The Rejected and the Bullied Lessons about Social Misfits from Developmental Psychology

The Rejected and The Bullied RUNNING HEAD: THE REJECTED AND THE BULLIED The Rejected and the Bullied: Lessons about Social Misfits from Developmental Psychology Jaana Juvonen and Elisheva F Gross University of California, Los Angeles Draft of Presentation at the 7th Annual Sydney Symposium of Social Psychology: “The Social Outcast: Ostracism, Social Exclusion, Rejection, and Bullying” To be included as a chapter in: Williams, K D., Forgas, J P., & von Hippel, W (Eds.) under contract) The social outcast: Ostracism, social exclusion, rejection, and bullying New York: Psychology Press Address Correspondence to: Jaana Juvonen Department of Psychology University of California, Los Angeles Los Angeles, CA 90095-1521 (310) 825-8293 e-mail: juvonen@psych.ucla.edu The Rejected and The Bullied The Rejected and the Bullied: Lessons about Social Misfits from Developmental Psychology The study of social outcasts among children has a long tradition in developmental psychology This topic has played a prominent role in social developmental research in part because of the surprisingly potent power of the consequences of being rejected or bullied Rejected and bullied children are at risk for a range of subsequent problems, including dropping out of school, compromised mental health, and criminality (Parker & Asher, 1987; Kupersmidt, Dodge & Coie, 1990) More recently, this topic has received renewed attention in light of media accounts of infamous school shootings in the US Many of the youngsters who hurt and killed their schoolmates and teachers were allegedly bullied and rejected by their peers The goal of this chapter is to provide insights from developmental research on the complex array of intrapersonal and interpersonal difficulties that both lead to and result from peer rejection To highlight the distinctive contributions of developmental psychology to our understanding of social outcasts, we begin by comparing the last decade of relevant research published in developmental and social psychology’s leading journals Following this brief analysis, we review the developmental research in light of three guiding questions: 1) who is most at risk for rejection; 2) what are the consequences of rejection and bullying, and 3) who is immune from these consequences? We then propose an integrative model of the intrapersonal and group-level processes by which peer rejection leads to long-term maladaptive outcomes We conclude by exploring the implications of our review and proposed model for the social psychological study of rejection Throughout our review, we highlight the role of the social, and specifically the peer group, contexts of rejection In our developmental analysis of rejection, we focus on peers for both theoretical and The Rejected and The Bullied practical reasons From a theoretical perspective, same or similar age peers provide a unique developmental context In contrast to relationships with adults, peer relationships are presumably more symmetrical or balanced in terms of power Among peers, children gain important insights about equality, reciprocity, loyalty, and trustworthiness (Berndt, 1996) Furthermore, peer relationships, and friendships in particular, provide opportunities for “social practice” in interpersonal behaviors that are critical to both current and future relationship development and maintenance These behaviors include cooperation, negotiation, compromise, conflict resolution, and the provision and seeking of social support (Hartup, 1996) In light of the developmental functions served by healthy peer relationships, it is therefore important to understand what happens to children who are social outcasts deprived of normative opportunities for social practice In the present review, we therefore include only studies that examine rejection and bullying by same- or similar-age peers, (to the exclusion of rejection by parents and romantic partners, for example) A second reason to focus on peers in reviewing the developmental research on rejection and bullying is practical: Most developmental investigators conceptualize rejection in terms of perceptions, preferences and behaviors directed toward an individual by familiar peers, as opposed to strangers or romantic partners In so doing, developmentalists have forged a path toward understanding social outcasts that is often distinct, both methodologically and conceptually, from that taken by social psychologists A note on terms: The many faces of peer rejection As anyone who has been picked last for kickball, endured ridicule or nasty rumors from ostensible friends, or sprinted home to avoid the neighborhood bully will attest, there are numerous ways to experience peer rejection Following Asher, Rose and Gabriel (2001), who undertook the onerous task of counting those The Rejected