Unpacking the differences in social impact and social preference among Spanish preschool aggressors, victims, aggressor‐victims, and defenders whilst controlling for emotional competences

Abstract

Peer status among preschool children has been associated with their roles in aggression‐related interactions. This study analyses the differences between aggressors, victims, aggressor‐victims and defenders on two measures of peer status (social impact and social preferences) whilst controlling for individual factors. The sample comprised 394 preschool children (184 girls, 210 boys) between the ages of 3–6 years old (M = 4.36, SD = 0.87) and their parents supplying information about socio‐demographic variables and children's emotion regulation. Teachers rated emotional competences for each child in their class. Analysis of covariance along with Bonferroni‐adjusted post‐hoc comparisons were conducted to compare mean scores between the aggression roles for social impact and social preference while controlling for significant individual factors. The results revealed that aggressors and aggressor‐victims exhibited higher social impact but lower social preference after controlling for individual factors. In contrast, defenders enjoyed higher social status among their peers, characterized by both higher social preference and social impact. Victims were associated with lower social preference and social impact. Uninvolved children consistently exhibited lower social impact. Results underscore the need for interventions that focus on promoting prosocial behaviors, addressing aggressive tendencies, and enhancing emotional competences to create a more positive and supportive peer environment.