8.3 The Peer Group

Peers become increasingly important in middle childhood. Younger children learn from their friends, but egocentrism buffers them from rejection. By age 8, however, children are very aware of their classmates’ opinions, judgments, and accomplishments. Social comparison, already explained at the beginning of this chapter, is one consequence of concrete operational thought.

The Culture of Children

Peer relationships, unlike adult–child relationships, involve partners who negotiate, compromise, share, and defend themselves as equals. Consequently, children learn social lessons from one another that grown-ups cannot teach. Adults sometimes command obedience, sometimes are playfully docile, but they are always much older and bigger, with the values and experiences of their own cohort, not the child’s.

How to Play Boys teach each other the rituals and rules of engagement. The bigger boy shown here could hurt the smaller ones, but he won’t; their culture forbids it in such situations.

KIDSTOCK/BLEND IMAGES/GETTY IMAGES

Child culture includes the particular rules and behaviours that are passed down to younger children from slightly older ones; it includes not only fashions and gestures, but also values and rituals. Jump-rope rhymes, nursery games, insults, and superstitions are often part of the peer culture. Throughout the world, the child culture encourages independence from adults. Classmates pity those (especially boys) whose parents kiss them (“mama’s boy”), tease children who please the teachers (“teacher’s pet,” “suck-up”), and despise those who betray children to adults (“tattletale,” “snitch,” “rat”).

As a result of this search for independence from adults, a clash sometimes develops between the generations. For example, children may refuse to wear the clothes their parents buy for them because they are too loose, too tight, too long, too short, or wrong in colour, style, brand, or some other aspect that adults ignore. Children view all of these issues as personal preferences, and think that adults should have no say over such matters. Such cohort differences may be multiplied if grandparents are involved: They may be shocked at what their grandchildren wear, say, or do.

The culture of children is not always benign. For instance, children might learn swear words and slang from their friends at school—expressions that may not be appreciated by their parents. In addition, in seeking independence from parents, children may find friends who defy authority (J. Snyder et al., 2005), sometimes harmlessly (passing a note during class), sometimes not (shoplifting, cigarette smoking).

Friendship and Social AcceptanceChildren want to be liked; they learn faster as well as feel happier when they have friends. Indeed, if they had to choose between being friendless but popular (looked up to by many peers) or having close friends but being unpopular (ignored by most classmates), most would prefer to have friends. This is particularly true for children younger than 10 years of age; in early adolescence, popularity may become the priority (LaFontana & Cillessen, 2010).

Pity the Teacher The culture of children encourages pranks, jokes, and the defiance of authorities at school. At the same time, as social cognition develops, many children secretly feel empathy for their teachers.

RALPH HAGEN/CARTOONSTOCK.COM

Friendships become more intense and intimate as social cognition and effortful control advance. By the end of middle childhood, friends demand more of each other, including loyalty. It can be devastating when a friendship ends, partly because making new friends is difficult. Gender differences persist in activities (girls converse more, boys play active games), but both boys and girls want best friends. Having no close friend at age 11 predicts depression at age 13 (Brendgen et al., 2010).

Most children learn how to be a good friend. For example, when Grade 5 children were asked how they would react if other children teased their friend, almost all said they would ask their friend to do something fun with them and would reassure the friend that “things like that happen to everyone” (Rose & Asher, 2004).

Older children tend to choose best friends whose interests, values, and backgrounds are similar to their own. By the end of middle childhood, close friendships are almost always between children of the same sex, age, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status. This occurs not because children become more prejudiced over the course of middle childhood (they do not), but because they seek friends who understand and agree with them. Remember: Children at this age seek harmony, not conflict.

Popular and Unpopular ChildrenIt seems universally true that children seek close friends, but we need to consider how culture and cohort affect and influence what qualities children deem as desirable. Academic achievement is valued in middle childhood. For example, one longitudinal study in Canada found that among francophone children from ages 7 to 10, higher-achieving children had more friends, as well as classmates who wanted to be their friends. They were not usually the most popular children, but their friends were themselves high achievers (Véronneau et al., 2010). Academic achievement is less admired if a particular child is the only one who attains it in their peer group.

In North America, shy children are not popular; but when Xinyin Chen was a professor at Western University in London, Ontario, he and his colleagues found that in Shanghai, China, shy children were respected and often were popular (X. Chen et al., 1992). That is a cultural difference, but a cohort difference occurred over 12 years in Shanghai. As assertiveness became more valued in Chinese culture, a survey from the same schools found that shy children were less popular than their shy predecessors had been (X. Chen et al., 2005). A later third study found that, in rural China, shyness was still valued and predicted adult adjustment (X. Chen et al., 2009). Obviously, cohort and context matter.

Over the years of middle childhood, two types of popular children and three types of unpopular children become apparent (see Figure 8.4). Throughout childhood, children who are kind, trustworthy, and cooperative are well liked. The second type of popular children emerges around Grade 5, when children who are “athletic, cool, dominant, arrogant, and…aggressive” are sometimes popular (Cillessen & Mayeux, 2004; Rodkin & Roisman, 2010).

