The current research considered the costs of caring in youths’ friendships. The development of a new construct, empathetic distress, allowed for a direct test of the commonly held belief that females suffer greater vicarious distress in response to close others’ stressors and problems than do males. Empathetic distress refers to strongly sharing in a relationship partner’s distress over problems to the point of taking on the partner’s distress and experiencing it as one’s own. This new construct was examined in an ethnically diverse sample of early adolescents who responded to a series of questionnaires in their classrooms. Results indicated that girls did experience greater empathetic distress in friendships than did boys. In addition, the current research revealed that social perspective-taking in friendships (i.e., the social-cognitive ability to infer and understand the friend’s perspective) had adjustment trade-offs in that it predicted greater positive friendship quality but also greater empathetic distress in the friendship. Interestingly, the associations of social perspective-taking with both positive friendship quality and empathetic distress were partially mediated by co-rumination or excessive discussion of problems. Applied implications of the findings that girls’ greater social perspective-taking and associated co-rumination contributed both to their greater positive friendship quality but also to greater costs of caring in the form of empathetic distress are discussed.

Co-rumination is a dyadic process between relationship partners that refers to excessively discussing problems, rehashing problems, speculating about problems, mutual encouragement of problem talk, and dwelling on negative affect. Although studies have addressed youths' tendency to co-ruminate, little is known about the nature of co-ruminative conversations. The primary goal of the present study (N = 314 adolescent friend dyads) was to identify microsocial processes that sustain and reinforce problem talk among adolescent co-ruminating friends. Results indicated that co-rumination was characterized by friends responding to each other's statements about problems with engaged statements (e.g., questions, supportive statements) that elicited even more problem talk. Results also indicated that some aspects of co-rumination (i.e., extensively talking about problems, rehashing problems, speculating about problems, and mutual encouragement of problem talk) were associated with positive friendship adjustment, whereas other aspects (i.e., dwelling on negative affect) were associated with internalizing problems. The present research highlights the utility of attending to microsocial processes in friends' conversations and has implications for intervention.

Research on relational aggression has drawn attention to how girls may be likely to aggress, but the role of gender is not fully understood. There are opposing views regarding whether relational aggression is most common among girls. Current findings demonstrate that when gender differences in relational aggression are assessed with peer nominations, gender differences favoring girls are more likely: a) in adolescence than childhood and b) when statistical overlap with overt aggression is controlled. Results also indicated that associations of relational aggression with peer acceptance depend on the aggressor’s gender, the peer rater’s gender, and whether overlap with overt aggression is controlled. Associations of relational aggression with lower acceptance became non-significant when overt aggression was controlled, suggesting that relational aggression displayed in isolation may not damage acceptance. In fact, in mid-adolescence, girls’ relational aggression predicted greater liking by boys. Reducing relational aggression among adolescent girls may be especially challenging if the behavior is linked with acceptance by boys.

This research highlights the critical role of gender in the context of problem talk and social support in adolescents’ friendships. Early- and middle-adolescents’ (N = 314 friend dyads; Ms = 13.01 and 16.03 years) conversations about problems were studied using observation and a short-term longitudinal design. Mean-level gender differences emerged in that girls participated in problem talk more than boys and responded in a more positive and engaged manner to friends’ statements about problems (e.g., by saying something supportive, asking a question) than did boys. Interestingly, boys used humor during problem talk more than girls. Despite mean-level differences, there were not gender differences in the functional significance of participating in problem talk and positive engaged responses in that these behaviors predicted increased friendship closeness for both boys and girls. In contrast, humor during problem talk predicted increased closeness only for boys, highlighting an understudied pathway to closeness in boys’ friendships.

No abstract

Although girls disclose to friends about problems more than boys, little is known about processes underlying this sex difference. Four studies (Ns = 526, 567, 769, 154) tested whether middle childhood to mid-adolescent girls and boys differ in how they expect that talking about problems would make them feel. Girls endorsed positive expectations (e.g., expecting to feel cared for, understood) more strongly than boys. Despite common perceptions, boys did not endorse negative expectations such as feeling embarrassed or worried about being made fun of more than girls. Instead, boys were more likely than girls to expect to feel “weird” and like they were wasting time. Sex differences in outcome expectations did help to account for girls’ greater disclosure to friends.

Through stress generation, individuals’ own thoughts and behaviors can actually lead to increases in their experience of stress. Unfortunately, stress generation is especially common among individuals who are already suffering from elevated depressive symptoms. However, despite the acknowledgement that some individuals with depressive symptoms generate greater stress than others, few studies have identified specific factors that could exacerbate stress generation among individuals with depressive symptoms. The present study examines co-rumination as a factor that might exacerbate stress generation among adolescents with depressive symptoms using a short-term longitudinal design. Considering these processes among adolescents was critical given that many youth experience increases in depressive symptoms at this developmental stage and that co-rumination also becomes more common at adolescence. Participants were 628 adolescents (326 girls; 302 boys) who reported on their depressive symptoms, experiences of stress, and co-rumination with a best friend. Interpersonal stressors (peer and family stress) and non-interpersonal stressors (school and sports stress) were assessed. Consistent with past research, adolescents with depressive symptoms experienced greater interpersonal and non-interpersonal stress over time. Importantly, co-rumination interacted with both depressive symptoms and gender in predicting increases in peer stress. Depressive symptoms predicted the generation of peer stress only for girls who reported high levels of co-rumination with friends. Implications for protecting youth with depressive symptoms against stress generation are discussed.

The definition of social competence is much debated among researchers. It is common to assess social competence based on relational outcomes, instead of individual traits, as it is believed that social competence underlies an individual's success in achieving these outcomes. Common indicators of social competence among adolescents include peer group status, friendship quality, and friendship stability. Researchers have recently paid increased attention to the different social skills needed to attain different forms of peer status (i.e., peer acceptance vs. popularity), but a similar level of attention has not been paid to the distinction between social skills needed for peer status compared with friendship success. In the current review, we call for increased attention to this distinction. In addition, we argue that social competence should be viewed in light of adolescents' personal social goals (e.g., whether they prioritize status over friendships), and their ability to effectively attain those goals. Finally, we argue that whereas friendship quality is a good marker of social competence, friendship stability is a poor marker of social competence because ending a friendship may actually be an indicator of social savvy in some instances.