Grit and peer relationships in early adolescence: A person-centered approach

Abstract

Although a burgeoning body of research has illustrated the association of grit with academic and psychosocial functioning in adolescence, little is known about how adolescents with differing grit profiles may diverge in regard to peer relationships (i.e., perceived popularity and friendships). Guided by the dynamic interactionism framework, the current study, using a person-centered approach, explores grit profiles of Chinese early adolescents and examines whether these profiles exhibit mean differences in perceived popularity and friendships. A total of 1,150 early adolescents aged from 10 years to 13 years (53.4% male) were involved in this study; participants were asked to complete self-report questionnaires concerning grit and self-perception of friendships and complete peer nominations within each classroom in terms of perceived popularity. A latent profile analysis revealed five grit profiles based on two facets of grit (i.e., perseverance and consistency). Moreover, multivariate analysis of covariance—controlling for age, gender, and socioeconomic status—showed that early adolescents who scored higher on both perseverance and consistency were nominated as more popular individuals than those with low-to-moderate perseverance and low consistency. In contrast, perseverance was more essential than consistency in determining greater self-perception of friendships. To summarize, the current study suggests that both perseverance and consistency are pivotal in terms of perceived popularity, whereas perseverance is critical in regard to the self-perception of friendships.

Keywords

Early adolescence friendships grit perceived popularity person-centered approach

It is well-documented that adolescents’ success in achieving positive and harmonious peer relationships can facilitate optimal academic and psychosocial functioning (e.g., Guo et al., 2018; Kawabata & Tseng, 2019; Morrow et al., 2016). This perspective is particularly emphasized in the context of Chinese culture. Chinese society, with its embedded Confucianism, highlights social harmony and interpersonal interactions (Bond, 2010), and a vital strategy to foster interpersonal harmony is to establish guanxi (relationships). Specifically, guanxi refers to the formalization of relationships that individuals create outside the family system, transforming strangers into kin by a reciprocal exchange of favors (Bond, 2010). The establishment of guanxi becomes increasingly critical as individuals begin to function in a vast array of new environments in early adolescence (Bukowski et al., 1993). Surprisingly, given the salience of peer relationships during this challenging period of life, the existing literature discusses relatively little about the association of individuals’ traits with peer relationships in the context of Chinese culture. Understanding of this association is potentially valuable in terms of designing school-related activities to foster positive peer relationships, which may buffer the detrimental effect of the vulnerability of early adolescence on their psychosocial and academic functioning.

To fill this gap, the present study is guided by the theoretical framework of dynamic interactionism (Magnusson, 1990). According to this framework, individuals develop through dynamic, continuous, and reciprocal transactions with their environments. Reciprocal causal effects are expected over the course of development not only between personality and the environment but also between personality and the quality of critical social relationships (Asendorpf & Wilpers, 1998). This is because individuals’ relationship quality is partly influenced by social–environmental factors, such as the personalities of the relationship partners. Following this approach, the study of personality-relationship transactions has been highlighted in separate lines of developmental research (e.g., Asendorpf & van Aken, 2003; Deventer et al., 2019). Apart from this theoretical perspective, we also take cultural orientation into account. For example, Chinese culture highlights the roles of perseverance and diligence in achieving long-term goals when encountering obstacles and challenges (Lan, Marci et al., 2019). Indeed, perseverance is usually regarded as a key to success and an essential characteristic for Chinese youth (Li et al., 2018). Given these considerations, we propose that grit—the power of passion and perseverance—may fall within our research purpose.

To concisely summary, the current study, using a person-centered approach, aims to explore the association between grit and peer relationships in Chinese early adolescents. In the following sections, we conduct a literature review to figure out the possible association of grit with peer relationships in early adolescence.

Peer relationships in early adolescence

Early adolescence is one of the most challenging developmental periods of life. During this period, the nature of interpersonal relationships changes as youths begin to function in a vast array of new environments, such as transitions in school structure, striving for autonomy from the family, and formulating a sense of self (Lan, Scrimin, et al., 2019a, 2019b). Although familial relationships remain prominent throughout adolescence, an increasing proportion of time outside of the family (i.e., school) motivates youth to interact with their peers, which is assumed to be the most salient extrafamilial type of relationship of the expanding network. Most adolescents report extensive daily contact with their friends, and support from friends sometimes exceeds that provided by parents (Collins & Laursen, 2004). Due to the vulnerability of this period, the establishment of healthy relations with peers becomes particularly critical, as early adolescents experience strong desires for personal validation through interpersonal intimacy (Erath et al., 2007).

In the last decade, several research efforts have been made to understand further the nature of peer relationships in early adolescence (Savickaitė et al., 2019; Stotsky & Bowker, 2018), but there is a lack of research differentiating the theoretical specificity of peer relationships. It is conceivable that a popular adolescent may not have a mutual friend and that an unpopular adolescent may have a friendship relation (Košir & Pečjak, 2005). Given this, in the current study, we focus on two of the most critical aspects of peer relationships, namely perceived popularity and friendships (Bukowski et al., 1993).

Perceived popularity, as a unilateral construct, refers to visibility, prestige, or dominance and is measured by asking adolescents who they see as popular in their peer groups (Cillessen & Rose, 2005). By contrast, friendship is defined in the context of duality and refers to a voluntary relationship which is regulated and enjoyed by two individuals (Beazidou & Botsoglou, 2016; Bukowski et al., 1993). In this perspective, a friendship represents strong emotional ties between two adolescents who are usually of the same age and view themselves as equals. Apart from these conceptual distinctions between perceived popularity and friendships, they also present different measurement requirements. Suggested by prior research (Beazidou & Botsoglou, 2016; Bukowski et al., 1993), sociometric nominations (i.e., asking adolescents to name the most popular peers in the classroom) and rating scales (i.e., asking adolescents to rate the relationships with their peers in the classroom on a Likert-type scale) are the most common methods of assessing perceived popularity and mutual friendships, respectively.

Moreover, we use different perspectives (i.e., sociometric nomination and self-report) in one single investigation to gather the information concerning peer relationships, which may potentially reduce the effect of common method bias on the research findings. Common method bias often occurs in behavioral research when participants are asked to report on their perceived experiences for multiple constructs in the same survey, which may lead to results confounded by report biases (e.g., response style and/or social desirability; Podsakoff et al., 2003). Given the theoretical distinction and methodological concern on this topic in the existing literature, the current study aims at understanding the association of grit with peer relationships by differentiating perceived popularity and friendships and assessing them in the sociometric nomination and rating scale, respectively.

