The current study examined social dominance and peer victimization as possible intervening and moderating variables of the association between peer liking and relational aggression because previous findings suggest that social dominance and peer victimization are important for predicting the acceptableness and success of aggression. A total of 367 5th- and 6th-grade students from Quebec, Canada, completed peer ratings of their classmates on measures of peer liking, relational aggression, social dominance, and peer victimization. Hierarchical multiple regression analyses demonstrated that peer victimization worked as a mediator and a moderator, such that victimization explained the link between peer liking and relational aggression, and that this association was only significant at high levels of peer victimization. Alternatively, social dominance worked as a suppressor, with the link between peer liking and relational aggression becoming stronger once social dominance was controlled in the multiple regression. Social dominance did not moderate the same association.
Baron, R.M., & Kenny, D.A. ( 1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.
3.
Bukowski, W.M., & Newcomb, A.F. ( 1984). Stability and determinants of sociometric status and friendship choice: A longitudinal perspective. Developmental Psychology, 20, 941-952.
4.
Cairns, R.B., Cairns, B.D., Neckerman, H.J., Ferguson, L.L., & Gariepy, J.L. ( 1989). Growth and aggression: Childhood to early adolescence . Developmental Psychology, 25, 320-330.
5.
Cillessen, A.H.N., & Mayeux, L. ( 2004). From censure to reinforcement: Developmental changes in the association between aggression and social status. Child Development, 75, 147-163.
6.
Cillessen, A.H.N., & Mayeux, L. ( 2007). Variations in the association between aggression and social status: Theoretical and empirical perspectives. In P. H. Hawley, T. D. Little, & P. C. Rodkin (Eds.), Aggression and Adaptation (pp. 135-156). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
7.
Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. ( 1975). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. Oxford, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum.
8.
Coie, J.D., Dodge, K.A., & Coppotelli, H. (1982). Dimensions and types of social status: A cross-age perspective. Developmental Psychology , 18, 557-570.
9.
Conger, A.J. ( 1974). A revised definition for suppressor variables: A guide to their identification and interpretation. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 34, 35-46.
10.
Courtney, M.L., Cohen, R., Deptula, D.P., & Kitzmann, K.M. (2003). An experimental analysis of children’s dislike of aggressors and victims, Social Development, 12, 46-66.
11.
Crick, N.R., & Grotpeter, J.K. (1995). Relational aggression, gender, and social-psychological adjustment. Child Development , 66, 710-722.
12.
Darlington, R.B. ( 1968). Multiple regression in psychological research and practice . Psychological Bulletin, 69, 161-182.
13.
Galen, B.R., & Underwood, M.K. (1997). A developmental investigation of social aggression among children. Developmental Psychology , 33, 589-600.
14.
Graham, S., & Juvonen, J. ( 2001). An attributional analysis of peer victimization. In J. Juvonen & S. Graham (Eds.), Peer harassment in school: The plight of the vulnerable and victimized (pp. 49-72). New York: Guilford.
15.
Hawker, D.S.J., & Boulton, M.J. (April, 1997). Peer victimization and psychosocial adjustment: Findings with a British sample. Poster presented at the Biennial Meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Washington, DC.
16.
Hawley, P.H. ( 1999). The ontogenesis of social dominance: A strategy-based evolution perspective. Developmental Review, 19, 97-132.
17.
Hawley, P.H. ( 2003). Prosocial and coercive configurations of resource control in early adolescence. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 49, 279-309.
18.
Hoover, J.H., Oliver, R., & Hazler, R.J. ( 1992). Bullying: Perceptions of adolescent victims in the midwestern USA. School Psychology International, 13, 5-16.
19.
Keane, S.P., & Calkins, S.D. ( 2004). Predicting kindergarten peer social status from toddler and preschool problem behavior. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 32, 409-423.
20.
LaFontanna, K.M., & Cillessen, A.H.N. (1999). Children’s interpersonal perceptions as a function of sociometric and peer-perceived popularity. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 160, 225-242.
21.
LaFontanna, K.M. & Cillessen, A.H.N. ( 2002). Children’s stereotypes of popular and unpopular peers: A multimethod assessment. Developmental Psychology , 38, 635-647.
22.
MacKinnon, D.P., Krull, J.L., & Lockwood, C.M. (2000). Equivalence of the mediation, confounding, and suppression effect. Prevention Science, 1, 173-181.
23.
MacKinnon, D.P., Lockwood, C.M., Hoffman, J.M., West, S.G., & Sheets, V. ( 2002). A comparison of methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects. Psychological Methods, 7, 83-104.
24.
Olweus, D. ( 1978). Aggression in the schools: Bullies and their whipping boys. Washington, DC: Hemisphere .
25.
Osterman, K., Bjorkqvist, K., Lagerspetz, K.M., Kaukainen, A., Huesmann, L., & Fraczek, A. ( 1994). Peer and self-estimated aggression and victimization in 8-year-old children from five ethnic groups. Aggressive Behavior, 20, 411-428.
26.
Parkhurst, J.T., & Hopmeyer, A. ( 1998). Sociometric popularity and peer-perceived popularity: Two distinct dimensions of peer status. Journal of Early Adolescence , 18, 125-144.
Perry, D.G., Perry, L.C., & Kennedy, E. ( 1992). Conflict and the development of antisocial behavior. In C. U. Shantz & W. W. Hartup (Eds.), Conflict in child and adolescent development (pp. 301-329). New York: Cambridge University Press.
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.
31.
Ray, J.J. ( 1981). Authoritarianism, dominance, and assertiveness. Journal of Personality Assessment, 35, 390-397.
32.
Rigby, K., & Slee, P.T. ( 1991). Bullying among Australian schoolchildren: Reported behavior and attitudes toward victims. Journal of Social Psychology , 131, 615-627.
33.
Schwartz, D. ( 2000). Subtypes of victims and aggressors in children’s peer groups. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 28, 181-192.
34.
Schwartz, D., Dodge, K.A., Pettit, G.S., & Bates, J.E. ( 1997). The early socialization of aggressive victims of bullying . Child Development, 68, 665-675.
35.
Schwartz, D., McFadyen-Ketchum, S.A., Dodge, K.A., Pettit, G.S., & Bates, J.E. ( 1999). Early behavior problems as a predictor of later peer group victimization. Journal Abnormal Child Psychology, 27, 191-201.
36.
Schwartz, D., Proctor, L.J., & Chien, D.H. ( 2001). The aggressive victim of bullying: Emotional and behavioral dysregulation as a pathway to victimization by peers. In J. Juvonen, & S. Graham (Eds.), Peer harassment in school: The plight of the vulnerable and victimized (pp. 147-174). New York: Guilford .
37.
Strayer, F.F., & Strayer, J. ( 1976). An ethological analysis of social agonism and dominance relations among preschool children. Child Development, 47, 980-989.
38.
Toblin, R.L., Schwartz, D., Hopmeyer-Gorman, A., & Abou-ezzeddine, T. (2005). Social-cognitive and behavioral attributes of aggressive victims of bullying. Applied Developmental Psychology, 26, 329-346.
