Chinese and American children’s perceptions of popularity determinants: Cultural differences and behavioral correlates

Abstract

The present study aimed to investigate cultural construction of children’s perceptions of popularity determinants using a cross-cultural approach. This study examined 327 Chinese and 312 American fifth-graders’ perceptions of what individual characteristics and peer relationships would make a peer popular. Consistent with cultural emphases, Chinese children primarily endorsed prosocial behaviors and academic competence and perceived opposite gender interactions unfavorably. In contrast, American children endorsed more social connections, appearance and opposite gender interactions. Compared with American children, Chinese children perceived antisocial behaviors more unfavorably. For both cultural groups, children’s popularity status and behavioral characteristics, as measured by peer nominations, related to their perceptions of popularity determinants. Discussions regarding cultural implications of these findings are provided.

Keywords

Chinese children cross-cultural culture peer status popularity

Children become increasingly concerned with their social status in peer networks as they enter into preadolescence (Rubin, Bukowski, & Parker, 2006). Many studies have examined the behavioral and individual characteristics related to popularity status (e.g., Cillessen & Mayeux, 2004; Lease, Kennedy, & Axelrod, 2002; Parkhurst & Hopmeyer, 1998; Prinstein & Cillessen, 2003). Researchers have also started investigating children’s perceptions of what contributes to popularity (de Bruyn & Cillessen, 2006; LaFontana & Cillessen, 2002; Xie, Li, Boucher, Hutchins, & Cairns, 2006). As previous research has shown, children’s perceptions of their own social standing (e.g., liking, rejection) is predictive of their future social functioning and psychological adjustment (McElhaney, Antonishak, & Allen, 2008; Prinstein & Aikins, 2004). Additionally, accumulating evidence has shown that children’s peer interactions are highly influenced by cultural contexts (Chen & French, 2008; Hart et al., 2000). Research on popularity has been mostly conducted among North American children. Little is known with regard to how cultural contexts contribute to children’s popularity perceptions (Schwartz et al., 2010). The present study addresses these research limitations by employing a cross-cultural approach to examine Chinese and American children’s perceptions of what individual characteristics and peer relationships contribute to popularity and how such popularity determinants relate to their popularity status and behavioral characteristics.

Popularity and behavioral correlates

Children’s peer status has been traditionally examined by acceptance or social preference, which primarily reflects peers’ personal preference and liking of a peer (Asher & Coie, 1990; Coie, Dodge, & Coppotelli, 1982). More recent research has started focusing on popularity (also referred to as perceived popularity) that reflects the reputation and social impact of a child (Cillessen & Bukowski, 2000; Cillessen & Marks, 2011; Parkhurst & Hopmeyer, 1998). Studies involving North American children have shown that popular children possess both positive and negative characteristics (Cillessen & Mayeux, 2004; LaFontana & Cillessen, 2002; Parkhurst & Hopmeyer, 1998; Prinstein & Cillessen, 2003; Rodkin, Farmer, Pearl, & Van Acker, 2000; Rose, Swenson, & Waller, 2004). They are cool, athletic, socially central, prosocial, and academically competent. At the same time, they also have aggressive and antisocial characteristics. These behavioral correlates possibly indicate that popular children are bistrategics who use both prosocial and aggressive behaviors to effectively control resources and to have higher popularity status (Hawley, 2003). Furthermore, research also suggests that popular youth is a heterogeneous group with both prosocial and antisocial/aggressive members (Farmer, Estell, Bishop, O’Neal, & Cairns, 2003; Rodkin et al., 2000).

Perceptions of popularity

The studies reviewed earlier have examined aggregated peers’ and teachers’ reports of popularity and behaviors about a particular peer group to find the behavioral correlates of popularity (LaFontana & Cillessen, 2002). Recent research using open-ended questions and interviews has explored children’s and adolescents’ perceptions regarding what behaviors and traits are associated with popularity (Closson, 2009a; de Bruyn & Cillessen, 2006; LaFontana & Cillessen, 2002; Xie et al., 2006). It has been found that favorable characteristics were attributed to popular peers, such as physical appearance, social connections, athletic ability, academic performance, and prosocial behavior. Additionally, unlike the behavioral correlates of popularity found in preadolescent children (e.g., fifth-graders) and adolescents (e.g., Cillessen & Mayeux, 2004; Prinstein & Cillessen, 2003), children and adolescents perceive that aggression and antisocial behaviors negatively contribute to popularity. However, some research also indicates that youth’s perceptions of popular peers can be heterogeneous, including both prosocial and antisocial characteristics (de Bruyn & Cillessen, 2006). Such discrepancies warrant further research on children’s social cognitions regarding the contributing factors for popularity. Furthermore, it is yet to be determined how such perceptions relate to children’s own social status and behavioral characteristics.

Recent research has shown that children’s perceptions of popularity factors are likely to be associated with important individual and social factors. For example, using an African American sample, Xie and colleagues (2006) found that the perceptions of determinants for popularity varied by children’s age. Preadolescent children emphasized appearance, self-presentation, and school performance more than younger children and adolescents. In a recent study, Closson (2009a) revealed that perceptions of popularity determinants also varied by adolescents’ popularity status such that popular adolescents were more likely to use positive words (e.g., athletic, liked, cool) to describe popular peers, whereas average popular or unpopular adolescents were more likely to use negative ones (e.g., mean, snobby, rude). Such findings are highly consistent with the social identity theory (Hogg & Abrams, 1988), which suggests that individuals may establish positive distinctiveness for the group they belong to and may have more positive opinions towards in-group members as compared to out-group members (i.e., in-group favoritism). As youth often hang around with peers with similar popularity statuses in their friendship cliques (Closson, 2009b), they may hold favorite views about these peers in their cliques. Therefore the more popular children are, the more likely they are to report that positive characteristics (e.g., being prosocial, nice appearance) make a child popular. Furthermore, despite these research advances, little is known about how children’s own behavioral characteristics relate to their attributions for popularity. It is expected that children are likely to hold perceptions of popularity determinants consistent with their behavioral tendency.

As suggested by social psychological theories, holding contradictory cognitions likely results in a state of cognitive dissonance, which may induce negative affect (Festinger, 1957). To avoid negative affects, individuals are inclined to reduce the dissonance by seeking attitude–behavior congruence. Consequently, children who behave in a certain way (e.g., aggressive or prosocial) are likely to give endorsement to such behaviors in their social cognitions. Investigating such associations may offer useful information regarding how children’s social cognitive processes for popularity vary as a function of individual characteristics.