Grit

Grit, as a higher order personality trait, refers to perseverance and a passion for long-term goals (Duckworth et al., 2007; Duckworth & Quinn, 2009). In the last decade, the topic of grit has sparked the interest and enthusiasm of researchers and practitioners due to its potential benefit for facilitating positive youth development across several domains (Credé et al., 2017). For instance, regarding the academic domain, grit is positively associated with academic achievement (Muenks et al., 2017, 2018; Tang et al., 2019), learning engagement, and school satisfaction (Lan & Moscardino, 2019). In terms of psychological functioning, grit is positively linked to high levels of psychological well-being (Disabato et al., 2019; Lan, Ma et al., 2019) and less problem behavior (Lan & Radin, 2020). Concerning social perspective, research has shown that grit is positively associated with domain-general retention and commitment to diverse life goals over time, such as roles in the military, the workplace, the school, and the marriage (Duckworth et al., 2007; Duckworth & Quinn 2009; Eskreis-Winkler et al., 2014); a sense of relatedness (Datu, 2017; Lan & Moscardino, 2019); meaning in life (e.g., Datu, King, et al., 2018; Kleiman et al., 2013); and prosocial behavior (Lan, Marci, et al., 2019).

Furthermore, grit is typically operationalized as a higher order construct with two lower order facets—perseverance of effort (hereafter, “perseverance”) and consistency of interests (hereafter, “consistency”). The former refers to the extent to which individuals can endure challenges while sustaining personal effort, whereas the latter refers to the degree to which individuals continually focus on achieving their long-term aspirations (Cormier et al., 2019; Duckworth & Quinn, 2009). A burgeoning body of research has documented the differential effects of perseverance and consistency on psychosocial and academic outcomes. For example, research has shown that the buffering role of perseverance on externalizing problem behavior is more salient than consistency, especially for adolescents who confront vulnerabilities (Lan & Radin, 2020). The authors explain these findings in terms of cultural values; that is, perseverance and diligence are culturally emphasized, whereas consistency is not. Moreover, prior investigation has exhibited that perseverance is moderately associated with subjective well-being and personality strengths, whereas consistency is weakly and negatively related to these outcomes (Disabato et al., 2019). The authors propose that the passion when possessing the long-term goal is more critical than keeping the consistent long-term goal to well-being because individuals with higher psychological flexibility (e.g., switching interests or passions) are more likely to report high levels of well-being. Additionally, research has also revealed perseverance is more strongly linked to self-efficacy, task values, and goal orientations than consistency (Muenks et al., 2018). The authors claim that perseverance is a more robust indicator of students’ academic performance than consistency because switching interests is relatively common in students and may not indicate a lack of motivation to achieve.

Although these findings are potentially valuable to elucidate the differential roles of the two dimensions of grit on psychosocial and academic functioning, research building on a traditional variable-centered approach makes it challenging to examine the distinct combinations of grit dimensions with outcomes. Given this weakness, we propose that adopting a person-centered approach is essential to investigate how specific grit profiles are related to peer relationships. Moreover, this approach may have various implications for designing grit interventions or psychological programs for early adolescents’ social relationships development. The existing literature has generated valuable insights regarding the importance of using a person-centered approach in assessing the role of grit constructs in different learning-related emotions. For example, Datu and Fong (2018) found that there are three profiles of grit (high perseverance and high consistency, high perseverance and low consistency, and low perseverance and high consistency) in a sample of Chinese primary school students. Students characterized by high perseverance and low consistency report the highest scores on hope and the lowest scores on anxiety and shame. Despite such findings, relatively little is known about the association between grit profiles with peer relationships in early adolescence.

The present study

To summarize, the current study, using a person-centered approach, aims to explore grit profiles in Chinese early adolescents and to investigate how individuals with differing grit profiles may diverge in terms of perceived popularity and friendships. First, based on the literature review above, we expect three grit profiles: high perseverance and high consistency, high perseverance and low consistency, and low perseverance and high consistency. Second, based on the empirical findings aforementioned, we assume that grit may allow adolescents to create and sustain life goals and bridge the gap between their present and ideal selves. As such, it is conceivable that grit may promote commitment to important life goals, such as social relationships. Therefore, we expect that adolescents of the high perseverance profile (but not consistency) are more likely to be nominated as popular individuals and/or more likely to report higher levels of self-perception of friendships.

Moreover, prior research has shown that older adolescents tend to be more popular within peer groups because they may acquire more social skills, and they are involved more in peer interactions (Boisvert & Poulin, 2016); males report higher levels of perceived popularity than females (Putarek & Keresteš, 2016); adolescents with high family socioeconomic status (SES) has demonstrated to be more socioemotionally competent (Bradley & Corwyn, 2002). Having considered these findings, we regard adolescents’ age, gender, and SES as potential covariates.

Method

Participants and procedures

Before data collection, ethical approval was obtained from the affiliated university and schools, and consent forms were received from both parents and adolescents. In total, 1,150 early adolescents (53.4% male) from five public primary schools (nested in 39 classrooms¹) agreed to participate in the current study (the response rate was 92%; approximately 100 students/parents refused to participate in this study). Among these respondents, the mean age was 10.93 years (range = 10–13 years; SD = 0.93). During data collection, respondents were attending fourth and fifth grades in mainland China. We excluded adolescents from the sixth grade, since they were highly engaged in preparing for the entrance examination. In this study, we focused on “typical” early adolescents’ social development, and thus, we did not set stringent eligibility criteria. The general criteria were as follows: (a) the early adolescent was between 10 years old and 13 years old and (b) the early adolescent was a full-time student who attends the public primary school of Grades 4 and 5. In sum, four cases were eliminated from the final sample due to the age range of early adolescence (Lan, Scrimin, et al., 2019).

During school hours, trained research assistants administrated the present survey in the classrooms. They provided a standardized set of instructions to ensure that information regarding participants’ rights was communicated uniformly across classrooms. These rights included the option to withdraw and debrief in addition to the confidentiality of their participation.² Overall, this survey took approximately half an hour to complete.

Measures

Demographic information, including gender, age, parental educational level, parental occupation, and family monthly income, was collected from the participants. Socioeconomic indicators were assessed via three indicators (i.e., parental educational level, occupation, and family monthly income). With regard to educational level, four options were available: (a) middle school graduation or lower, (b) high school graduation, (c) bachelor’s degree graduation, and (d) master’s degree graduation or higher. These options were suggested by prior research (Lan & Moscardino, 2019). As for parental occupation and monthly family income, adolescents could choose from seven different options based on occupational classification and residents’ income criteria in China (see J. Wang et al., 2019). These three scores were standardized and subsequently summed to yield an overall SES score.

