A review of sex differences in peer relationship processes: Potential trade-offs for the emotional and behavioral development of girls and boys.

Abstract

Theory and research on sex differences in adjustment focus largely on parental, societal, and biological influences. However, it also is important to consider how peers contribute to girls' and boys' development. This paper provides a critical review of sex differences in: several peerrelationship processes, including behavioral and social-cognitive styles, stress and coping, and relationship provisions. Based on this review, a speculative peer-socialization model is presented that considers the implications of these sex differences for girls' and boys' emotional and behavioral development. Central to this model is the idea that sex-linked relationship processes have costs and benefits for girls' and boys' adjustment. Finally, we present recent research testing certain model components and propose approaches for testing understudied aspects of the model. Keywordspeer relationships; sex differences; emotional adjustment; behavioral adjustment From a very early age, significant differences are found in the peer relationships of girls and boys. What are the potential implications of this consistent pattern of sex differences for youth? The purpose of the present paper is to review, synthesize, and critique existing research concerning the presence of sex differences in several key aspects of youths' relationships, particularly in the peer group context. Based on this critical review, we then introduce a speculative model concerning the influence of sex differences in these peer relationship processes on the emotional and behavioral development of girls and boys. Finally, this review and speculative model are used as a springboard for identifying critical future directions for research on sex differences in relationships processes and associated developmental outcomes.We focus on sex differences in three major domains of relationship processes: relationship style-including both behavioral and social-cognitive components, stress and coping processes, and emotional provisions in relationships. Several factors determined our selection of these relationship processes for inclusion in our review. The overarching goal of this review is to generate ideas about the influence of sex differences in relationship processes on well-being in girls and boys. Thus, we focused in general on relationship Correspondence regarding this article should be addressed to Amanda J. Rose, 210 McAlester Hall, Department of Psychology, University of Columbia, Missouri 65211, RoseA@missouri.edu NIH-PA Author ManuscriptNIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript processes that we hypothesized would have potential implications for understanding sex differences in emotional and behavioral development. With this goal in mind, we used three criteria to select specific dimensions for review. First, we focus on relationship processes that are emphasized in existing theoretical models of sex differences in relationships (e.g., Burhmester, 1996;Cross & Madson, 1997;Helgeson, 1994;Maccoby, 1990; NolenHoeksema & Girgus, 1994). Second, we ...

Gender Differences in Interpersonal Complementarity Within Roommate Dyads

“…If social conversation and self-disclosure differ between male and female college roommates, it could influence relationship development through the increased presence and opportunity for influence of complementary processes. While differences appear small in early childhood, these relationship differences increase in adolescence (Rose & Rudolph, 2006). Maccoby (1990) hypothesizes that early separation into same-sex play groups leads girls to develop a more polite and affiliative influencing style and leads boys to develop a more demanding influencing style.…”

Prospective associations of co-rumination with friendship and emotional adjustment: Considering the socioemotional trade-offs of co-rumination.

“…Recently, more attention has been paid to the risks of friendships, such as those related to having deviant friends (e.g., Brendgen, Vitaro, & Bukowski, 2000) or experiencing jealousy in friendships (Parker, Low, Walker, & Gamm, 2005). In contrast to work that examines either protective or risk factors, very little attention has been paid to the idea that some friendship processes have both costs and benefits (Rose & Rudolph, 2006). Considering such processes could contribute to a more nuanced and sophisticated understanding of friendships.…”

Interactive Links Between Theory of Mind, Peer Victimization, and Reactive and Proactive Aggression

“…For example, although some studies found no gender differences in reactive or proactive aggression (Connor et al 2003;Polman et al 2007), others found higher rates of reactive and proactive aggression in boys than in girls (Baker et al 2008;Little et al 2003;Salmivalli and Helteenvuori 2007;Salmivalli and Nieminen 2002). Boys also are more often the targets of peer victimization (Rose and Rudolph 2006) and show a slight delay in the development of theory of mind skills compared to girls (Sabbagh et al 2006). Apart from these main effects of gender, the previously cited literature provides only little indication that hypothesized associations between theory of mind, peer victimization, and reactive and proactive aggression should significantly differ for girls and boys.…”