As for the three types of unpopular children, some are neglected, but not actively rejected by peers. They are ignored, but not shunned. The neglected child does not enjoy school but is psychologically unharmed, especially if the child has a supportive family and outstanding talent (e.g., in music or the arts) (Sandstrom & Zakriski, 2004).

FIGURE 8.4 Popularity Most children are neither popular nor unpopular, and the arrogant popular type is not usually evident until the end of middle childhood. The relationship to bullying is shown as a dotted line because these types of children are not always involved in bullying—it depends on the school culture.

The other two types of unpopular children may be psychologically harmed. Specifically, they are at increased risk of depression and uncontrolled anger over the years of middle childhood. One type of unpopular child is aggressive-rejected, disliked because he or she is antagonistic and confrontational; the other type is withdrawn-rejected, disliked because he or she is timid and anxious. Children of these two types have much in common, often misinterpreting social situations, lacking emotional regulation, and experiencing mistreatment at home. They may become bullies or victims, a topic discussed next.

Bullying

From a developmental perspective, childhood bullying is connected to many other aspects of aggression, including maltreatment and delinquency (discussed in Chapters 6 and 10). Here we focus on bullies and victims in school.

Bullying is defined as repeated, systematic attacks intended to harm those who are unable or unlikely to defend themselves. It occurs in every nation, in every community, and in every kind of school (public or private, progressive or traditional, large or small). Although adults are often unaware of it, children recognize it as common. As one girl said, “There’s a little bit of bully in everyone” (Guerra et al., 2011).

Bullying may be of four types:

• physical (hitting, pinching, or kicking)
• verbal (teasing, taunting, or name-calling)
• relational (destroying peer acceptance and friendship)
• cyberbullying (using electronic means to harm another).

The first three types of bullying are common in primary school and may begin even earlier, in preschool. Cyberbullying is a particularly devastating form of relational bullying, more common in secondary school than in primary school. It is discussed in Chapter 9.

A key word in the definition of bullying is repeated. Almost everyone experiences an isolated attack or is called a derogatory name at some point in middle childhood. Victims of bullying, however, endure hurtful experiences again and again—being forced almost daily to hand over lunch money, laugh at insults, perform degrading acts, and so on—with no one defending them. Victims tend to be “cautious, sensitive, quiet…lonely and abandoned at school. As a rule, they do not have a single good friend in their class” (Olweus et al., 1999).

Some adults think that victims have particular physical characteristics that make them prone to bullying, but this is not usually true. Victims are chosen because of their personality and isolation; they may be teased about their appearance, but it is their emotional vulnerability that attracts the bully. As one boy said,

Remember the three types of unpopular children? Neglected children are not victimized; they are ignored, “under the radar.” However, if their family is supportive, they may be emotionally strong (Bowes et al., 2010). In contrast, rejected victims often have trouble at home as well. Most of them are withdrawn-rejected, but some are aggressive-rejected. The latter are bully-victims (or provocative victims) (Unnever, 2005), “the most strongly disliked members of the peer group,” with neither friends nor sympathizers (Sandstrom & Zakriski, 2004). One study found that teachers tend to mistreat bully-victims, making their problems worse (Khoury-Kassabri, 2009).

Unlike bully-victims, most bullies are not rejected. Although some have low self-esteem, others are proud; they bully because they are pleased with themselves and they find bullying cool (Guerra et al., 2011). Often bullies have a few admiring friends. Typically bullying is a social event, as bullies show off their power (not true for cyberbullying, but very true for physical bullying).

Bullies usually pick victims who are already rejected by most classmates (Veenstra et al., 2010), who have no friends to stick up for them, and who cannot fight back effectively. This is true for all forms of bullying, relational as well as physical, for both sexes. However, there are some sex differences in bullying type. Boy bullies are often big; they use physical aggression on smaller, weaker boys. Girl bullies are often sharp-tongued, preferring verbal aggression such as spreading rumours; they harass shyer, more soft-spoken girls.

Remember the latency period, in which children are involved with others of their own sex, both as friends and as victims. Bullies generally turn on their own, seeking admiration from other boys or other girls. Occasionally, boys accept other boys who bully girls, but girls almost never bully boys in middle childhood. This changes at puberty: Boys are no longer admired for bullying girls, but girls are allowed to bully boys, perhaps as a defence against (or expression of?) sexual feelings (Veenstra et al., 2010).

Who Suffers More? The 12-year-old girl and the 10-year-old boy both seem to be bullying younger or smaller children, but their attacks differ. Some developmentalists think a verbal assault is more painful than a physical one because it lingers for years.

PETER TITMUSS/ALAMY
HENRY KING/GETTY IMAGES

Causes and Consequences of BullyingWhen a toddler is aggressive, parents, teachers, and peers usually teach the child to rein in those impulses and develop emotional regulation and effortful control (Chapter 6). However, the opposite may occur if families create insecure attachment, provide a stressful home life, are ineffective at discipline, or include hostile siblings (Granic & Patterson, 2006). In these cases, young children can become more aggressive.