Cultural context and popularity factors

Children’s behaviors and peer relations are highly influenced by social and cultural context (Hart et al., 2000). Socially competent behaviors are evaluated based on the norms and values in the cultural context (Chen & French, 2008). Although variations within a culture can be observed (Oyserman, Coon, & Kemmelmeier, 2002), the Chinese culture stands as one of the prototypical collectivistic cultures, and is also heavily influenced by Confucianism (Chen, 2010; Triandis, 1989). The emphasis on collectivistic values (e.g., interdependence, cooperation) has been positively related to children’s prosocial behavior development in the Chinese culture (Stevenson, 1991). Prosocial behaviors, such as being nice to others and showing care for others, follow the fundamental principles of the Confucius tradition and are heavily emphasized in the moral education curriculum in the Chinese education systems (Chen, 2010). Consequently Chinese children display a high norm for prosocial behaviors. In comparison to North American children, Chinese children display more cooperative behaviors in peer interactions (Orlick, Zhou, & Partington, 1990). Although very prosocial, Chinese children are not as sociable (e.g., like to talk with peers, have many friends, make new friends easily) as their American counterparts in social initiatives (Hart et al., 2000). It is posited that Chinese children’s social interactions are often guided by prosocial motivations and the sociability orientation is less emphasized in their socialization (Chen, 2010). In addition to prosocial behaviors, Chinese society also highly values academic achievement as influenced by the Confucius tradition. One of the major socialization goals of Chinese parents involves their child’s academic achievement (Ho, 2008). Conforming to this socialization goal, Chinese youths are more willing to fulfill parental academic expectations than their American counterparts (Chen & Lan, 2006).

Cultural values and norms also relate to children’s attitude and exhibition of aggressive behaviors. Confucianism and the encompassed traditional cultural values on social harmony place great emphasis on behavioral regulations and inhibition of aggressive and antisocial behaviors (Bond & Wang, 1983). Similar to findings reported in Western cultures (Rubin et al., 2006), Chinese children who display aggressive and disruptive behaviors experience social and school difficulties, such as lower social competence and academic performance (Chen, Cen, Li, & He, 2005; Chen, Huang, Chang, & Wang, 2010). Empirical evidence has also revealed negative associations between endorsement of collectivism and different forms of aggressive behaviors among Chinese early adolescents (Li, Wang, Wang, & Shi, 2010). Some cross-cultural research has also shown that Chinese children were less overtly aggressive than their American counterparts (Domino, 2000).

Little information is available about popularity among Chinese children. To our knowledge, there is only one published study about Hong Kong Chinese children’s popularity (Schwartz et al., 2010). Consistent with North American findings, popularity was positively related to relational aggression and assertiveness-leadership, and negatively related to submissiveness-withdrawal. However, no correlations were found between popularity and overt aggression or victimization. This study provides up-to-date information about behavioral correlates of popularity among Chinese children. Nevertheless, no research has examined Chinese children’s perceptions regarding what contributes to popularity. Influenced by cultural values and norms, Chinese children’s perceptions of popularity determinants may differ in important ways from those of Western children.

The present study

The overarching aims of the present study were to compare American and Chinese children’s perceptions of individual characteristics and peer relationships that might contribute to popularity, and to examine how such perceptions relate to their own popularity status and behavioral characteristics, specifically their aggressivity and prosociality. Due to extremely limited research on Chinese children’ perceptions of popularity, we cautiously hypothesized the major determinants reported in previous research with North American children. Preadolescent children are likely to endorse prosocial behaviors and academic performance for popularity (LaFontana & Cillessen, 2002; Xie et al., 2006). Given the strong emphases of prosocial behaviors and academic performance in Chinese children’s socialization (Chen & Lan, 2006; Orlick et al., 1990), we expected that prosocial behaviors and academic competence would be even more prominent for Chinese children. Although we expected that both Chinese and American children perceive antisocial behaviors (e.g., aggressive, disruptive, breaking rules) to negatively contribute to popularity (LaFontana & Cillessen, 2002; Xie et al., 2006), such behaviors would likely be considered even more unfavorably by Chinese children given the societal censure of such behaviors as influenced by collectivistic and harmonious values (Bond & Wang, 1983; Chen et al., 2005; Li et al., 2010).

Furthermore, it seemed reasonable to expect that children perceive social connections (e.g., hanging out with popular peers and having lots of friends; LaFontana & Cillessen, 2002; Xie et al., 2006) to positively contribute to popularity in both cultural groups, though Chinese students might endorse this aspect to a lesser degree given that Chinese children’s social interactions are more prosocially oriented (Chen, 2010) and they are generally less sociable than American children (Hart et al., 2000). Similarly, appearance is perceived as an important factor contributing to popularity among North American children (LaFontana & Cillessen, 2002; Xie et al., 2006). It is reasonable to expect a similar pattern for Chinese children. However, due to the requirement of wearing school uniforms in many elementary schools in China, this aspect may be less emphasized among Chinese children.

Another important factor for preadolescents’ popularity is opposite-gender interactions, such as having a boyfriend/girlfriend and being liked by the opposite-sex peers (Xie et al., 2006). Romantic relationships have been linked to higher peer status among American early adolescents (Miller et al., 2009). In the Chinese culture, however, parents and teachers traditionally hold unfavorable views about early romantic involvement due to cultural taboos and concerns that it might interfere with a child’s academic focus (Wu, 1996). Consequently, Chinese children may not favor opposite-gender interaction for popularity.

In addition, gender differences have been found in previous popularity research. Prosocial behaviors and academic potential are more important for girls’ popularity than for boys’ (Lease et al., 2002), whereas antisocial behaviors are displayed more by boys and may be more prominent for boys’ peer status than girls’ (Chang et al., 2004; Chen et al., 2005; Lease et al., 2002; Schwartz, Gorman, Nakamoto, & McKay, 2006; Xie et al., 2006). Therefore we expected girls to perceive prosocial behaviors and academic competence as more important for popularity, whereas we expected boys to endorse more antisocial behaviors. Previous research also suggests that appearance is more important to determine popularity among girls than boys (LaFontana & Cillessen, 2002) and thus a higher endorsement on appearance is expected among girls. Due to limited research evidence, no specific hypotheses were made on gender differences in perceptions of social connection and opposite-gender interactions.

