This research addressed 2 limitations of past research on peer victimization: the tendency to study boys only and the tendency to focus on forms of peer maltreatment that are common in boys' peer groups (victimization through overt aggression) but occur much less frequently in girls' peer groups. Peer- and self-report instruments were used to assess a relational form of victimization in addition to the overt form that has been the focus of past research. Results showed that girls were more relationally victimized, whereas boys were more overtly victimized. Both forms of victimization were shown to predict concurrent sociopsychological adjustment problems significantly (e.g., peer rejection, loneliness) beyond aggression. Victims identified through a combination of self- and peer-reports were particularly maladjusted.

Numerous studies have demonstrated that physically aggressive children exhibit hostile attributional biases in response to instrumental peer provocations, a social information-processing pattern that has been recognized as a contributor to peer-directed aggression. The present studies (N = 127 and N = 535) were designed to extend past research by evaluating the intent attributions and feelings of emotional distress of relationally and physically aggressive children in response to instrumental and relational provocation contexts. Results indicated that physically aggressive children exhibited hostile attributional biases and reported relatively greater distress for instrumental provocation situations, whereas relationally aggressive children exhibited hostile attributional biases and reported relatively greater distress for relational provocation contexts. Implications of these findings for the understanding of factors that may contribute to relational as well as physical aggression are discussed.

This research was designed to assess whether children view relationally manipulative behaviors (i.e., those behaviors labeled relational aggression in past research) as "aggressive." 2 studies were conducted to evaluate whether children view relationally manipulative behaviors as associated with 2 defining features of aggression, anger (Study 1) and intent to harm (Study 2). Results of Study 1 (n = 459, 9-12-year-olds) indicated that relational aggression was the most frequently cited angry behavior for girls' interactions whereas physical aggression was the most frequently cited angry behavior for boys' interactions. Results of Study 2 (n = 60, 9-11-year-olds) demonstrated that relational aggression and verbal insults were the most frequently cited harmful behaviors for girls whereas physical aggression and verbal insults were the most frequently cited harmful behaviors for boys. These studies provide the first evidence that children view relationally manipulative acts (relational aggression) as angry, harmful behaviors (i.e., as "aggressive").

This research was designed to assess whether children view relationally manipulative behaviors (i.e., those behaviors labeled relational aggression in past research) as "aggressive." 2 studies were conducted to evaluate whether children view relationally manipulative behaviors as associated with 2 defining features of aggression, anger (Study 1) and intent to harm (Study 2). Results of Study 1 (n = 459, 9-12-year-olds) indicated that relational aggression was the most frequently cited angry behavior for girls' interactions whereas physical aggression was the most frequently cited angry behavior for boys' interactions. Results of Study 2 (n = 60, 9-11-year-olds) demonstrated that relational aggression and verbal insults were the most frequently cited harmful behaviors for girls whereas physical aggression and verbal insults were the most frequently cited harmful behaviors for boys. These studies provide the first evidence that children view relationally manipulative acts (relational aggression) as angry, harmful behaviors (i.e., as "aggressive").

No abstract