Grit was measured by the Grit Scale (Duckworth & Quinn, 2009), which is comprised of 8 items. Examples are “setbacks do not discourage me” (perseverance; 4 items) and “new ideas and projects sometimes distract me from previous ones” (consistency; 4 items). Participants were asked to rate each item ranging from 1 (not like me at all) to 5 (very much like me) on the Likert-type scale. The average score of these two facets was calculated separately, with a higher score indicating higher levels of perseverance and consistency. Previous studies have exhibited good internal consistency of this scale in Chinese adolescents (e.g., Datu & Fong, 2018; Lan & Moscardino, 2019). In the current study, Cronbach’s αs were .78 and .79 for perseverance and consistency, respectively. Moreover, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA; see more details in Statistical Analysis) was used to ensure the construct validity of grit (i.e., a two-factor model) in this study. Results showed an acceptable model fit: χ² = 132, df = 19, p < .001; Tucker–Lewis index (TLI) = .94; comparative fit index (CFI) = .96; root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) = .07, RMSEA 95% confidence interval (CI) [.06, .08]. Additionally, the factor loadings were relatively high per each subscale (β ranged from .59 to .65 for perseverance; β ranged from .45 to .52 for consistency).

Perceived popularity was assessed by asking adolescents to nominate three classmates as “most popular,” regardless of the classmates’ gender. All nominations were restricted to the adolescents’ own classrooms. This was because adolescents in the participating schools spend the vast majority of school hours with peers from their own classrooms. Suggested by previous studies (e.g., Bukowski et al., 1993; de Bruyn et al., 2010), the score of perceived popularity was standardized within each classroom to permit appropriate comparisons.

Friendship was assessed by the subscale of the Children’s Loneliness and Social Dissatisfaction Scale (Asher et al., 1984). This subscale, containing 5 items, has been successfully applied to measure self-perception of friendships in Chinese early adolescents (Lan & Moscardino, 2019). Due to the dyadic nature of friendships, the items were reworded in this study. One example is, “I have a lot of reciprocated friendships.” Participants were asked to rate each item from 1 (not true at all) to 5 (always true) on the Likert-type scale. The average score of the 5 items was calculated, so that higher scores indicated greater self-perception of friendships. In the current study, Cronbach’s αwas .89. Moreover, CFA revealed an acceptable model fit of this subscale: χ² = 55.5, df = 9, p < .001; TLI = .97; CFI = .98; RMSEA = .06, RMSEA 95% CI [.05, .08]. Additionally, the items showed high factor loadings (β ranged from .74 to .83).

Statistical analysis

Data analyses were performed in SPSS 21.0 (IBM Corp., 2012) and Mplus 7.0 (Muthén & Muthén, 2012). An initial analysis showed that there were no influential cases with high rates of missing data (more than 20%). Moreover, suggested by prior research (Lan, Scrimin, et al., 2019a), we conducted Little’s missing completely at random (MCAR) test to examine the impact of remaining missing values (less than 20%). Results supported the MCAR assumption: χ²(55) = 68.86, p = .09. Therefore, the full information maximum likelihood was applicable to impute missing data (Enders, 2001).

Concerning our research question, we conducted the data analyses in the following steps. First, descriptive information for the sample was summarized using means and standard deviations for continuous variables, and Pearson’s correlations were used to evaluate associations among the study variables.

Second, we executed CFA using the maximum likelihood estimation to test the within-network validity of the grit scale and the friendship scale in our sample. The goodness of fit was tested with χ² (a nonsignificant value corresponds to an accep fit), but χ² is sensitive to sample size and degree of freedom (Schermelleh-Engel et al., 2003). In view of this, the χ² was complemented by examining other indices that depend on a conventional cutoff. Multiple criteria were used because eatablech type has different strengths and weaknesses in assessing the goodness of fit between a hypothetical model and the actual data (Marsh et al., 1988). Consistent with Hu and Bentler’s recommendations (1999), several fit indices were assessed, such as CFI, TLI, and RMSEA. Generally speaking, CFI and TLI values should be higher than .95, and RMSEA value should be less than .05. For the 95% CI of RMSEA, its lower value should be no worse than .05 and its upper value less than .08 (Kline, 2005).

Third, to identify potential grit profiles, a latent profile analysis was implemented in Mplus 8.0 (Muthén & Muthén, 2012). Suggested by prior research (Ma et al., 2019), one- to five-profile solutions were evaluated and compared based on fit statistics and interpretability to determine the optimal number of latent profiles. Given that no single fit index has been demonstrated to produce the largest statistical power and perfectly identify the optimal model, we relied on multiple fit indices to compare the models: information-theoretic methods, likelihood ratio statistical test methods, and entropy-based criterion (see Nylund et al., 2007; Tein et al., 2013). To be precise, the two most widely used information-theoretic methods (i.e., Akaike’s information criterion [AIC]; Akaike, 1973, and Bayesian information criterion [BIC]; Schwarz, 1978) were adopted, and lower levels of these values indicate better model fit. To adjust the penalty term (i.e., increasing the number of estimated parameters can improve model fit), we also adopted the sample-size-adjusted BIC (Sclove, 1987) as an additional model fit index. Moreover, two likelihood ratio statistical tests (i.e., bootstrapped likelihood ratio test [BLRT] and Lo–Mendell–Rubin adjusted likelihood ratio test [LMR-LRT]) were conducted, and a small probability value indicates that the K-profile model provides a significantly better fit to the data than the K-1-profile model. Additionally, the entropy index (the uncertainty of classification; Celeux & Soromenho, 1996) was calculated. Conventionally, a higher value of entropy (ranges from 0 to 1) represents a better fit; values higher than .80 suggest that the latent profiles are highly discriminating (Muthén & Muthén, 2007). Taken together, an optimal model fit was selected in the context of lower AIC values, BIC values, and adjusted BIC values, as well as higher entropy, a significant BLRT, and a significant LMR-LRT. To determine whether potential grit profiles significantly differed on perseverance and consistency, multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) and the follow-up post hoc test (i.e., Bonferroni correction) were conducted.

Fourth, multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA)—controlling for sociodemographic variables (i.e., age, gender, and SES)—was performed to examine whether grit profiles exhibited mean differences in perceived popularity and friendships among Chinese early adolescents.

Results

Descriptive statistics

Means and standard deviations for study variables and bivariate correlations are reported in Table 1.

Table 1.
Descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations of study variables for Chinese early adolescents.