and The Bullied ways (and counted 32), we employ the term “peer rejection” inclusively It should be noted, however, that this is not typical of developmental psychologists who normally differentiate bullying or victimization by peers from peer rejection In developmental research, rejection is commonly defined as peers’ social avoidance of, dislike of, or reluctance to affiliate with an individual child In contrast, bullying is conceptualized as an active form of hostility toward a target (rather than mere avoidance or dislike) that is characterized by an imbalance of power (Olweus, 1978), such as a strong person intimidating a weaker one Bullying can take many forms including physical aggression, exclusion, and spreading nasty rumors Bullying is typically carried out by one or a few children, although bullied children are often also rejected by the larger peer group (Graham & Juvonen, 1998; Juvonen, Graham, & Schuster, 2003) In the present review, we include bullying within the broad category of peer rejection because we presume that from the perspective of the target of rejection or bullying the experiences are more similar than different We also propose that although the manifestations of rejection (avoidance) and bullying (hostility) vary, the action of non-inclusion or exclusion serves similar functions for the group (i.e., the rejectors) We therefore review developmental research on rejection and bullying as two conceptually and empirically related phenomena relevant to understanding the social outcast But how developmental psychologists study peer rejection and bullying? We now turn to a brief comparison between developmental and social psychological research A Decade of Studying the Outcast: Comparing Developmental and Social Studies We conducted an analysis of relevant studies published between 1993 and 2003 in the two leading journals in developmental psychology (Child Development and Developmental Psychology) and social psychology (Journal of Personality and Social Psychology and The Rejected and The Bullied Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin), respectively (see Appendix) Based on a search using six key words (rejection, exclusion, ostracism, harassment, victimization, and bullying), a total of 145 articles were identified (49% were published in the social psychology journals) This method is a short-hand way to represent the two fields and, as such, has limitations Nevertheless, this quick comparison reveals striking differences in conceptualizations and methodological approaches across the two areas of psychology What Constitutes Rejection? Chronic versus discrete experiences As shown in the Appendix, most developmentalists examine rejection and bullying experiences as chronic social problems rather than isolated interpersonal experiences As shown in Table 1, 89% of the developmental publications, compared to 45% of the social psychology articles published within the last decade investigated rejection as a repeated experience or chronic problem The chronicity of the social experience is reflected in developmental measures of rejection that indicate sociometric status or social standing Children are typically asked to name the individuals (e.g., classmates) whom they not like or with whom they not want to affiliate (i.e., play or “hang out”) An individual’s rejected status is based on the number or proportion of such nominations within the group (see Cillessen & Bukowski, 2000, for a comprehensive review of these methods) Rejection is thus operationalized as the consensus or overall attitude of the group toward one of its members The operational prerequisite for group consensus means that rejected status is likely to be based on recurring rejection experiences, as opposed to fleeting or isolated incidents Developmental studies that rely on such indicators of social status stand in sharp contrast to social psychological studies in which participants often describe or undergo a discrete incident of rejection Three quarters of the social psychological studies and only 26% of the developmental articles examined The Rejected and The Bullied discrete social rejection, ostracism, or bullying incidents Notably, some studies (24% in social and 13% in developmental) investigated both short-term and chronic forms of rejection Self-reported versus other-reported rejection Who determines whether an individual is rejected? Given the aforementioned popularity of peer nomination procedures in developmental research, it is not surprising that 78% of the last decade’s developmental studies assessed rejection based on others’ perceptions In addition to peer ratings or nominations assessing group sentiment toward a target child (e.g., dislike or avoidance), measures of behavioral or social reputation (e.g., “Who bullies others?” or “Who gets bullied?”) are also used Social psychological studies assessed