Regarding the associations between children’s perceptions of popularity determinant and their own characteristics, we expected that popular children would be more likely to associate positive characteristics with popularity, such as prosocial behaviors, academic competence, social connections, and appearance, and less likely to attribute antisocial behaviors for popularity (Closson, 2009a). Furthermore, children’s perceptions of popularity determinants are also likely to be consistent with their behavioral characteristics (Festinger, 1957). In this study, we were interested in two types of prominent child behaviors pertinent to popularity status: prosocial behaviors and physical aggression (Lease et al., 2002; Prinstein & Cillessen, 2003). Using the peer nomination method, we examined the reputational behavioral characteristics of physical aggressiveness and prosocial tendencies of the participants. We expected prosocial children to endorse more prosocial characteristics for popularity. Aggressive children, on the other hand, might hold more favorable views on antisocial behaviors in promoting popularity. Due to limited empirical evidence, we explored the cross-cultural similarity and difference in these associations.

Method

Participants

Participants of this study included 327 (163 girls; mean age = 11.79; SD = 0.74) Chinese and 312 (160 girls; mean age = 11.00, SD = 0.44) American fifth-graders. Chinese participants were recruited from three public schools in a southeastern city in China. American participants were recruited from six elementary schools in an urban school district in the mid-Atlantic region of the United States (US). The Chinese class sizes in the sample were much larger (approximately 50 students per class) than those in the United States (approximately 22 students per class). Children in both countries came from lower middle-class and working-class families. Chinese children were predominantly Han ethnic, representing the national ethnic characteristics. Among American children, 33% were White, 47% were African American, 18% were Hispanic, and 2% were Asian or of other ethnicity.

Procedure

Parents in both cultural groups were informed about this study with a letter taken home by their children. Children who returned parental permissions were invited to participate in the study. Participating children gave assent before completing a thin pack of questionnaires during a class session. Non-participating children were allowed to do their homework or reading in the classroom or play outside. They were assured that no penalty would apply to them if they did not participate. Participants were assured of confidentiality and were asked not to discuss their responses with other peers. Additionally, they were told that they could stop their participation at any time without any repercussion. For Chinese participants, the questionnaires were translated into Chinese using the translation and back translation technique by the first author and a research assistant, both of whom are fluent in Chinese and English.

Measures

Popularity determinant scale

This scale included 22 items measuring to what degree the individual characteristics and peer relationships make a boy/girl popular, as well as one open-ended question, “other,” for children to fill in any other factor not listed in the scale. This scale was developed based on the prominent popularity determinants reported in previous studies (LaFontana & Cillessen, 2002; Xie et al., 2006). To ensure an accurate translation of popularity into Chinese, we consulted multiple dictionaries (e.g., Foreign Languages Press & Sinolingua, 1996; Manser et al., 2003; Zhang, 1994) that are widely used in China, which suggested a common translation (i.e., 受欢迎, shou huan ying). We further consulted Chinese native-speaking students in the authors’ institutions in both the US and China, and reached a consensus on the translation. The same translation was also used in the assessment of popularity using the peer nomination procedure. Children rated the extent to which each item would make a same-sex peer popular on a five-point Likert-type scale (1 = very unpopular, 2 = unpopular, 3 = no effect, 4 = popular, and 5 = very popular). The rating was conducted among same-sex peer groups because children at this age may have more accurate understanding of popularity factors for same-sex peers (LaFontana & Cillessen, 2002). Due to limited responses, the “other” question was not included in the analysis.

To examine whether the items demonstrated the same dimensionality (i.e., the same items assess the same construct) for both groups to establish the basic comparability (Little, 1997), we first conducted preliminary exploratory factor analysis for each cultural group. We found five items that either showed different dimensionality (i.e., items measured different constructs for the two groups) or did not belong to any common dimensions shared by the two groups. We excluded these items from subsequent analysis. For the rest of the items (see Table 1), six dimensions of popularity factors were identified based on the content meaning of the items (LaFontana & Cillessen, 2002; Xie et al., 2006). These dimensions were antisocial behavior (e.g., “getting into fights”; American: α = .88, Chinese: α = .83), prosocial behavior (e.g., “being nice to people”; American: r = .54, p < .001, Chinese: r = .40, p < .001), academic competence (e.g., “getting good grades”; American: r = .60, p < .001, Chinese: r = .40, p < .001), social connection (e.g., “hanging out with popular students”; American: r = .33, p < .001, Chinese: r = .24, p < .001), appearance (e.g., “good looking”; American: r = .34, p < .001, Chinese: r = .18, p < .01), and opposite-gender interactions (e.g., “having a boyfriend/girlfriend”; American: r = .51, p < .001, Chinese: r = .43, p < .001). We conducted multi-group confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to examine the measurement of the six dimensions for the two cultural groups. Partial invariance was obtained for each of the constructs in the model (Δχ ² = 14.95, Δ df = 8, p = .06), which allowed meaningful comparisons between the two groups (Byrne, Shavelson, & Muthén, 1989). The model fit for the final CFA model with constraints on factor loadings across groups was adequate, χ ² = 473.53, df = 220, comparative fit index (CFI) = .92, Tucker Lewis index (TLI) = .91, root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) = .06, standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) = .07. Standardized factor loadings were all significant, indicating reliable measurement of the six dimensions (ps < .001; see Table 1).

Table 1.

CFA standardized factor loadings for popularity determinants

Popularity factor	American	Chinese
Antisocial behavior
Getting into fights	.69	.72
Breaking school rules	.76	.78
Drinking alcohol or smoking	.51	.54
Getting others to turn against another peer	.63	.61
Doing things he/she is not supposed to do	.83	.64
Spreading rumors	.70	.65
Calling people names	.80	.60
Prosocial behavior
Being nice to people	.77	.67
People trusting him/her	.71	.60
Academic competence
Getting good grades	.68	.58
Being smart	.86	.74
Social connection
Having a lot of friends	.38	.61
Hanging out with popular students	.64	.41
Appearance
Good looking	.54	.71
Wearing the right type of clothes	.56	.32
Opposite-gender interaction
Having a girlfriend/boyfriend	.72	.83
Being liked by an opposite-sex child	.70	.52

Note. All factor loadings were significant, ps < .001.

Peer nominations

Children’s popularity status and their behavioral characteristics on aggressiveness and prosociality were assessed using peer nominations. To assess popularity, children directly nominated classmates who were popular (Parkhurst & Hopmeyer, 1998; Rose et al., 2004). Additionally, they nominated peers who were prosocial (i.e., “helpful” and “cooperative”) and physically aggressive (i.e., “starts fight”). These items are similar or identical to those used in previous research (e.g., Coie et al., 1982; Farmer et al., 2003). Because children at this age interact primarily with peers in their classrooms, it is typical to ask students to nominate classmates (Rose et al., 2004). The items were aggregated and standardized within class. American children nominated three classmates for each item. Considering the large class sizes in China, Chinese children were allowed to nominate an unlimited number of peers for each item. This treatment gave Chinese children some more flexibility in choosing peers for each item.