Variable M SD Range 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

1. Perseverance 4.03 0.82 1 to 5 —

2. Consistency 3.40 1.03 1 to 5 .20* —

3. Popularity 0.00 0.98 −1.60 to 3.99 .10* .10 —

4. Friendships 4.17 0.87 1 to 5 .36* .12* .33* —

5. Age 10.93 0.80 10 to 13 −.06* .01 .03 .01 —

6. Gender^a — — 1 to 2 .09 .13* .06* .08 −.06 —

7. SES −0.01 4.14 −8.19 to 8.29 .11* .01 .07* .07* −.02 .07* —

Note. N = 1,150. The mean number of nominations was 2.51 (SD = 2.17; range from 0 to 13). SES = socioeconomic status.

^a Coded as 1 = male, 2 = female.

p < .05; p < .01; p < .001.

As summarized in Table 1, perseverance and consistency were each positively associated with perceived popularity and friendships in Chinese early adolescents. In terms of covariates, females showed higher scores than males in perceived popularity and friendships; higher SES was positively associated with perceived popularity and friendships.

Latent profile analysis

A latent profile analysis was used to identify potential grit profiles. The model fit indices are reported in Table 2.

Table 2.
Goodness-of-fit indices for different latent profile analysis models.

AIC BIC aBIC Entropy LMR-LRT BLRT Smallest profiles (%)

One profile 6,157.33 6,177.52 6,164.81 — — — —

Two profile 6,044.81 6,080.14 6,057.91 .69 113.16 118.52 22.0

Three profile 5,985.44 6,035.94 6,004.15 .61 62.42* 65.37* 19.1

Four profile 5,869.91 5,935.53 5,894.24 .73 116.03 121.52 9.98

Five profile 5,677.62 5,758.38 5,707.55 .86 189.34* 198.29* 4.0

Note. N = 1,150. AIC = Akaike information criteria; BIC = Bayesian information criteria; aBIC = adjusted Bayesian information criteria; LMR-LRT = Lo–Mendell–Rubin adjusted likelihood ratio test; BLRT = bootstrapped likelihood ratio test.

p < .05; p < .01; p < .001.

Boldface values refer to the optimal solution in this study.

As summarized in Table 2, the LMR-LRT and BLRT values were significant for the two-, three-, and five-profile solutions. Compared to the two- and three-profile options, the five-profile option showed lower levels of AIC, BIC, and adjusted BIC and higher entropy. Although the three-profile solution was in line with our expectation and relatively easier to interpret, a very low entropy index of this solution indicated that the uncertainty of classification was high. For instance, as indicated by prior investigation (M. C. Wang et al., 2017), for the three-profile solution, the entropy index around .64 and below is related to at least 20% classification error rate. By contrast, for the five-profile solution, the entropy index around .84 and above indicates at least 90% correct assignment. Taken this empirical indication into consideration, we proposed a five-profile solution as an optimal model in this study. A visualized distribution of these five profiles is depicted in Figure 1.

Figure 1.
Five grit profiles based on perseverance and consistency (z-standardized means).

In sum, these five profiles involve the following: (a) Profile 1 (extremely low perseverance and low consistency) = 45 early adolescents (4.0%), (b) Profile 2 (low-to-moderate perseverance and low consistency) = 187 early adolescents (16.2%), (c) Profile 3 (high perseverance and extremely low consistency) = 134 early adolescents (11.6%), (d) Profile 4 (moderate perseverance and moderate consistency) = 489 early adolescents (42.5%), and (e) Profile 5 (high perseverance and high consistency) = 295 early adolescents (25.7%). To determine whether these profiles significantly differed on perseverance and consistency and other-related study variables, MANOVA was conducted. Moreover, mean differences in these variables in grit profiles are reported in Table 3.

Table 3.
Mean differences in study variables among five grit profiles.

1. (n = 45) 2. (n = 187) 3. (n = 134) 4. (n = 489) 5. (n = 295)

Variable M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD F/χ² η²

Perseverance 1.89 0.40 2.97 0.23 4.87 0.19 3.91 0.25 4.84 0.19 3,104.16* .92

Consistency 3.05 1.10 3.13 0.80 2.09 0.65 3.31 0.85 4.35 0.62 208.74* .42

Popularity −0.20 0.90 −0.15 0.91 0.01 0.94 −0.01 1.00 0.13 1.00 2.97* .01

Friendships 3.40 1.05 3.78 0.94 4.48 0.73 4.10 0.82 4.49 0.72 36.54*** .11

Age 11.04 0.76 10.99 0.82 10.75 0.77 10.96 0.79 10.90 0.78 2.46* .01

Gender^a — — — — — — — — — — 13.89 —

SES −0.82 3.57 −0.87 3.76 0.45 4.27 0.08 4.04 0.27 4.45 3.32 .01

Note. N = 1,150. SES = socioeconomic status.

^a Coded as 1 = male, 2 = female (a χ² analysis was adopted to explore gender differences across five profiles).

***p < .001.

As summarized in Table 3, these five profiles showed significant differences in perseverance and consistency. In particular, a Bonferroni test showed that, in terms of perseverance, significant differences were found for all possible pair-wise comparisons except for the nonsignificant difference between Profile 3 and Profile 5; with regard to consistency, significant differences were found for all possible pair-wise comparisons except for the nonsignificant differences in consistency between Profile 1 and Profile 2, between Profile 1 and Profile 4, and between Profile 2 and Profile 4.

Moreover, MANCOVA showed that these five profiles demonstrated significant differences in perceived popularity and friendships. In particular, a Bonferroni test showed that significant differences were found between Profile 2 and Profile 5 in perceived popularity; with regard to friendships, all possible pairwise comparisons were significant except for the comparison between Profile 1 and Profile 2 and between Profile 3 and Profile 5. In addition, the profiles differed in terms of age and SES, and χ² analysis on gender also showed that gender was not equally distributed across different profiles. Therefore, compatible with previous empirical findings (see the literature view in the present study), we controlled age, gender, and SES, when examining whether grit profiles exhibited mean differences in perseverance and consistency.

Discussion

Given the Chinese cultural emphases on social harmony and interrelatedness, the objective of the current study was to explore the potential association between grit and peer relationships in early adolescence. More specifically, we explored the grit profiles and whether these profiles differ in terms of perceived popularity and friendships for Chinese early adolescents. Based on a person-centered approach, five grit profiles were revealed. In terms of perceived popularity, those who rated higher on both perseverance and consistency showed higher perceived popularity with peers than those with low-to-moderate perseverance and low consistency. With regard to friendships, results indicated that perseverance is more critical than consistency to greater self-perception of friendships in early adolescence.

