A comparison of the social status and social behavior of Aggressive and Aggressive/Withdrawn boys

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to clarify contradictory findings concerning the social status of aggressive youngsters. This was undertaken by dividing kindergarten boys into either Aggressive [A] or Aggressive/Withdrawn [A/W] groups, as proposed by Ledingham [1981]. Both groups were found to be high on peer-nominated rejection, but the A group was also high on peer-nominated popularity while the A/W group was low. Similarly, both groups were observed to be high in negative peer interactions, but the A group was also high in positive interactions. It was noted that valuable information regarding the social status and social behavior of aggressive youngsters would be lost if such subgrouping is not undertaken. The relationship between Ledingham 's categorizations and others reported in the literature was discussed.

Subgroups of Rejected Boys: Aggressive Responses to Peer Conflict Situations

“…Our AR boys, who were rejected by peers and viewed as behaving aggressively by their teachers, reported solutions to peer conflicts that were immature and unskilled. This; pattern of functioningaggressive, unpopular, immature, and la~cking in skillfulness--is consistent with observations of aggressive boys who are adso hyperactive (Loney & Milich, 1982;Milich & Landau, 1989;Pope, Bierman, & Mumma, 1989) and of children who are both aggressive and withdrawn (Ledingham, 1981;Milich & Landau, 1984). As Hinshaw (1987) noted, boys who evidence more than one type of behavior problem tend to display more disordered behavior than those with single problems.…”

“…Rejected children tend to be more aggressive, more disruptive, more immature, and more annoying than their better accepted classmates, and they are more likely to have academic and behavioral problems (Coie & Krehbiel, 1984;Milich & Landau, 1984).…”

Proactive and Reactive Aggression: An Analysis of Subtypes Based on Teacher Perceptions

“…Moreover, pure reactive cW1dre:n may be comparable to the aggressiveJwith+awn group identified by Milich and Landau (1984) and Ledingham (1981) in that these bsys alsq tended to be rated as less popular than either the n$ixecl-aggressive or low proactive/low reactive grodps. Further work is needed, however, to exarnin the overlap between aggressive children classifie l on the basis of both peer status and aggressive bghavi~or dimensions.…”

“…(1988) and Milich and Landau (1984), using peer sociometric ratings, found that aggressive children rated as either rejected or withdrawn showed greater academic and social skills deficits than did aggressive children of average or popular peer status. Moreover, such characteristics may extend beyond childhood into adolescence and adulthood (Coie & Koeppl Krehbiel, 1990).…”

L’évolution des enfants difficiles

“…Ces dernières années, l'ensemble « agressivité -repli sur soi » a émergé comme troisième catégorie de comportement pathologique, pour décrire les enfants qui sont à la fois souvent agressifs et souvent repliés sur eux-mêmes. Des résultats de recherche indiquent que cette forme de comportement est cliniquement distincte et qu'elle est possiblement un indicateur de risque pour des formes majeures de psychopathologie adulte, notamment les désordres schizophréni-ques (Ledingham, 1981 ;Milich et Landau, 1984;Schwartzman et al, 1985). Voilà les trois modèles de comportement social atypique de l'enfant dont le projet Concordia a choisi d'examiner les effets à long terme.…”