others’ perceptions of social outcasts much less frequently (18%) Instead, 97% of non-experimental investigations in social psychology journals relied on selfreports of rejection (as compared to 23% of non-experimental developmental studies) Who is doing the rejecting? One of the most notable differences between the social and developmental studies pertains to the source of rejection: 96% of the developmental studies versus 54% of the social psychological studies examined perceptions or acts of rejection by familiar others (e.g., classmates), as opposed to strangers, who were the source of rejection in 48% of social and just 4% of developmental investigations In addition, only 16% of the developmental studies, compared to 75% of the social psychological studies, involved rejection by one individual (as opposed to a group) The relatively few developmental studies of rejection by an individual mainly focused on maternal rejection (a topic excluded from our review) Experimental, Correlational, and Longitudinal Designs As shown in Table 1, the vast majority (81%) of the relevant studies on social outcasts published in the developmental journals were non-experimental, whereas those published in social psychology journals are fairly evenly split between experimental (51%) and non- The Rejected and The Bullied experimental (49%) As we will discuss later, the correlational nature of developmental studies hinders inferences about whether developmental outcomes associated with rejection (e.g., criminality) are better explained by the antecedents of rejection (e.g., aggressive tendencies) rather than by rejection per se In 70% of the social psychology experiments, the rejection experience was experimentally manipulated In 42% of these studies, however, rejection did not involve actual interpersonal interaction with the source of rejection (either in person or via phone, video or computer) In these cases, rejection was communicated on paper only or by the experimenter This form of rejection manipulation was used in only one developmental study When developmental psychologists make use of experimental methods, they often employ contrived play group procedures in which participants are assigned to play in groups of unfamiliar peers for a series of brief sessions This method allows investigators to study the behaviors and emerging social status of previously unfamiliar children in a relatively controlled setting In past developmental studies, this approach has been used to examine both antecedents and consequences of rejection and bullying (Rabiner & Coie, 1989; Schwartz, Dodge, & Coie, 1993), as well as the stability of rejection across groups (Coie & Kupersmidt, 1983) Among the non-experimental studies, about half of the developmental investigations were longitudinal, in contrast to 21% of the social investigations Although not equally prevalent in the two disciplines, the mean length of the longitudinal studies in developmental and social psychological studies was similar (Ms = 40 and 35 months, respectively) In sum, in comparison to social psychological research, developmental research on social outcasts more often 1) employs correlational and longitudinal designs, 2) focuses on chronic rather than discrete experiences of rejection, and 3) assesses rejected or bullied status based on the consensus of the peer group Although each approach has its limitations, the developmental The Rejected and The Bullied research on antecedents and correlates of persistent rejection by familiar peers can provide a more complete picture of the evolution or unfolding of rejection and the group functions rejection may serve We now begin our review of the developmental body of research by asking: what causes an individual to become a social outcast? Rather than provide an exhaustive review of the hundreds of studies that have examined the antecedents of rejection and bullying (see Hawker & Bolder, 2001; Kupersmidt et al., 1990; McDougall, Hymel, Vaillancourt, & Mercer, 2001, for comprehensive reviews), we propose that the most parsimonious account for the cause of peer rejection is person-group dissimilarity The Social Outcast as Group Misfit Although virtually everyone experiences peer rejection or bullying at some point in their childhood or adolescence, repeated rejection and chronic bullying are neither random nor universal experiences Numerous studies indicate that aggressive and socially withdrawn youth are most likely to be cast out from the group (e.g, Boivin, Hymel, & Bukowski, 1995; Rubin, LeMare, & Lollis, 1990) Associations between peer rejection and aggression as well as between rejection and social withdrawal have also been observed cross-culturally, among Italian (Tomada & Schneider, 1997), Chinese (Schwartz, Chang & Farver, 2001), and Indonesian children and adolescents (French, Jansen, & Pidada, 2002) What can account for children and