Both procedures have been used in previous research and are reliable methods to obtain peer nominations (Cillessen & Mayeux, 2004; Lease et al., 2002). As pointed out by Cillessen and Marks (2011), both limited and unlimited nominations are appropriate for elementary school children; however, when the reference group is large, using unlimited nominations improves the ecological validity of the peer nomination method. This helps avoid extensively concentrated nominations on a few peers and helps alleviate the impact of classroom size differences in the findings. Because nominations were eventually standardized within class, the number of nominations in these two groups did not affect the scale of the measures (mean = 0, SD = 1), ensuring reasonable comparability of the measured variables between the two groups. The two standardized prosocial items were significantly correlated (Chinese: r = .80, p < .001; American: r = .65, p < .00) and were averaged to form a prosocial behavior score.

Results

Mean differences in popularity factors

To compare the mean differences in Chinese and American children’s perceptions of popularity determinants, a multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was conducted with culture and gender entered as independent variables and the six popularity determinants as dependent variables. The MANOVA results indicated a significant cultural group effect (Wilks’ Lambda = .54, F = 90.82, p < .001), a significant gender effect (Wilks’ Lambda = .94, F = 6.22, p < .001), and a significant culture × gender interaction effect (Wilks’ Lambda = .96, F = 4.90, p < .001). For antisocial behaviors, the follow up analysis of variance (ANOVA) showed that, although both held a negative view as indicated by the Likert-type scale response anchors of the popularity determinants (Ms < 3; see Table 2), American children’s perceptions (M = 2.59, SD = 1.07) were less negative than those of Chinese children (M = 1.67, SD = 0.75), F(1, 635) = 162.94, p < .001, partial η² = .20. There was also a significant culture × gender interaction effect on antisocial behaviors, F(1, 635) = 7.37, p < .01, partial η²= .01. Specifically, there was no gender difference among American children, whereas Chinese girls (M = 1.48, SD = 0.58) perceived antisocial behaviors as making a peer even less popular in comparison to Chinese boys (M = 1.85, SD = 0.85), F(1, 325) = 21.83, p < .001, partial η²= .06.

Table 2.

Mean and standard deviations for popularity determinants by cultural group and child gender

	American						Chinese
	Total		Boys		Girls		Total		Boys		Girls
	Mean	SD	Mean	SD	Mean	SD	Mean	SD	Mean	SD	Mean	SD
Antisocial behavior	2.59	1.07	2.58	1.03	2.59	1.11	1.67	.75	1.85	.85	1.48	.58
Prosocial behavior	3.66	1.07	3.65	1.05	3.66	1.08	4.06	.96	3.86	1.00	4.28	.87
Academic competence	3.42	1.06	3.50	1.06	3.34	1.06	4.17	.82	4.02	.85	4.33	.77
Social connection	4.08	.93	4.12	.86	4.06	.99	3.78	.85	3.64	.84	3.91	.84
Appearance	4.08	.88	4.04	.96	4.12	.80	3.57	.72	3.50	.79	3.59	.64
Opposite-gender interaction	3.99	1.06	4.06	.97	3.92	1.14	2.27	1.07	2.57	1.14	1.96	.91

Both cultural groups perceived prosocial behavior positively for popularity as indicated by the Likert-type scale response anchors of the popularity determinants (Ms > 3; see Table 2). However, Chinese children (M = 4.06, SD = 0.96) perceived this factor more positively than American children (M = 3.66, SD = 1.07), F(1, 634) = 26.74, p < .001, partial η²= .04. There was also a significant culture × gender interaction effect, F(1, 634) = 6.95, p < .01, partial η²= .01. Specifically, there was no gender difference among American children; however, Chinese girls (M = 4.28, SD = 0.87) perceived prosocial behaviors as contributing more to popularity in comparison to Chinese boys (M = 3.86, SD = 1.00), F(1, 32) = 16.67, p < .001, partial η²= .05.

Similar results were found for academic competence. Both groups perceived academic performance as positively contributing to popularity, as indicated by the Likert-type scale response anchors of the popularity determinants (Ms > 3; see Table 2), but Chinese children (M = 4.17, SD = 0.82) did so to a greater degree than American children (M = 3.42, SD = 1.06), F(1, 635) = 102.05, p < .001, partial η²= .14. There was also a significant culture × gender interaction effect, F(1, 635) = 10.27, p < .01, partial η²= .02. Specifically, no gender difference was found among American children; however, Chinese girls (M = 4.33, SD = 0.77) perceived academic competence more positively than Chinese boys (M = 4.02, SD = 0.85), F(1, 325) = 12.31, p < .01, partial η²= .04.

For social connection, both groups perceived it as positively contributing to popularity, as indicated by the Likert-type scale response anchors of the popularity determinants (Ms > 3; see Table 2), but American children (M = 4.08, SD = 0.93) endorsed it more than Chinese children (M = 3.78, SD = 0.85), F(1, 634) = 19.13, p < .001, partial η²= .08. There was also a significant culture × gender effect, F(1, 634) = 5.50, p < .05, partial η²= .01. Specifically, no gender difference was found among American children; however, Chinese girls (M = 3.91, SD = 0.84) perceived social connection as contributing more to popularity than did Chinese boys (M = 3.64, SD = 0.84), F(1, 324) = 8.40, p < .01, partial η²= .03. In addition, a cultural group difference was found on appearance. American children (M = 4.08, SD = 0.88) perceived it to contribute more to popularity than did Chinese children (M = 3.57, SD = 0.72), F(1, 635) = 65.40, p < .001, partial η²= .09. No other effects were found on appearance.

For opposite-gender interactions, American children (M = 3.99, SD = 1.06) perceived this as positively contributing to popularity, whereas Chinese children (M = 2.27, SD = 1.07) perceived it as a negative popularity factor, as indicated by the Likert-type scale response anchors of the popularity determinants (see Table 2). This difference was significant, F(1, 633) = 431.88, p < .001, partial η²= .41. There was also a significant culture × gender effect on opposite-gender interactions, F(1, 633) = 7.95, p < .01, partial η²= .01. Follow-up analysis showed no effect of gender difference among American children, whereas Chinese girls (M = 1.96, SD = 0.91) perceived opposite-gender interactions as a more negative determinant for popularity than boys (M = 2.57, SD = 1.14), F(1, 323) = 28.47, p < .001, partial η²= .08.

