friendship lecture Flashcards

1
Q

what kind of relationship is there between peers?

A

horizontal: no power difference

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

functions of peer relations

A
  • play companions
  • role models
  • instruction and criticism
  • social comparison (can be good or bad)
  • confide in them
  • emotional support
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

piaget and vygotsky feelings toward peer relationships

A

piaget: thought they were important for development

vygotsky: thought it was better to have older peers

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

how do peer relations evolve over time

A
  • more interaction with peers at younger ages (daycare and preschool)
  • increase online friends with age
  • over half ages 13-17 have at least one online friend
  • only 20% actually met online friend
  • long distance friendships aren’t new (pen pals)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

sim and dif between internet friends and pen pals

A

pen pals: take time to write a letter, more depth, meaningful, not as spontaneous

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

effect of towns and cities on friendships

A

not conducive to child interactions; unsafe for them to roam around without parents in USA

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Use of internet for friendships during covid

A

83% teens reported using internet to maintain contact

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

development of peer relations 0-2 yrs

A
  • increase social interaction with age
  • 6-12 months: interest in peers emerges early, smile and gesture at other babies
  • 18-24 mo: coordinated interactions, imitation, start to assume complementary roles
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

development of peer relations, preschool age, 2-5 yrs

A
  • increase complexity and reciprocity of interactions
  • social and nonsocial play
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

development of peer relations, elementary school age

A
  • more cooperative and complex play: games with formal and socially constructed rules, learn social agreement, emergence of true peer groups (interact regularly, informal organization/hierarchy - may emerge earlier with more daycare/preschool)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

development of peer relations, adolescence

A
  • sharp increase in time spent with peers
  • emergence of cliques: small groups of friends with more formal structures, organized around perceived similarities, more peer pressure, conformity peaks in adolescence, provides sense of identity
  • crowds: large reference groups that are loosely organized but have similar characteristics
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

nonsocial play 3 types

A
  • unoccupied: briefly watch some event
  • onlooker play: watch others play, without engaging with them
  • solitary play: engage in own activity (first seen around 6mo, common before 2.5yr, focus on exploring objects, can involve pretense/pretend)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

social play 3 types

A
  • parallel: engage in similar activity but does not interact (common between 2-4yr, still occurs later)
  • associative play: play with others in same activity but no shared goal (main purpose is to interact with someone else, common 3-5yr, low structure and no common goal, socializing is important, often involves dramatic play)
  • cooperative play: engaged in common activity with shared goal (examples: building tall tower together, playing restaurant; common in 4+yr, goal is not necessarily to win)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

other types of play

A
  • competitive: more common 5+yr, more organized, emphasize winning, society is trying to introduce at younger age
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

cohort effects on play

A
  • more daycare and preschool now –> less cross-sectional interactions with peers (different ages interacting)
  • cultural/contextual differences –> unsure; most studies done in USA
  • amount of time with parents/peers
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

importance of play

A
  • essential part of development
  • active physical play promotes emotion regulation/increase pos emotions
  • higher situational emotional knowledge (can take more perspectives)
  • if unstructured, kids will play with whatever is available
  • build resilience and creativity
17
Q

choosing friends

A
  • choose people who behave pro-socially
  • with similar interests, behavior, cognitive maturity, cooperativeness
  • similar levels of negative emotions
  • close proximity
  • similar/shared activities
18
Q

measuring peer acceptance via 2 sociometric measure techniques

A

1) nominations technique: pos nominations and neg nominations (who do you like most/least)

2) rating scale technique: used with older kids; rate everyone on “likability” scale

19
Q

peer acceptance categories (by # nominations)

A
  • popular: many pos, few neg
  • rejected: many neg, few pos
  • controversial: many neg, many pos (rare - bullies or high status and mean)
  • neglected: few pos and few neg
  • average, moderate, few extreme ratings
20
Q

social skills and behaviors of sociometric categories

A
  • popular: friendly, cooperative, pro social, not aggressive or withdrawn, successful at initiating and maintaining interactions, good theory of mind and understands others’ and own motivations well, resolve conflicts easily
  • rejected: aggressive, disruptive, bossy, uncooperative, anxious, withdrawn, critical of peers, poor resolution skills

more lonely, depressed, socially anxious, most worrisome group; at risk for dropping out, truancy, low self-esteem, antisocial behavior

  • controversial: mixed behaviors, prosocial towards some kids, disruptive towards others
  • neglected: withdrawn, interests different from peers, make few attempts to enter groups, shy, don’t want to draw attention to self
21
Q

correlates of peer acceptance

A
  • parenting: secure attachment and authoritative parenting
  • physical attractiveness
  • cognitive skills: perspective taking and academic competence
  • social skills (example - Doge): STRONGEST PREDICTOR of peer relations
22
Q

friendship quality

A
  • intimacy: sharing personal info, valued more by girls
  • help and guidance
  • companionship: time spent together, valued by boys
  • rejected children have lower quality friendships
23
Q

bullying

A
  • distinct type of proactive aggression
  • power imbalance
  • repeated situations
  • concern is growing
24
Q

how common is bullying

A

varies depending on how it is measured, and defined (persistent or one-time occurrence)

25
Q

frequency of bullying

A
  • increases during childhood, peaks in early adolescence, decreased victimization with age
26
Q

type of bullying vs gender

A

boys: more physical aggression

girls: more verbal and relational aggression

27
Q

why are there individual differences in aggression

A
  • social cognitive distortions: how the child interprets the situation
  • enviro/social context: family, society, media
28
Q

role of family in bullying

A
  • discipline techniques
  • power assertion and inconsistency both lead to high aggression
  • coercive family systems (Patterson): anger, threats, harsh punishment spreads between family members
    parenting style
  • parental depression and conflict
29
Q

correlations between bullying and victimization

A
  • self esteem
    victim: low, not assertive, socially isolated
    bully: unclear
  • normative beliefs endorsing aggression –> leads to more aggression
    bullies: view bullying as positive
    victims: not clear, but if less likely to report aggression if they endorse it
  • school characteristics
    neg school climate –> low support for academic progress, distrust between students and teachers
  • school performance and engagement
    bullies: worse performance
    victims: disengaged, less socially adept, more isolated
30
Q

Guerra, williams, sadek 2011

A

mixed method longitudinal study
- 3yr study colorado schools, 2678 kids (all ages), focus groups with 115 other kids

  • found physical, direct and indirect verbal, and bystander bullying
  • surveyed self esteem, normative aggression, school climate

bullying and victimization
- predicted by low self-esteem, normative bullying, and poor school climate for both genders

focus groups
- bullying in adolescence linked to popularity and sexuality
- boys want to improve status, appear as desirable mates, lower status of certain girls
- girls want to enhance phys and sex appeal to improve social status, limit competition

  • both genders say bullying is entertaining

implications:
- make a positive school climate
- change the normative beliefs about aggression
- build healthy self esteem
- address sexual nature of bullying
- prevention at multiple levels (individual, classroom, school)

31
Q

should there be a federal law for bullying

A
  • need to define what bullying really is and how to deal with it when we see it
32
Q

is bullying in sports ok?

A

more fights, less attendance

33
Q

long term efects of bullying

A
  • health, wealth, crime, social outcomes
34
Q

great smoky mountain study

A

accelerated longitudinal n=1273
- original sample: 3 cohorts, 9yr, 11yr, 13yr
- annual assessment until 16yr, then at 19, 21, 24, 26
- measure health and wellbeing
- involved in bullying –> predicts neg outcomes for health, finances, behavior, social