adolescents’ intolerance for aggression and social withdrawal among their peers? When Coie and Pennington (1976) asked children to describe someone who is “different from other kids,” aggression and shyness were among the behavioral descriptions most frequently mentioned by first- through eleventh-grade students Similar results were obtained in a study with 12-year-old Finnish children (Juvonen, 1991) Younger, Gentile, The Rejected and The Bullied and Burgess (1993) have likewise shown that both aggression and social withdrawal are perceived as deviant in middle childhood Hence, the associations between peer rejection and both aggression and social withdrawal may in part reflect that these behaviors are among the most salient deviations from group behavioral norms across childhood and adolescence There is a small body of developmental research specifically testing the deviancerejection hypothesis These studies suggest that determinants of rejection are not necessarily invariant across all groups; rather, they differ depending on the prevailing group norms The Person-Group Misfit Model Wright et al (1986) were the first to formally propose and test a norm-based model of rejection They examined associations between individual behavior and peer status in groups of 10-year-old boys at a summer camp for children with behavioral difficulties They found that aggression and withdrawal each predicted peer rejection only in groups in which the behavior was non-normative In groups displaying low levels of aggressive behavior (e.g., verbal threats, hitting), aggressive individuals were rejected In contrast, in high-aggression groups, social withdrawal was the non-normative and less accepted behavior, whereas aggressive behavior was unrelated to peer status This landmark study provided strong initial evidence for the importance of group composition in determining who gets rejected Aggression, commonly conceived as an invariant cause of peer rejection, was instead shown to cause rejection only when it represented deviance from group norms More recent investigations have found similar group effects Using an experimental paradigm, Boivin, Dodge, and Coie (1995) found relations among aggressive, prosocial, and withdrawn behaviors, group behavioral composition, and social preference that were similar to those reported by Wright and colleagues Moreover, their findings are even more The Rejected and The Bullied 10 consistent with the person-group misfit hypothesis than Wright et al.’s Among novel play groups composed of African American boys recruited from first and third grades of a local elementary school, both withdrawn and aggressive behaviors predicted low status in groups in which the behavior was infrequent A more recent large-scale naturalistic study provides further support for the person-group misfit model (Stormshak, Bierman, Bruschi, Dodge, & Coie, 1999) Using multilevel modeling techniques to simultaneously test group- and individual-level patterns of associations across 2895 children in 134 first-grade classrooms, Stormshak and colleagues (1999) found strong evidence that the relation between certain individual behaviors and peer preference varied by classroom context Interestingly, they found distinct contextual effects for aggression, social withdrawal, pro-social behavior and inattention/hyperactivity Whereas aggression and social withdrawal varied in their acceptability across classrooms in a manner consistent with Wright et al (1986) and Boivin et al (1995), pro-social behavior and inattention/hyperactivity were invariant in their associations with social preference, with pro-social positively related and inattention/hyperactivity negatively related to social preference Although most studies of person-group misfit share a focus on aggressive, withdrawn and pro-social behaviors as correlates of acceptance and rejection, there are exceptions A recent study of 9-, 13-, and 16-year-old Chinese youth showed that relations between academic performance and social acceptance varied according to group academic performance (Chen, Chang & He, 2003) For example, in high achieving groups, low achievers were less accepted than high achievers This investigation is also notable for defining the group not simply as the classroom, but rather in terms of self- and peer-defined social networks within the larger school setting (e.g., Cairns, Cairns, & Neckerman, 1989; Cairns & Cairns, 1994) This approach The Rejected and The Bullied 30 References Allen, J.P., Weissberg, R.P., & Hawkins, J.A (1989) The relation between values and social competence in early adolescence Developmental Psychology, 25, 458-464 Asher, S.R., Rose, A.J., & Gabriel, S.W (2001) Peer rejection in everyday life In Leary, Mark R (Ed.), Interpersonal rejection (pp 105-142) London: Oxford Press Asher, S R., & Wheeler, V A (1985) Children's loneliness: A comparison of