Popularity determinants, popularity status, and behavioral characteristics

To examine how children’s own popularity status and behavioral characteristics, as measured through peer nominations, were related to their perceptions of popularity determinants, and to investigate the related gender and cultural moderations, hierarchical multiple regressions were conducted (see Table 3). Due to non-significant R ² changes for the culture × gender × popularity/behavior three-way interactions on all dependent variables, the three-way interactions were not included in the final report. To avoid multicollinearity, all continuous variables were centered and interactions were created using the centered variables. For culture, the American group was coded with a 0 and the Chinese group with a 1. For child gender, boys were coded with a 0 and girls with a 1. The regression results show that children’s own popularity status positively related to their perceptions of prosocial behaviors (β = .09, p < .05), social connection (β = .09, p < .05), and appearance (β = .14, p < .001) as determinant factors for popularity. Furthermore, children’s own physical aggression was positively related to their endorsement of antisocial behaviors (β = .13, p < .001) and opposite-gender interactions (β = .07, p < .05) as well as appearance, but at a near significance level (β = .08, p < .10). Additionally, children’s prosocial behavior also negatively related to their endorsement of appearance at a near significance level (β = −.08, p < .10).

Table 3.

Hierarchical multiple regressions predicting popularity determinants using participants’ popularity and behaviors

		Antisocial behavior		Prosocial behavior		Academic competence		Social connection		Opposite-gender interaction		Appearance
		ΔR²	β	ΔR²	β	ΔR²	β	ΔR²	β	ΔR²	β	ΔR²	β
Step 1	Gender	.21***	−.09**	.05***	.11**	.14***	.04	.03***	.06	.41***	−.14***	.09***	.03
	Culture		−.45***		.20***		.37***		−.17***		−.63***		−.30***
Step 2	Gender	.00	−.09*	.01*	.10*	.00	.04	.01*	.05	.00	−.14***	.01**	.02
	Culture		−.45***		.20***		.37***		−.16***		−.63***		−.30***
	Popularity		−.05		.09*		.04		.09*		.02		.11**
Step 3	Gender	.02**	−.06 ^†	.00	.09*	.00	.04	.01	.07 ^†	.01*	−.12***	.01*	.05
	Culture		−.44***		.21***		.37***		−.17***		−.63***		−.30***
	Popularity		−.06		.07		.06		.11*		.03		.14***
	Physical aggression		.13***		.01		.00		.04		.07*		.08 ^†
	Prosocial behavior		.01		.04		−.04		−.06		−.03		−.08 ^†
Step 4	Gender	.02*	−.03	.01	.08 ^†	.02*	.02	.01	.06	.01	−.11***	.00	.06
	Culture		−.44***		.21***		.37***		−.18***		−.63***		−.29***
	Popularity		−.09		.09		−.05		.06		.01		.20**
	Physical aggression		.05		.04		.06		.12 ^†		.04		.03
	Prosocial behavior		−.17*		.13		.14		−.03		−.10		−.18 ^†
	Pop. × Gender		.05		−.03		.06		.09		.07		−.06
	Phy. agg. × Gender		.09 ^†		.01		.02		−.08		.04		.03
	Pro. beh. × Gender		.24**		−.11		−.22**		−.03		.10		.13
	Pop. × Culture		.01		−.03		.07		−.03		−.04		−.01
	Phy. agg. × Culture		.05		−.05		−.10 ^†		−.06		.02		.04
	Pro. beh. × Culture		−.05		.04		.02		−.03		−.03		−.03
Total R ²		.24***		.07***		.16***		.05***		.43***		.12***

Note. Pop. = Popularity; Phy. agg. = Physical aggression; Pro. beh. = Prosocial behavior.

^† p < .10; * p < .05; ** p < .01; *** p < .001.

In addition, there was a significant prosocial behavior × gender interaction effect on antisocial perceptions (β = .24, p < .01; ΔR ² = .02, p < .05). Follow-up analysis showed that prosocial boys were less likely to attribute antisocial behaviors for popularity (β = −.16, p < .01), whereas girls’ prosocial behavior was not related to their perceptions of antisocial behaviors for popularity. There was also a marginally significant physical aggression × gender interaction effect on antisocial perception (β = .09, p < .10). Exploring this effect revealed that physically aggressive girls were more likely to attribute antisocial behaviors for popularity (β = .13, p < .01). A similar pattern was found for boys, but at a near significant level (β = .10, p < .06).

For academic competence, there was a significant prosocial behavior × gender interaction effect (β = −.22, p < .01; ΔR ² = .02, p < .05). Follow-up analysis showed that prosocial boys tended to endorse academic competence for popularity, but at a near significance level (β = .09, p < .10), whereas prosocial girls did not show a significant trend. Exploring the marginally significant physical aggression × culture interaction effect (β = −.10, p < .10) did not reveal any meaningful associations between physical aggression and academic competence for either group.

Discussion

This research examined cultural variations in American and Chinese preadolescent children’s perceptions of determinants for popularity and how children’s perceptions related to their own popularity status and behaviors as measured through peer nominations. Findings of this study underscore the cultural construction of children’s social cognitions about popularity. These findings call for more attention to examine children’s social cognitions of popularity and how they vary by social-cultural context.

Cultural and gender differences in popularity determinants

Findings of this study suggest both cross-cultural similarities and differences in children’s perceptions of popularity determinants. Children in both cultures attributed prosocial behaviors, academic competence, social connection, and appearance positively for popularity, while they attributed antisocial behaviors negatively for popularity. However, they differed in the degree of endorsement. Chinese children perceived prosocial behaviors and academic competence more positively than American children did. This finding is congruent with the strong cultural emphasis on prosocial development and academic performance among Chinese children (Chen, 2010; Ho, 2008; Orlick et al., 1990; Stevenson, 1991). Nevertheless, American children’s perceptions were also mildly positive, suggesting that children in both cultures perceive that popularity status relates to positive characteristics, which is in accordance with findings among Western child and adolescent samples (Closson, 2009a; de Bruyn & Cillessen, 2006; LaFontana & Cillessen, 2002; Xie et al., 2006).

