title: Relational and Overt Aggression in Childhood and Adolescence: Clarifying Mean-Level Gender Differences and Associations with Peer Acceptance.
abstract: Research on relational aggression has drawn attention to how girls may be likely to aggress, but the role of gender is not fully understood. There are opposing views regarding whether relational aggression is most common among girls. Current findings demonstrate that when gender differences in relational aggression are assessed with peer nominations, gender differences favoring girls are more likely: a) in adolescence than childhood and b) when statistical overlap with overt aggression is controlled. Results also indicated that associations of relational aggression with peer acceptance depend on the aggressor's gender, the peer rater's gender, and whether overlap with overt aggression is controlled. Associations of relational aggression with lower acceptance became non-significant when overt aggression was controlled, suggesting that relational aggression displayed in isolation may not damage acceptance. In fact, in mid-adolescence, girls' relational aggression predicted greater liking by boys. Reducing relational aggression among adolescent girls may be especially challenging if the behavior is linked with acceptance by boys.
authors.affiliation: University of Missouri.
authors.forename: Rhiannon L
authors.initials: RL
authors.lastname: Smith
authors.forename: Amanda J
authors.initials: AJ
authors.lastname: Rose
authors.forename: Rebecca A
authors.initials: RA
authors.lastname: Schwartz-Mette
references.citation: Dev Psychol. 2004 May;40(3):378-87
references.pmid: 15122964
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 1993 Oct;100(4):674-701
references.pmid: 8255953
references.citation: Child Dev. 1997 Dec;68(6):1198-209
references.pmid: 9418234
references.citation: Child Dev. 1995 Jun;66(3):710-22
references.pmid: 7789197
references.citation: Dev Psychol. 2000 Mar;36(2):147-54
references.pmid: 10749072
references.citation: Scand J Psychol. 2000 Mar;41(1):17-24
references.pmid: 10731839
references.citation: Child Dev. 1996 Oct;67(5):2317-27
references.pmid: 9022243
references.citation: Nebr Symp Motiv. 1998;45:75-141
references.pmid: 10752059
references.citation: J Exp Child Psychol. 2004 May;88(1):25-45
references.pmid: 15093724
references.citation: Child Dev. 2008 Sep-Oct;79(5):1185-229
references.pmid: 18826521
references.citation: J Abnorm Child Psychol. 2000 Aug;28(4):327-37
references.pmid: 10949958
references.citation: Psychol Bull. 2006 Jan;132(1):98-131
references.pmid: 16435959
references.citation: Child Dev. 2004 Jan-Feb;75(1):147-63
references.pmid: 15015681
references.citation: Dev Psychol. 2002 Sep;38(5):635-47
references.pmid: 12220043
references.citation: Child Dev. 2002 Nov-Dec;73(6):1830-43
references.pmid: 12487497
references.citation: Child Dev. 1981 Mar;52(1):171-8
references.pmid: 7238141
references.citation: Dev Psychol. 1997 Jul;33(4):601-9
references.pmid: 9232375
references.citation: J Abnorm Psychol. 1999 Nov;108(4):615-23
references.pmid: 10609426
references.citation: Annu Rev Psychol. 1995;46:433-65
references.pmid: 7872734
references.citation: Dev Psychol. 2000 Jan;36(1):14-24
references.pmid: 10645741
references.citation: Dev Psychol. 1997 Jul;33(4):589-600
references.pmid: 9232374
references.citation: Dev Psychol. 1997 Jul;33(4):610-7
references.pmid: 9232376
references.citation: Dev Psychol. 1999 Jan;35(1):69-79
references.pmid: 9923465