rejected and neglected peer status Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 53, 500-505 Bagwell, C.L., Coie, J.D., Terry, R.A., & Lochman, J.E (2000) Peer clique participation and social status in preadolescence Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 46, 280-305 Bellmore, A., D., Witkow, M R., Graham, S & Juvonen, J (in press) From beliefs to behavior: The mediating role of hostile response selection in predicting aggression Aggressive Behavior Bellmore, A., Witkow, M., Graham, S., & Juvonen, J (in press) Beyond the individual: The impact of ethnic context and classroom behavioral norms on victims' adjustment Berndt, T.J (1996) Friendships in adolescence In Vanzetti, Nelly & Duck, Steve (Eds.), A lifetime of relationships (pp 181-212) Belmont, CA, US: Brooks/Cole Publishing Co Boivin, M., Dodge, K A., & Coie, J D (1995) Individual-group behavioral similarity and peer status in experimental play groups of boys: The social misfit revisited Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 69, 269-279 Boivin, M., Hymel, S., & Bukowski, W.M (1995) The roles of social withdrawal, peer rejection, and victimization by peers in predicting loneliness and depressed mood in childhood Development & Psychopathology Special Issue: Developmental processes in peer relations and psychopathology, 7, 765-785 The Rejected and The Bullied 31 Bryk, A.S., & Raudenbush, S.W (1992) Hierarchical linear models Newbury Park, CA: Sage Burks, V.S., Dodge, K.A., & Price, J.M (1995) Models of internalizing outcomes of early rejection Development & Psychopathology Special Issue: Developmental processes in peer relations and psychopathology, 7, 683-695 Cairns, R B., & Cairns, B D (1994) Lifelines and risks: Pathways of youth in our time New York: Cambridge University Press Cairns, R B., Cairns, B D., & Neckerman, H J (1989) Early school dropout: Configurations and determinants Child Development, 60, 1437-1452 Cairns, R.B., Cairns, B.D., Neckerman, H.J., Gest, S.D., & Gariepy (1988) Social networks and aggressive behavior: Peer support or peer rejection? Developmental Psychology, 24, 815-823 Chen, X., Chang, L., & He, Y (2003) The peer group as a context: Mediating and moderating effects on relations between academic achievement and social functioning in Chinese children Child Development, 74, 710-727 Cillessen, A.H.N & Bukowski, W.M., Eds (2000) Recent advances in the measurement of acceptance and rejection in the peer system New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 88 San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Cillessen, A.H.N., Bukowski, W.M., & Haselager, G.J.T (2000) Stability of sociometric categories In Cillessen, A.H.N & Bukowski, W.M (Eds.), Recent advances in the measurement of acceptance and rejection in the peer system New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 88 (pp 75-94) San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Clifford, E (1963) Social visibility Child Development, 34, 799-808 The Rejected and The Bullied 32 Coie, J D., & Cillessen, A H (1993) "Peer rejection: Origins and effects on children's development." Current Directions in Psychological Science, 2, 89-92 Coie, J D., Dodge, K A., & Kupersmidt, J B (1990) Peer group behavior and social status In S R Asher & J D Coie (Eds.), Peer rejection in childhood Cambridge studies in social and emotional development (pp 17-59) New York, NY: Cambridge University Press Coie, J.D., & Kupersmidt, J.B (1983) A behavioral analysis of emerging social status in boys’ groups Child Development, 54, 1400-1416 Coie, J.D., & Pennington, B.F (1976) Children's perceptions of deviance and disorder Child Development, 47, 407-413 Coie, J.D., Terry, R., Lenox, K., & Lochman, J (1995) Childhood peer rejection and aggression as predictors of stable patterns of adolescent disorder Development & Psychopathology Special Issue: Developmental processes in peer relations and psychopathology, 7, 697-713 Crick, N & Dodge, K (1994) A Review and Reformulation of Social InformationProcessing Mechanisms in Children’s Social Adjustment Psychological Bulletin, 115, 74-101 Crick, N R., & Grotpeter, J K (1995) Relational aggression, gender, and socialpsychological adjustment Child Development, 66, 710-722 Crick, N R., & Ladd, G W (1990) Children's perceptions of the outcomes of social strategies: Do the ends justify being mean? Developmental Psychology, 26, 612-620 Crick, N R., & Ladd, G W (1993) Children's perceptions of their peer experiences: Attributions, loneliness, social anxiety, and social avoidance Developmental Psychology, 29, 244-254 The Rejected and The Bullied 33 Deater-Deckard, K (2001) Annotation: Recent Research Examining the Role of Peer Relationships in the Development of Psychopathology Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 42, 565-579 DeRosier, M E., Kupersmidt, J.B., & Patterson, C.J (1994) Children's academic