Consistent with previous research on American children’s and adolescents’ perceptions of popularity (LaFontana & Cillessen, 2002; Xie et al., 2006), children from both cultures viewed antisocial behaviors negatively for popularity. However, Chinese children deemed such behaviors even more unfavorably, which is likely influenced by Chinese cultural norms. Guided by collectivistic and social harmony values, the socialization of Chinese children places a strong emphasis on the inhibition of aggression and antisocial behaviors (Bond & Wang, 1983; Chen et al., 2005; Domino, 2000). In comparison, American children’s perceptions were closer to neutral, reflecting the transition period in which antisocial behaviors start gaining attraction in middle childhood among North American children (Bukowski, Sippola, & Newcomb, 2000; Cillessen & Mayeux, 2004; Prinstein & Cillessen, 2003; Rose et al., 2004; Xie et al., 2006). From children’s perspective, aggressive and antisocial behaviors may become the necessary tools to gain and maintain a high status in the social hierarchy (Hawley, 2003; LaFontana & Cillessen, 2002).

Both cultural groups perceived being sociable and having an attractive appearance positively for popularity. However, Chinese children did not endorse the social connection as highly as American children did. This is consistent with the findings that Chinese children are less sociable than their American counterparts (Hart et al., 2000) and their social interactions are primarily guided by prosocial purposes (Chen, 2010). In contrast, American children are likely to put more emphasis on building connections with peers, especially with popular peers, in their social initiatives to promote social status. In addition, Chinese children also perceived appearance as contributing less to popularity than did American children. The mandatory wearing of school uniforms in most Chinese elementary schools decreases individuality on clothing, making children pay less attention to appearance. Furthermore, having a strong moral education program emphasizing internal virtues in the Chinese primary school education system (Ministry of Education of China, 1998) also partly inhibits children from placing too much attention on appearance.

An interesting cross-cultural phenomenon emerged regarding the role of opposite-gender interactions in promoting popularity. Consistent with previous research among African American youth (Xie et al., 2006), the American children with diverse ethnic backgrounds in this study also highly and positively endorsed opposite-gender interactions (e.g., boyfriends/girlfriends, liked by opposite-sex peers) for popularity. In contrast, Chinese children perceived it as a negative factor for popularity. From middle childhood to adolescence, it becomes more common and acceptable for Western children to have opposite-gender interactions and to start romantic relationships (Carver, Joyner, & Udry, 2003). In China, early romantic involvement or ‘‘precocious love’’ is often viewed as an inappropriate student behavior, especially in elementary schools, and is subject to discipline by teachers and parents (Chen et al., 2009). Consequently, romantic involvement is very uncommon among Chinese children. Due to such societal discouragement of early romantic involvement, Chinese children are likely to perceive opposite-gender interactions negatively and thus a factor negatively contributing to popularity.

We observed gender differences in several popularity determinants, but only for Chinese children. Chinese girls attributed prosocial behaviors more positively than Chinese boys. This finding suggests that, although Chinese boys and girls are both highly prosocial (Chen, 2010), it may be particularly important for girls to act prosocially to attain or maintain a higher popularity status. Similar findings were found on academic competence and social connection. As shown by a study involving three cohorts of Chinese children across 20 years, Chinese girls were consistently more sociable and more academically successful than boys (Chen et al., 2005). These gender differences suggest that these two characteristics are important for Chinese girls’ socialization and peer status attainment.

In contrast, Chinese boys endorsed antisocial behaviors for popularity more than did Chinese girls, though both genders perceived it as a negative factor for popularity. The relatively higher norm of aggression and antisocial behaviors among Chinese boys than girls in elementary schools (Chen et al., 2005; Schwartz et al., 2006) and in middle schools (Chang et al., 2004) might make boys censure antisocial behaviors less in regard to gaining popularity status. Additionally, we observed that Chinese girls had an even less favorable view of opposite-gender interactions than did boys. Chen et al.’s (2009) study shows that romantically involved Chinese girls are more likely to experience depression and externalizing behaviors than boys, suggesting that the cultural restriction may be even more strictly enforced among girls. Consequently it is not surprising to observe that Chinese girls held particularly less favorable views on opposite-gender interactions. In contrast to our expectations, American boys and girls did not differ in their perceptions of popularity determinants. Although they may differ in the behavioral correlates of popularity (e.g., Lease et al., 2002), the current findings suggest that American boys and girls hold similar perceptions of what contributed to popularity.

Popularity status, behavioral characteristics, and popularity determinants

We found that children’s perceptions of what contributed to popularity were related to their own popularity status and behavioral characteristics, specifically peer-nominated aggressiveness and prosociality, although the effect sizes were generally small. These associations demonstrate cross-cultural similarities. Reflecting the in-group favoritism (Hogg & Abrams, 1988), children of higher popularity may hold more favorable views about what contributes to popularity (Closson, 2009a). Consistent with this view, the current research shows that the more popular children were, the more likely they attributed prosocial behaviors, social connection, and appearance for popularity.

The associations between children’s behavioral characteristics and their perceptions for popularity determinants reveal cognition–behavior congruence. Specifically, physically aggressive children were more likely to attribute antisocial behaviors for popularity. This effect was even more pronounced among girls, suggesting that girls whose behaviors are against the female norm may be strongly supported by their social cognitions. Among boys, prosocial behavior was negatively related to their endorsement of antisocial behaviors, but positively related to academic competence for popularity. These effects were not found among girls. As boys have a generally lower norm of prosocial behavior than girls, it is particularly important for prosocial boys to have a social cognition consistent with their behavioral profile. Interestingly, children’s physical aggression was also positively related to their perceptions of opposite-gender interactions for popularity. This finding may indicate that early romantic involvement reflects some deviant behaviors away from the peer norm, which may be appealing to physically aggressive children as an approach to gain popularity status. Taken together, children are likely to hold attributions for popularity consistent with their behaviors. Such congruence may help reduce possible distress due to the cognitive dissonance (Festinger, 1957) between their attributions of popularity and their behaviors and may also possibly facilitate their future engagement in pursuing popularity using the endorsed behaviors.

Limitations and future directions

Several limitations of this study should be noted. First, although the popularity determinant scale captures the major dimensions of factors contributing to popularity and few children provided additional information in the open-ended question in the scale, it is possible that there are other culturally specific characteristics important for Chinese children’s popularity. Future research may employ different methodologies, such as semi-structured interviews, to fully investigate the possible popularity determinants among Chinese children. Moreover, we only assessed children’s perceptions for same-sex peers. Children are usually more knowledgeable of their same-sex peers’ interactions; however, they may gradually gain more knowledge about opposite-sex peers as they enter into preadolescence. Future studies may investigate whether there are consistencies or discrepancies in children’s perceptions of popularity determinants for both genders.