First, in regard to the specific configurations of grit in Chinese early adolescents, this study supported a five-option solution: extremely low perseverance and low consistency, low-to-moderate perseverance and low consistency, high perseverance and extremely low consistency, moderate perseverance and moderate consistency, and high perseverance and high consistency. Such a finding does not support our research hypothesis and confirms prior research in grit profiles among Chinese primary school students (Datu & Fong, 2018). One possible explanation is ascribed to the complex psychosocial and academic challenges and rapid physical growth in early adolescence (Bukowski et al., 1993; Lan, Scrimin, et al., 2019s), resulting in a vast range of individual differences in personality traits. Moreover, distinct from prior research (Datu & Fong, 2018), the current study showed that the highest proportion of early adolescents was affiliated with the profile characterized by moderate perseverance and moderate consistency. This may be influenced by Zhongyong thinking (the Doctrine of the Mean), which is a distinctive and critical philosophical thought in Chinese society (Ma et al., 2019; Yang et al., 2016). Under this cultural influence, individuals are more likely to evaluate their behaviors toward the average because prominence (either too high or too low) is culturally discouraged. Also, such a finding may be impacted by the methodological weakness because grit is assessed by a 5-point self-report Likert-type scale. Prior research has shown that the respondents tend to answer the questions moderately in the item with which they disagree a little, thereby making the discrimination lower than 4- or 6-point Likert-type scale (Chomeya, 2010).

Although the five-profile solution indicated the best model fit, a further examination showed that there were some insignificant distinctions in perseverance and consistency among study profiles. One possible explanation is attributable to few indicators, which delimits the statistical distinction of these profiles (Tein et al., 2013). The other possibility could be that perseverance and consistency are assessed by the same self-report measurement. For instance, perseverance was positively and significantly related to consistency in the current study (although the correlation coefficient was low). Further research may consider incorporating other dimensions of grit (e.g., adaptability to situations; Datu et al., 2017) or broadening the domain specificity of grit (Cormier et al., 2019). This is because increasing the number of indicators may contribute to greater accuracy and certainty in defining the grit profiles. Likewise, using more indicators improves convergence rates and reduces probability bias (Tein et al., 2013).

Second, in regard to the association between grit profiles and perceived popularity, results showed significant differences between Profile 2 and Profile 5, suggesting that high scores on both perseverance and consistency are critical for perceived popularity within peer groups. However, such a finding is distinct from our hypothesis and salient literature highlighting the role of perseverance on optimal functioning (Datu et al., 2016; Disabato et al., 2019; Muenks et al., 2017). One possible explanation is that popular adolescents are usually highly visible, viewed with prestige, and dominant and located high in the hierarchy of their peer groups (de Bruyn et al., 2010). In early adolescence, passionately possessing a long-term goal may be more critical in maintaining high standing in a peer group. This is because an adolescent who often switches passions and interests regarding social activities during the school year is more likely to lose visibility within their social group. For example, prior research has documented that popular early adolescents prefer to engage in social activities, such as going to the movies and dating, and dislike solitary activities, such as collecting stamps and computer activities (de Bruyn & Cillessen, 2008). As such, consistency characterized by a persistent commitment to life goals or social activities over long periods may help young adolescents to maintain long-term high social status within peer groups (Cormier et al., 2019; Eskreis-Winkler et al., 2014). Moreover, it is conceivable that individuals with diligence, stamina, and determination are more popular than their peers with less perseverance. This is in line with Chinese cultural orientations, namely Confucianism’s emphasis on perseverance (Lan, Marci, et al., 2019), which facilitates an adolescent’s prestige and dominance within a group. Overall, both perseverance and consistency are proposed as crucial to perceived popularity in Chinese early adolescents.

Third, regarding self-perception of friendships, the current study showed significant differences between Profile 1 and Profile 3 and between Profile 1 and Profile 5, but no significant differences between Profile 3 and Profile 5. Altogether, this result supports our hypothesis and highlights that the role of perseverance is more essential than consistency in friendships. To some extent, our finding corroborates how the existing literature associates overall grit with self-reported relatedness and friendships (Datu, 2017; Lan & Moscardino, 2019). One possible interpretation is that high perseverance can enhance positive self-conscious emotions and self-valuation (Van Doren et al., 2019), which can cause early adolescents to feel positive about their self-perception of friendships. Moreover, social harmony is valued and reinforced through the emphasis of prosocial-cooperative behaviors in China (Bond, 2010). There are a variety of studies indicating that a major aspect of mutual friendships involves providing academic assistance to each other within the classroom (Lu et al., 2018). In Chinese culture, academically successful students are often commended as examples by teachers to their classmates. Based on prior research (e.g., Muenks et al., 2017), students’ perseverance (but not their consistency) predicts their later grades. Following this perspective, students with higher levels of perseverance may be more likely to report high levels of mutual friendships because these students are often admired by peers and have additional means to retain friendships through mutual academic assistance. Thus, the role of perseverance may be more salient in terms of friendships in early adolescence.

Limitations and implications

The current study may involve several limitations that should be acknowledged. First, the cross-sectional design of this study cannot infer the causation of study variables. Although prior research has suggested a reciprocal association between personality and social relationships (Asendorpf & van Aken, 2003; Asendorpf & Wilpers, 1998), further research adopting a longitudinal or experimental design is highly recommended to ascertain the directionality of the association (i.e., reciprocal or reversed) between grit and peer relationships.

Second, although girt has sparked research interests, researchers have also raised some pressing issues about this construct and the grit scale developed by Duckworth and her colleagues (2009) (Datu et al., 2016; Muenks et al., 2017; Vazsonyi et al., 2019). For example, prior research has highlighted that grit is conceptually similar to other constructs, such as self-regulation, engagement, and conscientiousness (Muenks et al., 2017). These constructs have been empirically demonstrated to predict students’ grades more strongly than grit. As noted by Muenks et al. (2017), some items on the girt scale should be revised to reflect more accurately the focus on long-term goals, which is consistent with the conceptualization of grit. Due to these conceptual and methodological concerns, further research may investigate grit, along with other conceptually similar constructs, in one single investigation, to ascertain whether grit or others are more strongly predict social outcomes, such as peer relationships.

Third, we adopt different perspectives to assess peer relationships in this study. Different points of view, however, may bias the research findings, particularly in young adolescents. Future investigations may use a multi-informant approach to having a more comprehensive understanding of the linkage between grit and peer relationships. Moreover, although peer nominations are regarded as a widely used and valid method of assessing perceived popularity (Bukowski et al., 1993; de Bruyn et al., 2010), researchers may keep cautious about the possible methodological limitations of such a technique. For instance, Babad (2001) claims that peer nominations of popularity represent personal attractiveness for intimate and dyadic friendship and thus correspond to a measure of potential friendships. In this regard, it is in contradiction to the assertion that perceived popularity and friendships should be regarded as distinct concepts. Suggested by prior research (Košir & Pečjak, 2005), future investigation should consider assessing students’ popularity with methodological triangulation (i.e., combining sociometric data with the data about students’ popularity as perceived by peers and teachers), which may increase the reliability of the measured construct.