and behavioral adjustment as a function of the chronicity and proximity of peer rejection Child Development, 65, 1799-1813 Dishion, T J., McCord, J., & Poulin, F (1999) When interventions harm: Peer groups and problem behavior American Psychologist, 54, 755-764 Dishion, T J., Spracklen, K M., Andrews, D W., & Patterson, G R (1996) Deviancy training in male adolescent friendships Behavior Therapy, 27, 373-390 Dodge, K A., & Crick, N R (1990) Social information-processing bases of aggressive behavior in children Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin Special Issue: Illustrating the value of basic research, 16, 8-22 Dodge, K A (1980) Social cognition and children's aggressive behavior Child Development, 51, 162-170 Dodge, K A., Coie, J D., Pettit, G S., & Price, J M (1990) Peer status and aggression in boys' groups: Developmental and contextual analyses Child Development, 61, 1289-1309 Eder, D.(1995) School talk: Gender and adolescent school culture Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum Egan, S K., & Perry, D g (1998) Does low self-regard invite victimization? Developmental Psychology, 34, 299-309 The Rejected and The Bullied 34 French, D.C., Jansen, E.A., & Pidada, S (2002) United States and Indonesian children's and adolescents' reports of relational aggression by disliked peers Child Development, 73, 1143-1150 Graham, S., Hydley, C, & William, E (1992) Attributional and emotional determinants of aggression among African American and Latino early adolescents Developmental Psychology, 31, 28, 731-740 Hallinan, M T (1979) Structural effects on children's friendships and cliques Social Psychology Quarterly, 42, 43-54 Hartup, W.W (1996) The company they keep: Friendships and their developmental significance Child Development, 67, 1-13 Hawker, D S J., & Boulton, M.J (2000) Twenty years’ research on peer victimization and psychosocial maladjustment: A meta-analytic review of cross-sectional studies Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 41, 441-455 Hawkins, J D., & Lam, T (1987) Teacher practices, social development, and delinquency In J D Burchard & S N Burchard (Eds.), Prevention of delinquent behavior (pp 241-247) Newbury Park,CA: Sage Hodges, E V E & Perry, D G (1999) Personal and interpersonal antecedents and consequences of victimization by peers Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 677685 Hodges, E V E., Boivin, M., Vitaro, F., & Bukowski, W M (1999) The power of friendship: Protection against an escalating cycle of peer victimization Developmental Psychology, 35, 94-101 The Rejected and The Bullied 35 Hodges, E V E., Malone, M J., & Perry, D G (1997) Individual risk and social risk as interacting determinants of victimization in the peer group Developmental Psychology, 33, 1032-1039 Hogg, M (this volume) All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others: Social identity and marginal membership Hope, T L., & Bierman, K L (1998) Patterns of home and school behavior problems in rural and urban settings Journal of School Psychology Special Issue: School Violence, 36, 4558 Hymel, S (1986) Interpretations of peer behavior: Affective bias in childhood and adolescence Child Development, 57, 431-445 Hymel, S., Vaillancourt, T., McDougall, P., & Renshaw, P D (2002) Peer acceptance and rejection in childhood In P K Smith & C H Hart (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of childhood social development Blackwell handbooks of developmental psychology (pp 265-284) Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers Hymel, S., Wagner, E., & Butler, L J (1990) Reputational bias: View from the peer group Cambridge studies in social and emotional development [Peer rejection in childhood], 156-186 Janes, L.M, & Olson, J.M (2000) Jeer pressure: Effects of observing ridicule of others Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 474-485 Juvonen, J (1991) Deviance, perceived responsibility, and negative peer reactions Developmental Psychology, 27, 672-681 Juvonen, J & Cadigan, J (2002) Social determinants of public behavior of middle school youth: Perceived peer norms and need to be accepted In F Pajares & T Urdan, (Eds.), The Rejected and The Bullied 36 Adolescence and Education, Vol 2: Academic motivation of adolescents (pp.277-297) Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing Juvonen, J., Nishina, A., & Graham, S (2000) Peer harassment, psychological adjustment, and school functioning in early adolescence Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 349-359 Killen, M., Crystal, D S., & Watanabe, H (2002) Japanese and American children's evaluations of peer exclusion, tolerance of differences, and prescriptions for conformity Child Development, 73, 1788-1802 Kochenderfer, B J., & Ladd, G W (1997) Victimized children's responses to peers' aggression: Behaviors associated with reduced versus continued victimization