Furthermore, what contributes to popularity is also likely to change with age (Xie et al., 2006). This may be particularly true when children move from middle childhood to adolescence, when popularity is strongly desired and the behaviors related to popularity start to change (Cillessen & Mayeux, 2004). Longitudinal studies or cross-sectional studies involving multiple age groups would be welcomed to investigate the changes in popularity determinants across age and whether cultural contexts relate to those changes.

In addition, this study was primarily concerned with perceptions of popularity determinants and their relations to children’s own popularity. Since children’s social preference and popularity are not highly differentiated in middle childhood, future research may further delineate the relations between children’s own popularity and their perceptions of popularity determinants with a control of their social preference.

Another limitation of this study is that the two cultural groups differed on several factors. In comparison to the American children, Chinese children had larger class sizes and had more homogeneous peer groups. Additionally, following the literature recommendation (Cillessen & Marks, 2011), Chinese children used unlimited peer nominations in response to the large class sizes, whereas American children used limited nominations. Although these differences are part of the cultural contexts reflecting the nature of the two countries, they may serve as possible explanations for the cross-cultural differences. In the current study, the influence of these factors on the results cannot be clearly determined. Future research may examine the effects of these distinct cultural elements on children’s perceptions of popularity determinants. For example, future research may account for the peer group ethnic composition in construing children’s perceptions of popularity determinant in different cultural contexts. This may be a valuable consideration given that children’s popularity depends on both individual characteristics and peer group ethnic compositions (Bellmore, Nishina, & Graham, 2011).

Finally, we only examined preadolescents’ physical aggression and prosocial behavior tendencies that were related to their perceptions of popularity determinants. Previous research has suggested that other behaviors, such as relational/social aggression, are positively linked to popularity status (Cillessen & Mayeux, 2004; Farmer et al., 2003; Lease et al., 2002). Therefore future research may expand the behavior list to fully understand how children’s behavioral characteristics correspond to their perceptions of what contributes to popularity status.

In summary, this study reveals informative cross-cultural similarities and variations in Chinese and American children’s perceptions of individual characteristics and peer relationships contributing to popularity. The cross-cultural differences resonate with cultural norms and values of the two countries. Additionally, children’s attributions of popularity are not isolated social cognitions, but are linked to their popularity status and behavioral characteristics. Findings of this study contribute to our understanding of the cultural-contextual constructions of children’s popularity status in the peer context.

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

We thank the children who participated in our study and the schools that assisted our study in various ways.

Funding

This research was supported by a Competitive Research Grant from DePaul University to the first author and by grants from the National Science Foundation (NSF 0339070) and William T. Grant Foundation (Grant ID 6934) to the second author. The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the granting agencies.

References

Asher

S. R.

Coie

J. D.

(1990). Peer rejection in childhood. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Bellmore

Nishina

Graham

(2011). Peer popularity in the context of ethnicity. In Cillessen

A. H. N.

Schwartz

Mayeux

(Eds.), Popularity in the peer system (pp. 193–215). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Bond

M. H.

Wang

( 1983). China: Aggressive behavior and the problem of maintaining order and harmony. In Goldstein

A. P.

Segall

M. H.

(Eds.), Aggression in global perspective (pp. 58–74). New York, NY: Pergamon Press.

Bukowski

W. M.

Sippola

L. K.

Newcomb

A. F.

(2000). Variations in patterns of attraction of same- and other-sex peers during early adolescence. Developmental Psychology, 36, 147–154.

Byrne

B. M.

Shavelson

R. J.

Muthén

(1989). Testing for the equivalence of factor covariance and mean structures: The issue of partial measurement invariance. Psychological Bulletin, 105, 456–466.

Carver

Joyner

Udry

J. R.

(2003). National estimates of adolescent romantic relationships. In Florsheim

(Ed.), Adolescent romantic relations and sexual behavior: Theory, research, and practical implications (pp. 23–56). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Chang

Lei

K. K.

Liu

Guo

Wang

Fung

K. Y.

(2005). Peer acceptance and self-perceptions of verbal and behavioural aggression and social withdrawal. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 29, 48–57.

Chang

Liu

Wen

Fung

K. Y.

Wang

(2004). Mediating teacher liking and moderating authoritative teachering on Chinese adolescents’ perceptions of antisocial and prosocial behaviors. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 369–380.

Chen

Lan

(2006). Adolescents’ perceptions of their parents’ academic expectations: Comparison of American, Chinese-American, and Chinese high school students. Family Therapy, 33, 113–118.

10.

Chen

(2010). Socio-emotional development in Chinese children. In Bond

M. H.

(Ed.), The Oxford handbook of Chinese psychology (pp. 37–52). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

11.

Chen

Cen

(2005). Social functioning and adjustment in Chinese children: The imprint of historical time. Child Development, 76, 182–195.

12.

Chen

French

D. C.

(2008). Children’s social competence in cultural context. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 591–616.

13.

Chen

Huang

Chang

Wang

(2010). Aggression, social competence, and academic achievement in Chinese children: A 5-year longitudinal study. Development and Psychopathology, 19, 659–680.

14.

Chen

Guo

Yang

Duan

Zhang

(2009). Emotional and behavioral effects of romantic relationships in Chinese adolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 38, 1282–1293.

15.

Cillessen

A. H. N.

Bukowski

W. M.

(2000). Introduction: Conceptualizing and measuring peer acceptance and rejection. In Cillessen

A. H. N.

Bukowski

W. M.

(Eds.), New directions for child and adolescent development: Vol. 88. Recent advances in the measurement of acceptance and rejection in the peer system (pp. 3–10). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

16.

Cillessen

A. H. N.

Marks

P. E. L.

(2011). Conceptualizing and measuring popularity. In Cillessen

A. H. N.

Schwartz

Mayeux

(Eds.), Popularity in the peer system (pp. 25–56). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

17.

Cillessen

A. H. N.

Mayeux

(2004). From censure to reinforcement: Developmental changes in the association between aggression and social status. Child Development, 75, 147–163.

18.

Closson

L. M.

(2009a). Status and gender differences in early adolescents’ descriptions of popularity. Social Development, 18, 412–426.

19.

Closson

L. M.

(2009b). Aggressive and prosocial behaviors within early adolescent friendship cliques: What’s status got to do with it? Merrill-Palmer Quarterly: Journal of Developmental Psychology, 55, 406–435.

20.