Peers are influential as well. Some peer groups approve of bullying, and children in those groups entertain their classmates by mocking, excluding, punching, and insulting each other (N. E. Werner & Hill, 2010). On the other hand, when students themselves disapprove of bullying, its incidence is reduced (Guerra & Williams, 2010).

Young bullies and victims sometimes escape serious depression or other harm. Both bullies and victims can be identified in Grade 1 and need active guidance and remediation before their behaviour patterns become truly destructive (Leadbeater & Hoglund, 2009). Unless bullies are deterred, they and their victims risk lower school achievement and relationship difficulties later on. Bystanders who witness bullying suffer as well, experiencing physical and emotional trauma as a result of the experience (Ma et al., 2009; Monks & Coyne, 2011; Nishina & Juvonen, 2005; Rivers et al., 2009).

Can Bullying Be Stopped?Most victimized children find ways to halt ongoing bullying—by ignoring, retaliating, defusing, or avoiding. A study of older children who were bullied in one year but not in the next indicated that finding new friends was crucial (P. K. Smith et al., 2004). Friendships help individual victims, but what can be done to halt bullying altogether? We know what does not work: increasing students’ awareness, instituting zero tolerance for fighting, or putting troubled students together in a therapy group or a classroom (Baldry & Farrington, 2007; Monks & Coyne, 2011). This last measure tends to make daily life easier for some teachers, but it increases aggression.

Think Pink Students in this Peterborough, Ontario, school are raising awareness for Anti-Bullying Pink Shirt Day. This day, celebrated in schools across Canada, was initiated as a result of a student being bullied in Nova Scotia for wearing a pink shirt. Students send powerful messages to bullies by wearing pink shirts, making posters, and discussing ways to address bullying.

CLIFFORD SKARSTEDT/PETERBOROUGH EXAMINER/QMI AGENCY

We also know that each specific school, with its teachers, students, and practices, can make much more difference than the macrosystem can (such as a provincial policy against bullying or a national value). For example, a study of more than 1000 schools in Columbia (where guerilla and paramilitary troops have fought for decades) found that regional poverty, population density, and homicide rate did not correlate with bullying nearly as much as did hostility and lack of empathy within each school (Chaux et al., 2009).

Empathy can be taught via cooperative learning, friendship encouragement, and school pride. A “whole school” approach—including all teachers and bystanders, parents and aides, bullies and victims—seems to be most effective. For example, a study of children with high self-esteem found that when the overall school climate seemed to encourage learning and cooperation, children with high self-esteem were unlikely to be bullies; yet when the school climate was hostile, those with high self-esteem were often bullies (Gendron et al., 2011).

Peers are crucial: If they are taught to notice bullying, become aware of it, and yet do nothing (some anti-bullying programs don’t teach them what to do), that is of no help. However, if peers empathize with victims and refuse to admire bullies, that reduces classroom aggression (Salmivalli, 2010).

Programs and initiatives designed to change the entire school culture are credited with recent successful efforts to decrease bullying in schools in England (e.g., Cross et al., 2010), in Canada (reported by National Crime Prevention Centre, 2013), throughout Norway, in Finland (Kärnä et al., 2011), and in the United States (Allen, 2010; Limber, 2011). A review of all research on successful ways to halt bullying finds the following (Berger, 2007):

• Everyone in the school must change, not just the identified bullies.
• Intervention is more effective in the earlier grades.
• Evaluation is critical: Programs that initially appear to be good might not work.

This final point merits special emphasis. Longitudinal research finds that some programs reduce bullying and others increase it. Results depend on the age of the children, the strategies employed, and the outcome measures used (peer reports, teacher reports, suspensions, etc.). Objective follow-up suggests that, although well-intentioned efforts sometimes fail, bullying can be reduced.

There can be little doubt that bullying is a significant social problem in North America (Craig & Pepler, 2007). A survey by the World Health Organization ranked Canada 26th and 27th out of 35 industrialized nations on measures regarding bullying and victimization, respectively (Craig & Harel, 2004). Such results have led a coalition of academics and non-governmental organizations in Canada to set up an umbrella organization called PREVNet (Promoting Relationships and Eliminating Violence Network) to formulate a national strategy to deal with the problem of bullying in schools. Codirected by Debra Pepler (York University) and Wendy Craig (Queen’s University), PREVNet’s three key messages are

1. Bullying is wrong and hurtful to victims.
2. Bullying is a relationship problem that is destructive.
3. It is everybody’s responsibility to promote positive relationships and eliminate violence.

Empathy Building Look at their facial expressions, not just their matching hats and gloves. For this 9-year-old sister and 7-year-old brother, moral development in the form of caring for one another is apparent.

JOHN ANTHONY RIZZO/UPPERCUT IMAGES/PHOTOLIBRARY