Development and Psychopathology, 9, 59-73 Kochenderfer-Ladd, B., & Ladd, G W (2001) Variations in peer victimization: Relations to children's maladjustment In J Juvonen, & S Graham (Eds.), Peer harassment in school: The plight of the vulnerable and victimized (pp 25-48) New York, NY: Guilford Press Kochenderfer-Ladd, B & Wardrop, J.L (2001) Chronicity and instability of children's peer victimization experiences as predictors of loneliness and social satisfaction trajectories Child Development, 72, 134-151 LaFontana, K M., & Cillessen, A H N (2002) Children's perceptions of popular and unpopular peers: A multimethod assessment Developmental Psychology, 38, 635-647 Leadbeater, B., Hoglund, W., & Woods, T (2003) Changing contents? The effects of a primary prevention program on classroom levels of peer relational and physical victimization Journal of Community Psychology, 31, 397-418 The Rejected and The Bullied 37 Lease, A M., & Axelrod, J L (2001) Position of the peer group's perceived organizational structure: Relation to social status and friendship Journal of Early Adolescence, 21, 377-404 Luthar, S S., & McMahon, T J (1996) Peer reputation among inner-city adolescents: Structure and correlates Journal of Research on Adolescence, 6, 581-603 McDougall, P., Hymel, S., Vaillancourt, T., & Mercer, L (2002) The consequences of childhood peer rejection In M Leary (Ed), Interpersonal rejection (pp 213-247) London: Oxford University Press Moffitt, T E (1993) Adolescence-limited and life-course-persistent antisocial behavior: A developmental taxonomy Psychological Review, 100, 674-701 Newcomb, A.F., Bukowski, W.M., & Pattee, L (1993) Children's peer relations: A metaanalytic review of popular, rejected, neglected, controversial, and average sociometric status Psychological Bulletin, 113, 99-128 Nishina, A., & Juvonen, J (submitted for publication) Daily Reports of Witnessing and Experiencing Peer Harassment in Middle School Nishina, A., Juvonen, J., & Witkow, M (submitted for publication) Sticks and Stones May Break My Bones, But Names Will Make Me Sick: The Consequences of Peer Harassment Orobio de Castro, B., Veerman, J W., Koops, W., Bosch, J D., & Monshouwer, H J (2002) Hostile attribution of intent and aggressive behavior: A meta-analysis Child Development, 73, 916-934 Olweus, D (1978) Aggression in the schools: Bullies and whipping boys Oxford, England: Hemisphere The Rejected and The Bullied 38 Panak, W F., & Garber, J (1992) Role of aggression, rejection, and attributions in the prediction of depression in children Development and Psychopathology, 7, 145-165 Parker, J.G., & Asher, S.R (1987) Peer relations and later personal adjustment: Are lowaccepted children at risk? Psychological Bulletin, 102, 357-389 Parkhurst, J T., & Asher, S R (1992) Peer rejection in middle school: Subgroup differences in behavior, loneliness, and interpersonal concerns Developmental Psychology, 28, 231-241 Parkhurst, J T., & Hopmeyer, A (1998) Sociometric popularity and peer-perceived popularity: Two distinct dimensions of peer status Journal of Early Adolescence, 18, 125-144 Patterson, G.R., Capaldi, D., & Bank, L (1991) An early starter model for predicting delinquency In Pepler, Debra J & Rubin, Kenneth H (Eds.), The development and treatment of childhood aggression (pp 139-168) Hillsdale, NJ, England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Peevers, B H., & Secord, P F (1973) Developmental changes in attribution of descriptive concepts to persons Pepler, D J., Craig, W M., & Roberts, W L (1998) Observations of aggressive and nonaggressive children on the school playground Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 44, 55-76 Rabiner, D., & Coie, J (1989) Effect of expectancy inductions on rejected children's acceptance by unfamiliar peers Developmental Psychology, 25, 450-457 Rodkin, P.C., Farmer, T.W., Pearl, R., & Van Acken, R (2000) Heterogeneity of popular boys: Antisocial and prosocial configurations Developmental Psychology, 36, 14-24 Rubin, K.H., LeMare, L.J., & Lollis, S (1990) Social withdrawal in childhood: Developmental pathways to peer rejection In Asher, Steven R & Coie, John D (Eds.), Peer The Rejected and The Bullied 39 rejection in childhood Cambridge studies in social and emotional development (pp 217-249) New York, NY, US: Cambridge University Press Sandstrom, M J., & Cillessen, A H N (2003) Sociometric Status and Children's Peer Experiences: Use of the Daily Diary Method Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 49, 427-452 Sandstrom, M J., & Cramer, P (2003) Girls use of defense mechanisms following peer rejection Journal of Personality, 71, 605-627 Schippell, P.L., Vasey, M.W., Cravens-Brown, L.M., and Bretveld, R.A (2003) Suppressed attention to rejection, ridicule, and failure cues: A unique correlate of reactive but not proactive aggression in youth Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 32, 40-55 Schmitt, M T., Silvia, P J., & Branscombe, N R (2000) The intersection of selfevaluation maintenance and social identity theories: Intragroup judgment in interpersonal and intergroup contexts Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 1598-1606 Schwartz, D., Dodge, K.A., & Coie, J.D (1993) The emergence of chronic peer vicitimization in boys' play groups Child Development, 64, 1755-1772 Schwartz, D., Farver, J., & Chang, L (2000) Correlates of victimization in Chinese children’s peer groups Harassment Across Diverse Contexts Stormshak, E A., Bierman, K L., Bruschi, C., Dodge, K A., & Coie, J D (1999) The relation between behavior problems and peer preference in different classroom contexts Child Development, 70, 169-182 Tomada, G., & Schneider, B.H., (1997) Relational aggression, gender, and peer acceptance: Invariance across culture, stability over time, and concordance among informants Developmental Psychology, 33, 601-609 The Rejected and The Bullied 40 Tremblay, R.E., Masse, L.C., Vitaro, F & Dobkin, P.L (1995) The impact of friends' deviant behavior on early onset of deliquency: Longitudinal data from to 13 years of age Development & Psychopathology Special Issue: Developmental processes in peer relations and psychopathology, 7, 649-667 Vernberg, E M., Abwender, D.A., Ewell, K.K., & Beery, S H (1992) Social anxiety and peer relationships in early adolescence: A prospective analysis Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 21, 189-196 Vossekuil, B., Fein, R., Reddy, M., Borum, R., & Modzeleski, W (2002) The final report and findings of the safe school initiative: Implications for prevention of school attacks in the United States US Department of Education, Office of Elementary and Secondary Educations, Safe and Drug-Free Schools Program, and US Secret Service Washington D.C Weiner, B (1995) Judgments of responsibility: A foundation for a theory of social conduct New York, NY, US: Guilford Press White, K.J., Rubin, E.C., & Graczyk, P.A (2002) Aggressive children's perceptions of behaviorally similar peers: The influence of one's own behavioral characteristics on perceptions of deviant peers Journal of Social & Personal Relationships, 19, 755-775 White, K J., Sherman, M D., & Jones, K (1996) Children's perceptions of behavior problem peers: Effects of teacher feedback and peer-reputed status Journal of School Psychology, 34, 53-72 Wood, J J., Cowan, P A., & Baker, B L (2002) Behavior problems and peer rejection in preschool boys and girls Journal of Genetic Psychology, 163, 72-88 The Rejected and The Bullied 41 Wright, J C., Giammarino, M., & Parad, H W (1986) Social status in small groups: Individual-group similarity and the social "misfit." Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 50, 523-536 Younger, A., Gentile, C., & Burgess, K (1993) Children's perceptions of social withdrawal: Changes across age In K H Rubin & J B Asendorpf (Eds.), Social withdrawal, inhibition, and shyness in childhood (pp 215-235) Hillsdale, NJ, England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc Zeller, M., Vannatta, K., Schafer, J., & Noll, R B (2003) Behavioral reputation: A crossage perspective Developmental Psychology, 39, 129-139 The Rejected and The Bullied 42 Appendix Our review was based on the 145 studies published between 1993 and 2003 in Child Development, Developmental Psychology, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology and Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin that were found in a PsycINFO search on the following six keywords: rejection, ostracism, exclusion, harassment, victimization and bullying Each of thirteen characteristics were coded independent of the others; that is, an article could include both experimental and non-experimental data, or rejection by both strangers and familiar others Table 1A Comparison of Characteristics of Social and Developmental Investigations, 1993-2003 % of Articles in Developmental Psychology Journals (n = 74) % of Articles in Social Psychology Journals (n = 71) χ2 89% 26% 45% 75% 29.56** 36.76** 78% 19% 1% 18% 51% 18% 52.32** 16.20** 12.33** 12% 44% 16.24** Source of Rejection Strangers Familiar others Individual Group 4% 96% 16% 89% 48% 55% 73% 34% 33.81** 33.29**‡ 52.59**‡ 47.38**‡ Research Design Experimental Non-experimental Longitudinal 20% 81% 45% 62% 49% 21% 26.11** 16.20** 8.89* Characteristic Chronicity of Rejection Chronic Discrete Determination of Rejected Status Other-report Self-report Rejection involving no direct interpersonal interaction with source Experimental manipulation or behavioral coding only Notes: Unless otherwise noted, χ2 statistics reflect Fisher’s Exact test comparing articles with and without each characteristic in the two fields; comparisons that include a third category “unspecified,” used a standard two-tailed χ2 test, and are noted by “‡”; * = p