Fourth, the samples of this study were built on Chinese early adolescents only (ethnically homogeneous), which may provide limited insight into the role of grit in different ethnic and cultural contexts, such as in other collective societies and individualistic societies. Future researchers are highly encouraged to conduct a cross-cultural or cross-national study to address this weakness.

Finally, although it is still highly controversial to judge whether the obtained effect size is small or large due to the scarcity of research in this area (see Funder & Ozer, 2019), a relatively small effect size of the profile differences in perceived popularity may indicate that these differences are not very strong. Researchers should keep this point in mind when interpreting the current findings. Moreover, further investigation may consider this preliminary finding as a benchmark to evaluate effect size, which would be more accurate to judge whether these differences are strong enough or the other way around.

Despite these limitations, some theoretical and practical implications can be deduced. With regard to theory, the current findings enrich the theoretical framework of dynamic interactionism (Magnusson, 1990), elucidating the association of grit with peer relationships in early adolescence. Moreover, the current study enriches the grit-related literature by the following two points: (a) documenting the grit profiles in early adolescence and (b) focusing on the association between grit and social status, which goes beyond the existing literature on the association of grit with achievement or engagement outcomes. Additionally, as the results show that perseverance is more important than consistency in terms of self-reported friendship, it points to the possibility that adjusting one’s actions or interests based on situational or social factors may serve as a salient way to form and maintain long-term friendships. Such a finding is compatible with the evidence regarding the triarchic model of grit in a collective setting (perseverance of effort, consistency of interests, and adaptability to situations; Datu et al., 2017; Datu, Yuen, et al., 2018). This may indicate the need for future investigation to explain the triarchic model of grit in Chinese populations, which may enrich the grit-related theoretical framework and literature in a collective setting.

From a practical perspective, through the study of peer relationships of Chinese adolescents, we see further evidence of the importance of values such as maintaining perseverance and consistency. Given the expanding peer networks in early adolescence, individuals’ difficulties in social interactions with peers should be watched for and addressed sufficiently by parents and teachers. Presumably, some adolescents learn more easily to engage in positive peer relationships, whereas others may have problems making friends or “fitting in.” Parents and teachers should address issues of peer relationships as early as possible to prevent any unpleasant consequences (Beazidou & Botsoglou, 2016). As such, grit-oriented interventions may facilitate positive peer relationships. For example, within the school context, activities promoting grit should be organized to inspire early adolescents to set long-term goals based on their interests. Practice or training should be provided to learn to manage failure and obstacles, encouraging adolescents to overcome setbacks as a chance to learn and improve (Lan & Moscardino, 2019).

Overall, the current study underlines the importance of distinguishing between perceived popularity and friendships in future social status research, as each construct is linked to a different profile of traits. Moreover, the current study provides preliminary evidence that contributes to an understanding of the association of perseverance and consistency with peer relationships in early adolescence. More precisely, both perseverance and consistency are positively linked to perceived popularity, whereas perseverance is more critical than consistency to greater self-perception of friendships in early adolescence.

Variable	M	SD	Range	1	2	3	4	5	6	7
1. Perseverance	4.03	0.82	1 to 5	—
2. Consistency	3.40	1.03	1 to 5	.20***	—
3. Popularity	0.00	0.98	−1.60 to 3.99	.10***	.10**	—
4. Friendships	4.17	0.87	1 to 5	.36***	.12***	.33***	—
5. Age	10.93	0.80	10 to 13	−.06*	.01	.03	.01	—
6. Gender^a	—	—	1 to 2	.09**	.13***	.06*	.08**	−.06	—
7. SES	−0.01	4.14	−8.19 to 8.29	.11***	.01	.07*	.07*	−.02	.07*	—

	AIC	BIC	aBIC	Entropy	LMR-LRT	BLRT	Smallest profiles (%)
One profile	6,157.33	6,177.52	6,164.81	—	—	—	—
Two profile	6,044.81	6,080.14	6,057.91	.69	113.16**	118.52**	22.0
Three profile	5,985.44	6,035.94	6,004.15	.61	62.42*	65.37*	19.1
Four profile	5,869.91	5,935.53	5,894.24	.73	116.03	121.52	9.98
Five profile	5,677.62	5,758.38	5,707.55	.86	189.34***	198.29***	4.0

	1. (n = 45)	2. (n = 187)	3. (n = 134)	4. (n = 489)	5. (n = 295)
Perseverance	1.89	0.40	2.97	0.23	4.87	0.19	3.91	0.25	4.84	0.19	3,104.16***	.92
Consistency	3.05	1.10	3.13	0.80	2.09	0.65	3.31	0.85	4.35	0.62	208.74***	.42
Popularity	−0.20	0.90	−0.15	0.91	0.01	0.94	−0.01	1.00	0.13	1.00	2.97*	.01
Friendships	3.40	1.05	3.78	0.94	4.48	0.73	4.10	0.82	4.49	0.72	36.54***	.11
Age	11.04	0.76	10.99	0.82	10.75	0.77	10.96	0.79	10.90	0.78	2.46*	.01
Gender^a	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	13.89**	—
SES	−0.82	3.57	−0.87	3.76	0.45	4.27	0.08	4.04	0.27	4.45	3.32**	.01

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

We much appreciate the participants, teachers, school principals, and research assistants involved in the present research. Moreover, we are grateful to the editor and three anonymous reviewers for their guidance and constructive comments concerning the revision of the article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Xiaoyu Lan

Open research statement

This research was not pre-registered. The data and materials used in the research are available upon request by emailing lanxiaoyu1001@163.com.

Notes

References

Akaike

(1973). Information theory and an extension of the maximum likelihood principle. In Petrov

B. N.

Csaki

(Eds.), Second international symposium on information theory, 267–281. Akademiai Kiado.

Asendorpf

J. B.

van Aken

M. A.

(2003). Personality–relationship transaction in adolescence: Core versus surface personality characteristics. Journal of Personality, 71, 629–666. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6494.7104005

Asendorpf

J. B.

Wilpers

(1998). Personality effects on social relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1531–1544. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.6.1531

Asher

S. R.

Hymel

Renshaw

P. D.

(1984). Loneliness in children. Child Development, 55, 1456–1464. https://doi.org/10.2307/1130015

Babad

(2001). On the conception and measurement of popularity: More facts and some straight conclusions. Social Psychology of Education, 5, 3–29. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012780232587

Beazidou

Botsoglou

(2016). Peer acceptance and friendship in early childhood: The conceptual distinctions between them. Early Child Development and Care, 186, 1615–1631. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2015.1117077

Boisvert

Poulin

(2016). Romantic relationship patterns from adolescence to emerging adulthood: Associations with family and peer experiences in early adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 45, 945–958. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-016-0435-0

Bond

M. H.

(Ed.). (2010). The oxford handbook of Chinese psychology. Oxford University Press.

