Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Psychopathology & Development > Peer Relationships > Flashcards

Peer Relationships Flashcards

1
Q

ROLE OF PLAY

A

NON SOCIAL
- unoccupied/onlooker/solitary
SOCIAL
- parallel/associative/cooperative
ASSOCIATIONS
- motor skills
- empathy
- cognitive skills
- emotional regulation
- positive emotions

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

SOCIOMETRIC STATI

A

BUKOWSKI ET AL (2012)
- POPULAR
- REJECTED
- NEGLECTED
- AVERAGE
- CONTROVERSIAL

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

SOCIOMETRIC STATI: POPULAR

A

BUKOWSKI ET AL (2012)
- highly liked/accepted/impactful peer rating

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

SOCIOMETRIC STATI: REJECTED

A

BUKOWSKI ET AL (2012)
- low acceptance/preference
- high rejection AND impact

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

SOCIOMETRIC STATI: NEGLECTED

A

BUKOWSKI ET AL (2012)
- low social impact ratings (if any at all)
- go unnoticed
- not especially liked/disliked

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

SOCIOMETRIC STATI: AVERAGE

A
  • moderate ratings on both impact/preference
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

SOCIOMETRIC STATI: CONTROVERSIAL

A
  • high impact BUT average performance
  • noticed and liked/disliked by quite a lot on each spectrum
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

SIBLING RELATIONSHIPS

A
  • +85% adolescents have a sibling
  • kids tend to spend more time w/siblings > parents
  • siblings act as:
    1. confidants
    2. caregivers
    3. teachers/support source
  • sibling relationships AND small conflicts = associated w/better development
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

SIBLINGS: THEORIES

A

BOWLBY: ATTACHMENT THEORY
ADLER: INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGY

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

SIBLINGS: ATTACHMENT

A
  • siblings = attachment figures
  • secure attachment -> positive sibling relations
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

SIBLINGS: INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGY

A
  • kids try to overcome inferiority feelings
  • aim to differentiate themselves from siblings
  • parental favouritism (ie. difs in closeness/confiding/emotional support provision) can -> dif sibling relationships
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

ROMANTIC RELATIONSHIPS

A
  • positive adolescent romantic relations associations:
    1. peer group status
    2. companionship
    3. intimacy/support
    3. social competence
    4. autonomy sense
  • partner selection based on:
    1. honest/kindness
    2. IQ
    3. attractiveness
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

ROMANTIC RELATIONSHIPS: CHARACTERISTICS

A
  1. involvement (ie. dating frequency/consistency)
  2. partner identity (ie. characteristics of the partner)
  3. content (ie. what partners do together)
  4. relationship quality (ie. supportive VS negative experiences)
  5. cognitive/emotional processes (ie. perceptions/attributions of self/partner/emotions/moods)
    - adolescent romantic relations = oft unreciprocated
    - positive association between romantic problems/depressive symptoms
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

PEER SIMILARITY

A
  • friendships characterised by:
    1. intimacy
    2. reciprocity
  • friends have similarities:
    1. prosocial behaviours/sociability
    2. interests/behaviours
    3. maturity in play interactions
    4. academic motivation
    5. emotions/attributions
    6. proximity
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

CHANGES IN FRIENDSHIP COMPLEXITY

A

GUMMERUM ET AL (2008)
- age 9+ across 4 dif countries
- complexity of children’s friendship descriptions increased at same rate
- all nearly equal in high complexity ratings by 15Y

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

FREINDSHIP: PRESCHOOL

A
  • at least one good friend
  • spend a lot of time in pretend play
  • no dif in conflict/hostility between kids who are/aren’t friends
17
Q

FRIENDSHIP: CHILDHOOD

A
  • friendship evaluated on basis of:
    1. validation/caring
    2. help/guidance
    3. companionship/recreation
    4. intimate exchange
    5. conflict resolution
    6. betrayal
18
Q

FRIENDSHIP: ADOLESCENCE

A
  • friendship evaluated on basis of:
    1. self-exploration
    2. intimacy
    3. giving/receiving feedback
    4. sharing personal issues
  • oft unstable here
19
Q

FRIENDSHIP: ADOLESCENT MEETING

A

HIGHEST-LOWEST PERCENTAGE WISE
- school
- someone’s house
- online
- extracurricular
- neighbourhood
- stores
- religious setting
- job

20
Q

FRIENDSHIP: STAYING IN TOUCH IN ADOLESCENCE

A

HIGHEST-LOWEST PERCENTAGE WISE
- text messaging
- phone calls
- social-networking site
- video-sharing site
- blogging site
- game site/server
- discussion site

21
Q

FRIENDSHIP: POSITIVE EFFECTS

A
  • kids w/friends:
    1. better understanding of emotions
    2. learn about appropriate norms
    3. discuss ideas
    4. feel less lonely/depressed/anxious
    5. cope better w/negative experiences
    6. face life transitions ^ constructively
22
Q

FRIENDSHIP: NEGATIVE EFFECTS

A
  • kids w/aggressive friends ^ likely to:
    1. be aggressive themselves
    2. get involved in deviancy training
  • kids w/friends w/alcohol/substance abuse issues ^ likely to have those issues themselves
  • kids/adolescents w/depressed friends = ^ likely to co-ruminate
23
Q

FRIENDSHIP: TECHNOLOGY

A
  • electronic communication = positive effect on friendships:
    1. anonymity
    2. less focus on appearance
    3. ^ control over interactions
    4. peer selection w/similar characteristics
    5. greater availability/success
    6. more fun
24
Q

FRIENDSHIP: TECHNOLOGY THEORIES

A
  • 2 contrasting theories explaining tech effects on social outcomes:
    1. RICH-GET-RICHER
  • internet = positive impact on adolescents w/good social skills
    2. SOCIAL-COMPENSATION HYPOTHESIS
  • internet = positive impact on socially anxious/lonely adolescents
25
Q

BULLYING TYPES/CATEGORIES

A

TYPES
- physical
- verbal
- relational
- cyber
CATEGORIES
- bullies
- victims
- bullies-victims

26
Q

BULLYING: CYBERBULLYING TYPES

A

HIGHEST-LOWEST PERCENTAGE WISE
- mean/hurtful comments
- rumours
- threat to hurt via phone text
- threat to hurt via online posting
- pretending to be the victim online
- posting mean/hurtful picture

27
Q

BULLYING: SIBLINGS

A
  • sibling rivalry = universal phenomenon BUT…
  • sibling bullying can be:
    1. physical (ie. hitting/pushing)
    2. verbal (ie. threats)
    3. relational (ie. exclusion/spreading rumours)
  • 15-50% kids victimised by siblings
  • 10-40% kids = perpetrators of sibling bullying
  • many kids are both
28
Q

SIBLING BULLYING: RISK FACTORS

A

WOLKE ET AL (2015)
- male siblings
- younger siblings more at risk from older siblings
- more kids in family
- low socio-economic status
- immigrant kids
- family violence
- child maltreatment
- low warmth/supervision

29
Q

BULLYING: POLY-VICTIMISATION

A

MITCHELL ET AL (2007)
- 85% kids who experienced cyber-bullying also experience it at school
- 50.7% kids bullied by siblings also bullied by school peers
- poly-victimised kids = more psychopathy symptoms > kids who repeatedly experience only 1

30
Q

! SUMMARY !

A
  • relations w/peers/siblings/partners = influential on kids/adolescents
  • friendships = associated w/range of positive/negative effects (ie. aggressive/antisocial friends)
  • bullying = common risk factor for long lasting emotional/behavioural issues

Psychopathology & Development (12 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions