Why Social Networks Matter: A Structural Approach to the Study of Relational Aggression in Middle Childhood and Adolescence

Abstract

Prior studies have addressed the influence of individual-level demographic variables on relational aggression among children and adolescents, resulting in little information about effective points of intervention. This paper argues that the inherently social nature of relational aggression warrants an examination of the effects of peer social network features on these behaviors. Specifically, the paper reframes the literature linking two individual-level variables (sex and age) to relational aggression from a contextual perspective that considers peer social networks. Moreover, the paper offers implications regarding how these reframed findings can be applied to the development of effective prevention and intervention programs and future research efforts.Early characterizations and empirical studies of childhood aggression focused exclusively on physical (e.g., hitting, shoving, kicking) and verbal (e.g., threats of physical aggression, yelling) forms of aggression (see Parke and Slaby 1983 for review). In contrast, recent definitions of childhood aggression have recognized that children and adolescents may also inflict harm by damaging their peers' social relationships. This paper examines such relational forms of aggression. Specifically, in order to identify more effective points of intervention, the paper introduces a structural framework that considers the influence of peer social networks on relational forms of aggression among children and adolescents.Relational forms of aggression include deliberate behaviors designed to harm others through subtle injury to peer relationships such as rumor spreading, social exclusion, and betrayal of trust. Researchers have discussed these behaviors using three overlapping constructs: relational aggression (e.g., Crick and Grotpeter 1995), indirect aggression

Network ties and mean lies: a relational approach to relational aggression

“…Specifically, children, especially young adolescents, view clique membership and crowd affiliation as particularly important (Brown, Eicher, & Petrie, 1986;Crockett, Losoff, & Peterson, 1984;Shrum & Cheek, 1987). Given the strong desire to be part of a highly dense clique, it is likely that children may use relationally aggressive behaviors to attain and maintain these positions (Adler & Adler, 1995;Neal, 2007). These arguments suggest that density will positively predict levels of relational aggression (Hypothesis 2).…”

Ecological Theory: Preventing Youth Bullying, Aggression, and Victimization

“…During the 1990s, much research supported the notion that girls are socialized to exercise more relational forms of aggression or social bullying, yet boys engage in multiple forms of aggression (Neal, 2007). Despite this, several studies have failed to document significant sex differences in relational aggression or social forms of bullying (Card, Stuckey, Sawalani, & Little, 2008;Crick, Casas, & Mosher, 1997).…”

Older Teenagers’ Explanations of Bullying

“…However, by almost exclusively attributing the causes of bullying to the bully or the victim, teenagers risk overlooking social psychological and sociological factors such as group processes and peer pressure (e.g., Burns et al 2008;Hamarus and Kaikkonen 2008), group norms (e.g., Duffy and Nesdale 2009;Salmivalli and Voeten 2004), labeling and stigma processes, social inhibition (e.g., bystander effect), social facilitation, moral disengagement (e.g., moral justifications, diffusion of social responsibility, dehumanization, and blaming the victim; e.g., Bandura 1999), instability in peer networks (e.g., Neal 2007), different participation roles in bullying situations (e.g., Salmivalli et al 1996), gender and heterosexual hegemony (e.g., Neal 2007;Phoenix et al 2003; also see Thornberg 2011), and reinforcing mechanisms operating in the peer group or school class. Overlooking such factors might in turn diminish students' awareness of their own impact and responsibility as bystanders as well as bullies.…”