Bradley

R. H.

Corwyn

R. F.

(2002). Socioeconomic status and child development. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 371–399. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135233

10.

Bukowski

W. M.

Hoza

Boivin

(1993). Popularity, friendship, and emotional adjustment during early adolescence. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 60, 23–37. https://doi.org/10.1002/cd.23219936004

11.

Celeux

Soromenho

(1996). An entropy criterion for assessing the number of clusters in a mixture model. Journal of Classification, 13, 195–212. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01246098

12.

Chomeya

(2010). Quality of psychology test between Likert scale 5 and 6 points. Journal of Social Sciences, 6, 399–403. https://doi.org/10.3844/jssp.2010.399.403

13.

Cillessen

A. H.

Rose

A. J.

(2005). Understanding popularity in the peer system. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 102–105. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0963-7214.2005.00343.x

14.

Collins

W. A.

Laursen

(2004). Changing relationships, changing youth: Interpersonal contexts of adolescent development. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 24, 55–62. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431603260882

15.

Cormier

D. L.

Dunn

J. G.

Dunn

J. C.

(2019). Examining the domain specificity of grit. Personality and Individual Differences, 139, 349–354. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2018.11.026

16.

Credé

Tynan

M. C.

Harms

P. D.

(2017). Much ado about grit: A meta-analytic synthesis of the grit literature. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113, 492–511. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000102

17.

Datu

J. A. D.

(2017). Sense of relatedness is linked to higher grit in a collectivist setting. Personality and Individual Differences, 105, 135–138. https://doi.org//10.1016/j.paid.2016.09.039

18.

Datu

J. A. D.

Fong

R. W.

(2018). Examining the association of grit with test emotions among Hong Kong Chinese primary school students. School Psychology International, 39, 510–525. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143034318793468

19.

Datu

J. A. D.

King

R. B.

Valdez

J. P. M.

Eala

M. S. M.

(2018). Grit is associated with lower depression via meaning in life among Filipino high school students. Youth & Society. https://doi.org/10.1177/0044118X18760402

20.

Datu

J. A. D.

Valdez

J. P. M.

King

R. B.

(2016). Perseverance counts but consistency does not! Validating the short grit scale in a collectivist setting. Current Psychology, 35, 121–130. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-015-9374-2

21.

Datu

J. A. D.

Yuen

Chen

(2017). Development and validation of the triarchic model of grit scale (TMGS): Evidence from Filipino undergraduate students. Personality and Individual Differences, 114, 198–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.04.012

22.

Datu

J. A. D.

Yuen

Chen

(2018). The triarchic model of grit is linked to academic success and well-being among Filipino high school students. School Psychology Quarterly, 33, 428–438. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000234

23.

de Bruyn

E. H.

Cillessen

A. H.

(2008). Leisure activity preferences and perceived popularity in early adolescence. Journal of Leisure Research, 40, 442–457.

24.

de Bruyn

E. H.

Cillessen

A. H.

Wissink

I. B.

(2010). Associations of peer acceptance and perceived popularity with bullying and victimization in early adolescence. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 30, 543–566. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431609340517

25.

Deventer

Wagner

Lüdtke

Trautwein

(2019). Are personality traits and relationship characteristics reciprocally related? Longitudinal analyses of development in the transition out of high school and beyond. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 116, 331–347. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000191

26.

Disabato

D. J.

Goodman

F. R.

Kashdan

T. B.

(2019). Is grit relevant to well-being and strengths? Evidence across the globe for separating perseverance of effort and consistency of interests. Journal of Personality, 82, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12382

27.

Duckworth

Gross

J. J.

(2014). Self-control and grit related but separable determinants of success. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 23, 319–325. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721414541462

28.

Duckworth

A. L.

Peterson

Matthews

M. D.

Kelly

D. R.

(2007). Grit: Perseverance and passion for long-term goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 1087–1101. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.92.6.1087

29.

Duckworth

A. L.

Quinn

P. D.

(2009). Development and validation of the Short Grit Scale (Grit-S). Journal of Personality Assessment, 91, 166–174. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223890802634290

30.

Enders

C. K.

(2001). The performance of the full information maximum likelihood estimator in multiple regression models with missing data. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 61, 713–740. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164401615001

31.

Erath

S. A.

Flanagan

K. S.

Bierman

K. L.

(2007). Social anxiety and peer relations in early adolescence: Behavioral and cognitive factors. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 35, 405–416. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-007-9099-2

32.

Eskreis-Winkler

Duckworth

A. L.

Shulman

E. P.

Beal

(2014). The grit effect: Predicting retention in the military, the workplace, school and marriage. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 36. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00036

33.

Funder

D. C.

Ozer

D. J.

(2019). Evaluating effect size in psychological research: Sense and nonsense. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 2, 156–168. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245919847202

34.

L. T.

Bentler

P. M.

(1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6, 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118

35.

IBM Corp. (2012). IBM SPSS statistics for windows, version 21.0. IBM Corp.

36.

Guo

Zhou

Feng

(2018). Prosocial behavior is predictive of academic success via peer acceptance: A study of Chinese primary school children. Learning and Individual Differences, 65, 187–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2018.05.010

37.

Kawabata

Tseng

W. L.

(2019). Relational and physical victimization, friendship, and social and school adjustment in Taiwan. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 36, 1559–1578. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407518767771

38.

Kleiman

E. M.

Adams

L. M.

Kashdan

T. B.

Riskind

J. H.

(2013). Gratitude and grit indirectly reduce risk of suicidal ideations by enhancing meaning in life: Evidence for a mediated moderation model. Journal of Research in Personality, 47, 539–546. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2013.04.007

39.

Kline

R. B.

(2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modelling. The Guilford Press.

40.

Košir

Pečjak

(2005). Sociometry as a method for investigating peer relationships: What does it actually measure? Educational Research, 47, 127–144. https://doi.org/10.1080/0013188042000337604

41.

Lan

Radin

(2019). Parental autonomy support and psychological well-being in Tibetan and Han emerging adults: A serial multiple mediation model. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 621. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00621

42.

Lan

Marci

Moscardino

(2019). Parental autonomy support, grit, and psychological adjustment in Chinese adolescents from divorced families. Journal of Family Psychology, 33, 511–520. https://doi.org/10.1037/fam0000514

43.

Lan

Moscardino

(2019). Direct and interactive effects of perceived teacher-student relationship and grit on student wellbeing among stay-behind early adolescents in urban China. Learning and Individual Differences, 69, 129–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2018.12.003

44.

