–283.
53. Miller, P. A., & Eisenberg, N. (1988). The relation of empathy to aggressive and externalizing antisocial behavior. Psychological Bulletin,103, 324–344.
54. Ministerio de Planificación, Chile. (2005). Estadísticas sociales de los pueblos indígenas en Chile. Censo 2002. Santiago: Programa Orígenes MIDEPLAN-BID.
55. Molano, A., Jones, S. M., Brown, J. L., & Aber, J. L. (2013). Selection and socialization of aggressive and prosocial behavior: The moderating role of social-cognitive processes. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 23, 424–436. doi:10.1111/jora.12034.
56. Muthén, B. O. (2004). Latent variable analysis: Growth mixture modeling and related techniques for longitudinal data. In D. Kaplan (Ed.), Handbook of quantitative methodology for the social sciences (pp. 345–368). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
57. Muthén, B. O., & Muthén, L. K. (1998–2013). MPlus user’s guide. Los Angeles: Authors.
58. Muthén, B. O., & Muthén, L. K. (2000). Integrating person-centered and variable-centered analyses: Growth mixture modeling with latent trajectory classes. Alcoholism, Clinical and Experimental Research,24, 882–891.
59. Nagin, D. S., & Tremblay, R. E. (2001). Parental and early childhood predictors of persistent physical aggression in boys from kindergarten to high school. Archives of General Psychiatry,58, 389–394.
60. Nylund, K. L., Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. O. (2007). Deciding on the number of classes in latent class analysis and growth mixture modeling: A Monte Carlo simulation study. Structural Equation Modeling,14(4), 535–569. doi:10.1080/10705510701575396
61. Ojanen, T., Grönroos, M., & Salmivalli, C. (2005). An interpersonal circumplex model of children’s social goals: Links with peer-reported behavior and sociometric status. Developmental Psychology,41, 699–710.
62. Peeters, M., Cillessen, A. H. N., & Scholte, R. (2010). Clueless or powerful? Identifying subtypes of bullies in adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence,39(9), 1041–1052. doi:10.1007/s10964-009-9478-9
63. Peets, K., & Kikas, E. (2006). Aggressive strategies and victimization during adolescence: Grade and gender differences, and cross-informant agreement. Aggressive Behavior,32, 68–79.
64. Pellegrini, A. D., Roseth, C. J., Van Ryzin, M. V., & Solberg, D. (2011). The place of social dominance and aggression in children’s and adolescents’ popularity. In A. Cillessen, D. Schwartz, & L. Mayeux (Eds.), Popularity in the peer system. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
65. Peters, E., Cillessen, A. H. N., Riksen-Walraven, J., & Haselager, H. (2010). Best friends’ preference and popularity: Associations with aggression and prosocial behavior. International Journal of Behavioral Development,34, 398–405.
66. Phillips, C. (2003). Who’s who in the pecking order? Aggression and ‘normal violence’ in the lives of girls and boys. British Journal of Criminology,43(4), 710–728. doi:10.1093/bjc/43.4.710
67. Potocnjak, M., Berger, C., & Tomicic, T. (2011). Una aproximación relacional a la violencia escolar entre pares en adolescentes chilenos: Perspectiva adolescente de factores intervinientes. Psykhe,20(2), 39–52. doi:10.4067/S0718-22282011000200004
68. Pountain, D., & Robins, D. (2000). Cool rules: Anatomy of an attitude. London: Reaktion Books.
69. Prinstein, M. J., Boergers, J., & Vernberg, E. M. (2001). Overt and relational aggression in adolescents: Social–psychological functioning of aggressors and victims. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology,30, 477–489.
70. Pronk, R., & Zimmer-Gembeck, M. (2010). It’s “mean”, but what does it mean to adolescents? Relational aggression by victims, aggressors, and their peers. Journal of Adolescent Research,25, 175–204. doi:10.1177/0743558409350504
71. Puckett, M. B., Aikins, J. W., & Cillessen, A. H. N. (2008). Moderators of the associations between relational aggression and perceived popularity. Aggressive Behavior,34, 563–576.
