Formation of Dominance Hierarchies in Young Children

Omark, Donald R.; Omark, Monica; Edelman, Murray S.

doi:10.1515/9783110802818.289

Cited by 55 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It is suggested that girls bully for reassurance whereas, boys bully to display their power (Wachtel, 1973). Affiliation and power are considered by Omark et al (1973) to be the basic factors which regulate belonging and our social behaviour. Girls need a feeling of a shared intimacy expressed in exchanging confidence and gossip.…”

Section: Are Involved In Development Ofmentioning

confidence: 99%

Personality and family relations of children who bully

Connolly

O’Moore

2003

Personality and Individual Differences

102

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Are Involved In Development Ofmentioning

confidence: 99%

Personality and family relations of children who bully

Connolly

O’Moore

2003

Personality and Individual Differences

102

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…For example, research suggests that boys play ball games more than do girls but do not play chasing games more than girls (although these differences varied as a function of country, time of year, and age; Pellegrini et al, 2004). Perhaps because boys have greater opportunities to compare strength and skill during roughand-tumble play and competitive games, boys also develop better-defined dominance hierarchies than girls (Omark, Omark, & Edelman, 1975;Savin-Williams, 1979), meaning there is greater shared understanding about which group members hold the most social power.To summarize, there is sufficient evidence to conclude that there are sex differences in the structure and content of youths' behavior with peers. Moreover, evidence suggests that a number of these sex differences strengthen with age.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Rose

Rudolph

2006

Psychological Bulletin

2,008

157

1,831

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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 ...

show abstract

“…Even in preschool familiar- Percentages of peer-peer dyads in which the above different types of aggression were directed ity with each other and with the context produces a decrease in aggression, more dramatically in hostile than in specific aggression [Attili and Cavallo-Boggi, 19831. However, where a friendship is increasing over time, aggression increases too [Attili, 1984bl. Boys are more aggressive than girls [Omark and Edelman, 1975;Smith and Green, 1975;Whiting and Whiting, 1975; see review by Maccoby and Jacklin, 1974, 19801 but the difference depends not only upon the type of aggression shown [Manning, in press], but also upon the sex of both the actor and the partner, both in dyads and in peer groups [Abramovitch et al, 1979;Barrett, 1979;Hoving et al, 1974;McGrew, 1972;Smith and Green, 19751. I do not agree with Parke and Slaby [ 19831 who point out that the evidence for sex differences in both verbal and physical aggression-as reported by Maccoby and Jacklin ( 1980)-challenges traditional assumptions f Feshbach, 19701 that sex differences in aggression depend mainly on differences in the type of aggression displayed.…”

Section: Relationship Between Actor and Target: Sex Differencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Concomitants and factors influencing children's aggression

Attili¹

1985

Aggr. Behav.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Formation of Dominance Hierarchies in Young Children

Cited by 55 publications

References 0 publications

Personality and family relations of children who bully

Personality and family relations of children who bully

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

Concomitants and factors influencing children's aggression

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About