Lan

Radin

(2020). Direct and interactive effects of peer attachment and grit on mitigating problem behaviors among urban left-behind adolescents. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 29, 250–260. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-019-01580-9

45.

Lan

Scrimin

Moscardino

(2019a). Emotional awareness moderates the association between discrimination and emotional-behavioral problems: A cross-informant study in Chinese rural-to-urban migrant youth. The Journal of Early Adolescence. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431619874399

46.

Lan

Scrimin

Moscardino

(2019b). Perceived parental guan and school adjustment among Chinese early adolescents: The moderating role of interdependent self-construal. Journal of Adolescence, 71, 18–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2018.12.003

47.

Zhao

Kong

Yang

Wang

(2018). Psychometric assessment of the short grit scale among Chinese adolescents. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 36, 291–296. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282916674858

48.

Niu

Jin

French

D. C.

(2018). Relations between popularity and prosocial behavior in middle school and high school Chinese adolescents. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 42, 175–181. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025416687411

49.

Wang

Lan

(2019). Empathy and psychosocial adjustment in Tibetan and Han adolescents: A person-centered approach. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1896. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01896

50.

Magnusson

(1990). Personality development from an interactional perspective. In Pervin

(Ed.), Handbook of personality: Theory and measurement (pp. 193–122). Guilford Press.

51.

Marsh

H. W.

Balla

J. R.

McDonald

R. P.

(1988). Goodness-of-fit indexes in confirmatory factor analysis: The effect of sample size. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 391–410. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.391

52.

Morrow

M. T.

Hubbard

J. A.

Sallee

M. L.

Barhight

L. R.

Lines

M. M.

Rubin

R. M.

(2016). Dyadic accuracy and bias in preadolescents’ perceived peer relations: Associations with aggression, depression, and peer victimization. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 33, 892–916. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407515605907

53.

Muenks

Wigfield

Yang

J. S.

O’Neal

C. R.

(2017). How true is grit? Assessing its relations to high school and college students’ personality characteristics, self-regulation, engagement, and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 109, 599–620. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000153

54.

Muenks

Yang

J. S.

Wigfield

(2018). Associations between grit, motivation, and achievement in high school students. Motivation Science, 4, 158–176. https://doi.org/10.1037/mot0000076

55.

Muthén

L. K.

Muthén

B. O.

(2007). Re: What is a good value of entropy. Online comment. http://wwwstatmodel.com/discussion/messages/13/2562.html,1237580237.

56.

Muthén

L. K.

Muthén

B. O.

(2012). Mplus user’s guide: Statistical analysis with latent variables (7th ed.). Muthén & Muthén.

57.

Nylund

K. L.

Asparouhov

Muthén

B. O.

(2007). Deciding on the number of classes in latent class analysis and growth mixture modeling: A monte Carlo simulation study. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 14, 535–569. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510701575396

58.

Podsakoff

P. M.

MacKenzie

S. B.

Lee

J. Y.

Podsakoff

N. P.

(2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879–903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879

59.

Putarek

Keresteš

(2016). Self-perceived popularity in early adolescence: Accuracy, associations with loneliness, and gender differences. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 33, 257–274. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407515574465

60.

Savickaitė

Dijkstra

J. K.

Kreager

Ivanova

Veenstra

(2019). Friendships, perceived popularity, and adolescent romantic relationship debut. The Journal of Early Adolescence. Advanced Online Publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431619847530

61.

Schermelleh-Engel

Moosbrugger

Müller

(2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of psychological research online, 8, 23–74.

62.

Schwarz

(1978). Estimating the dimension of a model. The Annals of Statistics, 6, 461–464.

63.

Sclove

S. L.

(1987). Application of model-selection criteria to some problems in multivariate analysis. Psychometrika, 52, 333–343. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02294360

64.

Stotsky

M. T.

Bowker

J. C.

(2018). An examination of reciprocal associations between social preference, popularity, and friendship during early adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 47, 1830–1841. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-018-0846-1

65.

Tang

Wang

M. T.

Guo

Salmela-Aro

(2019). Building grit: The longitudinal pathways between mindset, commitment, grit, and academic outcomes. Journal of youth and adolescence, 48, 850–863. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-019-00998-0

66.

Tein

J. Y.

Coxe

Cham

(2013). Statistical power to detect the correct number of classes in latent profile analysis. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 20, 640–657. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2013.824781

67.

Van Doren

Tharp

J. A.

Johnson

S. L.

Staudenmaier

P. J.

Anderson

Freeman

M. A.

(2019). Perseverance of effort is related to lower depressive symptoms via authentic pride and perceived power. Personality and Individual Differences, 137, 45–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2018.07.044

68.

Vazsonyi

A. T.

Ksinan

A. J.

Jiskrova

G. K.

Mikuška

Javakhishvili

Cui

(2019). To grit or not to grit, that is the question!. Journal of Research in Personality, 78, 215–226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2018.12.006

69.

Wang

M. C.

Deng

Yang

(2017). Performance of the entropy as an index of classification accuracy in latent profile analysis: A Monte Carlo simulation study. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 49, 1473–1482.

70.

Wang

Shi

Yang

Zou

Zhang

(2019). The joint effect of paternal and maternal parenting behaviors on school engagement among Chinese adolescents: The mediating role of mastery goal. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1587. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01587

71.

Yang

Zhang

Zhao

Wang

Chen

Ding

Zhang

(2016). Confucian culture still matters: The benefits of Zhongyong thinking (doctrine of the mean) for mental health. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 47, 1097–1113. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022116658260

	1. (n = 45)		2. (n = 187)		3. (n = 134)		4. (n = 489)		5. (n = 295)
Variable	M	SD	M	SD	M	SD	M	SD	M	SD	F/χ²	η²
Perseverance	1.89	0.40	2.97	0.23	4.87	0.19	3.91	0.25	4.84	0.19	3,104.16***	.92
Consistency	3.05	1.10	3.13	0.80	2.09	0.65	3.31	0.85	4.35	0.62	208.74***	.42
Popularity	−0.20	0.90	−0.15	0.91	0.01	0.94	−0.01	1.00	0.13	1.00	2.97*	.01
Friendships	3.40	1.05	3.78	0.94	4.48	0.73	4.10	0.82	4.49	0.72	36.54***	.11
Age	11.04	0.76	10.99	0.82	10.75	0.77	10.96	0.79	10.90	0.78	2.46*	.01
Gender^a	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	13.89**	—
SES	−0.82	3.57	−0.87	3.76	0.45	4.27	0.08	4.04	0.27	4.45	3.32**	.01