72. Rodkin, P. C., Farmer, T. W., Pearl, R., & Van Acker, R. (2000). Heterogeneity of popular boys: Antisocial and prosocial configurations. Developmental Psychology,36(1), 14–24.
73. Rodkin, P. C., Farmer, T. W., Pearl, R., & Van Acker, R. (2006). They’re cool: Social status and peer group supports for aggressive boys and girls. Social Development,15(2), 175–204. doi:10.1046/j.1467-9507.2006.00336.x
74. Rodkin, P. C., Ryan, A., Jamison, R., & Wilson, T. (2013). Social goals, social behavior, and social status in middle childhood. Developmental Psychology,49(6), 1139–1150. doi:10.1037/a0029389
75. Rose, A., & Swenson, L. (2009). Do perceived popular adolescents who aggress against others experience emotional adjustment problems themselves? Developmental Psychology,45(3), 868–872. doi:10.1037/a0015408
76. Rubin, K. H., Chen, X., & Hymel, S. (1993). Socioemotional characteristics of withdrawn and aggressive children. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly (1982-), 518–534.
77. Salmivalli, C., Kaukiainen, A., & Lagerspetz, K. (2000). Aggression and sociometric status among peers: Do gender and type of aggression matter? Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 41, 17–24. doi:10.1111/1467-9450.00166.
78. Sijtsema, J., Veenstra, R., Lindenberg, S., & Salmivalli, C. (2009). Empirical test of bullies’ status goall: Assessing direct goals, aggression, and prestige. Aggressive Behavior,35, 57–67. doi:10.1002/ab.20282
79. Sutton, J., & Keogh, E. (2001). Components of Machiavellian beliefs in children: Relationships with personality. Personality and Individual Differences,30(1), 137–148. doi:10.1016/S0191-8869(00)00017-9
80. Sutton, J., Smith, P. K., & Swettenham, J. (1999). Social cognition and bullying: Social inadequacy or skilled manipulation? British Journal of Developmental Psychology,17(3), 435–450. doi:10.1348/026151099165384
81. Vaillancourt, T., McDougall, P., Hymel, S., & Sunderani, S. (2010). Respect or fear? The relationship between power and bullying behavior. In S. Jimerson, S. Swearer, & D. Espelage (Eds.), Handbook of bullying in schools: An international perspective (pp. 211–222). London: Routledge.
82. Veenstra, R. (2006). The development of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde: Prosocial and antisocial behavior in adolescence. Solidarity and Prosocial Behavior,. doi:10.1007/0-387-28032-4_6
83. Veenstra, R., Lindenberg, S., Munniksma, A., & Dijkstra, J. K. (2010). The complex relation between bullying, victimization, acceptance, and rejection: Giving special attention to status, affection, and sex differences. Child Development,81, 480–486. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2009.01411.x
84. Waasdorp, T., Baker, C., Paskewich, B., & Leff, S. (2013). Aggression, leadership, and social status among urban youth. Journal of Youth and Adolescence,43(2), 263–274. doi:10.1007/s10964-012-9837-9
85. Warden, D., & Mackinnon, S. (2003). Prosocial children, bullies and victims: An investigation of their sociometric status, empathy and social problem-solving strategies. British Journal of Developmental Psychology,21(3), 367–385.
86. Wargo Aikins, J., & Litwack, S. (2011). Prosocial skills, social competence and popularity. In A. H. N. Cillessen, D. Schwartz, & L. Mayeux (Eds.), Popularity in the peer system (pp. 140–162). New York: Guilford Press.
87. Wentzel, K., & Asher, S. (1995). The academic lives of neglected, rejected, popular, and controversial children. Child Development,66, 754–763.
88. Werner, N. E., & Crick, N. R. (2004). Maladaptive peer relationships and the development of relational and physical aggression during middle childhood. Social Development,13(4), 495–514. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9507.2004.00280.x
89. Zwaan, M., Dijkstra, J. K., & Veenstra, R. (2013). Three contextual factors explaining the status-aggression link among adolescents. International Journal of Behavioral Development,37(3), 211–221. doi:10.1177/0165025412471018