Coie

J. D.

Dodge

K. A.

Coppotelli

(1982). Dimensions and types of social status: A cross-age perspective. Developmental Psychology, 18, 557–569.

21.

de Bruyn

E. H.

Cillessen

A. H. N.

(2006). Popularity in early adolescence: Prosocial and antisocial subtypes. Journal of Adolescent Research, 21, 607–627.

22.

Domino

(2000). Social values: A comparison of Chinese and American children. In Comunian

A. L.

Gielen

U. P.

(Eds.), International perspectives on human development (pp. 355–378). Lengerich, Germany: Pabst Science Publishers.

23.

Farmer

T. W.

Estell

D. B.

Bishop

J. L.

O’Neal

K. K.

Cairns

B. D.

(2003). Rejected bullies or popular leaders? The social relations of aggressive subtypes of rural African American early adolescents. Developmental Psychology, 39, 992–1004.

24.

Festinger

(1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.

25.

Foreign Languages Press & Sinolingua. (1996). A practical English–Chinese dictionary/shiyong yinghan cidian. Beijing, China: Beijing Foreign Languages Press & Sinolingua.

26.

Hart

C. H.

Yang

Nelson

L. J.

Robinson

C. C.

Olsen

J. A.

Nelson

D. A.

. (2000). Peer acceptance in early childhood and subtypes of socially withdrawn behavior in China, Russia, and the United States. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 24, 73–81.

27.

Hawley

P. H.

(2003). Prosocial and coercive configurations of resource control in early adolescence: A case for the well-adapted Machiavellian. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 49, 279–309.

28.

D. Y. F.

(2008). Filial piety and its psychological consequences. In Bond

M. H.

(Ed.), The handbook of Chinese psychology (2nd ed., pp. 155–165). London, UK: Oxford University Press.

29.

Hogg

M. A.

Abrams

(1988). Social identifications: A social psychology of intergroup relations. New York, NY: Routledge, Chapman & Hall.

30.

LaFontana

K. M.

Cillessen

A. H. N.

(2002). Children’s perceptions of popular and unpopular peers: A multimethod assessment. Developmental Psychology, 38, 635–647.

31.

Lease

A. M.

Kennedy

C. A.

Axelrod

J. L.

(2002). Children’s social constructions of popularity. Social Development, 11, 87–109.

32.

Wang

Shi

(2010). Individualism, collectivism, and Chinese adolescents’ aggression: Intracultural variations. Aggressive Behavior, 36, 187–194.

33.

Little

T. D.

(1997). Mean and covariance structures (MACS) analysis of cross-cultural data: Practical and theoretical issues. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 32, 53–76.

34.

Manser

M. H.

Zhu

Wang

Ren

Mei

Shi

. (Eds.). (2003). Oxford Chinese dictionary: English–Chinese, Chinese–English/Ying–Han, Han–Ying. Oxford, UK and New York, NY: Oxford University Press; Commercial Press.

35.

McElhaney

K. B.

Antonishak

Allen

J. P

. (2008). “They like me, they like me not”: Popularity and adolescents’ perceptions of acceptance predicting social functioning over time. Child Development, 79, 720–731.

36.

Miller

Lansford

J. E.

Costanzo

Malone

P. S.

Golonka

Killeya-Jones

L. A.

(2009). Early adolescent romantic partner status, peer standing, and problem behaviors. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 29, 839–861.

37.

Ministry of Education of China. (1998). Moral education guidelines in middle schools and elementary schools. Retrieved from http:www.moe.edu.cn/publicfiles/business/htmlfiles/moe/moe_621/201001/81872.html

38.

Orlick

Zhou

Q.-Y.

Partington

(1990). Co-operation and conflict within Chinese and Canadian kindergarten settings. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 22, 20–25.

39.

Oyserman

Coon

H. M.

Kemmelmeier

(2002). Rethinking individualism and collectivism: Evaluation of theoretical assumptions and meta-analyses. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 3–72.

40.

Parkhurst

J. T.

Hopmeyer

(1998). Sociometric popularity and peer-perceived popularity: Two distinct dimensions of peer status. Journal of Early Adolescence, 18, 125–144.

41.

Prinstein

M. J.

Aikins

J. W.

(2004). Cognitive moderators of the longitudinal association between peer rejection and adolescent depressive symptoms. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 32, 147–158.

42.

Prinstein

M. J.

Cillessen

A. H. N.

(2003). Forms and functions of adolescent peer aggression associated with high levels of peer status. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 49, 310–342.

43.

Rodkin

P. C.

Farmer

T. W.

Pearl

Van Acker

(2000). Heterogeneity of popular boys: Antisocial and prosocial configurations. Developmental Psychology, 36, 14–24.

44.

Rose

A. J.

Swenson

L. P.

Waller

E. M.

(2004). Overt and relational aggression and perceived popularity: Developmental differences in concurrent and prospective relations. Developmental Psychology, 40, 378–387.

45.

Rubin

K. H.

Bukowski

Parker

J. G.

(2006). Peer interactions, relationships, and groups. In Eisenberg

(Ed.), Handbook of child psychology. Vol. 3: Social, emotional, and personality development (pp. 571–645). New York, NY: Wiley.

46.

Schwartz

Gorman

A. H.

Nakamoto

McKay

(2006). Popularity, social acceptance, and aggression in adolescent peer groups: Links with academic performance and school attendance. Developmental Psychology, 42, 1116–1127.

47.

Schwartz

Tom

S. R.

Chang

Duong

M. T.

Kelly

B. M.

(2010). Popularity and acceptance as distinct dimensions of social standing for Chinese children in Hong Kong. Social Development, 19, 681–697.

48.

Stevenson

H. W.

(1991). The development of prosocial behavior in large-scale collective societies: China and Japan. In Hinde

R. A.

Groebel

(Eds.), Cooperation and prosocial behaviour (pp. 89–105). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

49.

Triandis

H. C.

(1989). The self and social behavior in differing cultural contexts. Psychological Review, 96, 506–520.

50.

D. Y. H.

(1996). Chinese childhood socialization. In Bond

M. H.

(Ed.), The handbook of Chinese psychology (pp. 143–154). Hong Kong, China: Oxford University Press.

51.

Xie

Boucher

S. M.

Hutchins

B. C.

Cairns

B. D.

(2006). What makes a girl (or a boy) popular (or unpopular)? African American children’s perceptions and developmental differences. Developmental Psychology, 42, 599–612.

52.

Zhang

. (Ed.). (1994). A dictionary of current English usage/Xian dai ying yu yong fa ci dian. Beijing, China: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press