2. 1 Psychology 3260: Personality & Social Development Don Hartmann Spring 2006 Lecture 12: Peers II

3. 2 Administration The library has a Writing Center (in conjunction with the Writing Program) on Level 3 “to help students at all levels become better writers.” (Phone # 587-9122 or just drop by the 3 rd floor of Marriott in the Atrium area). Ben is your man. If your group elected to write autobiographical papers, but a minority would like to present to the class, they are welcome to recruit from other groups. Please let me know who you are. Reed Dow Salem Honey

4. 3 WEB Discussion Assignments & Due Dates WEB Assignment # Group IIIIIIIV CSI02/03 Growing Pain02/06 Psyched02/07 Agrrrression02/08 Authoritarians 02/09 Divas02/10 Peer Pressure02/13 Morally Distinguished02/14 Raging Hormones02/15 Bono02/16 Girlie02/19 Note: Each discussion topic closes at 5:00 p.m. two days prior to the stated due data.

5. 4 Panel Discussion Schedule Wednesday… Feb. 15 th Feb. 22 nd Identity (Murquia et al.) Feb. 29 th Mar. 08 th Mar. 15 th Bullying (Borski et al.) Mar. 29 th Apr. 05 nd : Family topic (Kyle et al.) Apr. 12 th Apr. 19 th Get you time period now, they are going like hot cakes!

6. 5 Handout Summary Handout* WEB Date Date 11. Sup. Lect. #3: Method III-----01/11 12. HO: Autobio. Term Paper-----01/11 13. Lecture #4a: Method III-----01/12 14. HO: Completed Class Locator01/13----- 15. Sup. Lect: Term Paper-----01/13 16. Code of Academic Conduct-----01/18 17. Study Guide #2: Chpt. 2-----01/18 18. Lect. #7: Skinner-----01/18 19. Lect. #8: Bandura-----01/19 20. Study Guide #3-----01/24 21. Lect. #9: Piaget-----01/25 22. Lect. 10: Peers I-----01/27 23. Study Guide #4-----01/30 24. Study Guide #5-----02/03 25. Lect. #12:Peers II-----02/03 ----- *Handout date refers to the date the handout was distributed in class. WEB date indicates the date the handout should have been included on the class WEB site. A dashed line indicates that the handout either was not distributed in class or was not placed on the WEB.

7. 6 Study Guide Assistance from the Instructor Based upon past experience, a number of you will wait until the night before the exam to prepare answers to the study guides. You should know the rules relating to requests to the instructor for help on the study guides: I do not take class material home with me, so I am unlikely to be able to answer questions after 5:00 p.m. on the evening prior to the exam—or any other evening. You are to use the instructor as a last resort after consulting with class mates about study guide answers. The instructor will not answer more than 3 study guide questions per request and you are limited to 1 request per day.

8. 7 Supplementary References: Friendship Bukowski, W.M., & Hoza, B. (1989). Popularity and friendship: Issues in theory, measurement, and outcome. In T.J. Berndt & G.W. Ladd (Eds.), Peer relationships in child development (pp. 15 ‑ 45). New York: Wiley. Rubin, K. H., Bukowski, W., & Parker, J. G. (1998). Peer interactions, relationships, and groups. In W. Damon (Series Ed.) N. Eisenberg (Vol. Ed.), Handbook of child psychology, Vol. 3: Social, emotional, and personality development (5th ed., pp. 619-700). New York: Wiley. Terry, R., & Coie, J.D. (1991). A comparison of methods for defining sociometric status among children. Developmental Psychology, 27, 867-880.

9. 8 Overview of Peer Relations II Lecture Nature of Peer Groups Developmental changes in peer relations Friendships Value of Friendships Peer Lab findings (Hartmann et al.) Cordinates with text, pp. 425-430 & 445-450 Next: Lect. #13a: Emotions I

10. 9 Peers!

11. 10 The Heyday (1970-) Descriptive studies of various ages and groups: Who does what with whom? Chums, rejects, crowds, friendships; group structure (e.g., dominance) Who are the major players: Asher, Berndt, Coie, Dodge, Gottman, Howes Methods old and new: Sociometric assessments and observations; sequential analysis

12. 11 DEVELOPMENTAL CHANGES IN PEER RELATIONS: The Beginning Infants touch within the first 3 months of life Around 6 months of age share toys, food, and the like with peers By 1.5 years engaging in coordinated play with peers (see example involving Larry and Bernie on p. 441) By 2 years, complementary roles (e.g., hide-and- seek) With increasing age, interactions become more verbal and complex. By age 5, pretend play interactions become important

13. 12 DEVELOPMENTAL CHANGES IN PEER RELATIONS: Childhood & adolescence Elementary school: Interactions become increasingly sophisticated. Some identification with groups, such a Brownies and Cubs (6-10). Preadolescence (8.5-10): Chumships (Sullivan) Early Adolescence: Same-sex cliques (Dunphy)

14. 13 DEVELOPMENTAL CHANGES IN PEER RELATIONS: Youth Mid Adolescence: Heterosexual cliques & crowds (Brown) Old Adolescence: Dating dyads

15. 14 What Kind of Peer Relationship was that Again?

16. 15 Friendships: Introduction Definition: Reciprocal relationship with positive affect Distinct from popularity Importance Source of social support Conflict resolution skills Preparation for adulthood Can have bad consequences as well: Quality of friendships Developmental Changes: Increasingly intimate and fewer in number with age

17. 16 Friendships: Introduction Definition: Reciprocal relationship with positive affect Distinct from popularity Importance Source of social support Conflict resolution skills Preparation for adulthood Can have bad consequences as well: Quality of friendships

18. 17 George & Hartmann (1) Relationship between friendship and popularity (George & Hartmann). 5 th - & 6 th - grade children administered a rating scale sociometric ‑‑ and children were divided, by classrooms, into the bottom.25 (unpopular), middle.50 (average), and top.25 (popular) Completed a questionnaire asking them to list up to 15 people who they considered to be their good friends

19. 18 Results of George & Hartmann (2) Children reported a mean ≈ 12 good friends 80% of friends within a year of age Few children had reciprocated cross ‑ sex friends 70% in same school % Reciprocation Popularity Group

20. 19 Results of George & Hartmann (3) Who is chosen as friends? 12% unpopular; 47% average; 41% popular

21. 20 Hartmann, Abbott, Pelzel, George, & Ward-Anderson Friendship Stability: Length of Time X Verified Status X Friendship Status % Friends Lost Weeks

22. 21 Hartmann et al. Why Do Children Loose Friends? Lack of recent Contact (33%) Change in Interests (23%) Negative Personality (21%) Replaced by Other (21%) Conflict (13%) Third Party (10%) Violation of Trust (10%)

23. 22 Pelzel, Barrett, & Hartmann Feelings about their most significant friendship loss What emotions did the loss precipitate? Anger, sadness, & confusion How strong were the emotions? 2/3 stated experiencing strong negative feeling How long did the feelings last? More than a month!

24. 23 Summary of Peer Lab Friendship findings Children describe having a substantial number of friendships A substantial minority of which are not in their classroom almost all of which are same gender many of which are not reciprocated Popular children are over-represented on lists of good friends Friendships are dynamic—many are changing How dynamic varies depending on how we assess Friendship loss Occurs for a variety of reason And most individuals experience some pain with their most significant friendship loss

25. 24 Summary of Social Cognition Lecture Scientific Investigations Of The Peer Group: Heyday (1970 ‑ ) Issues In Peer Relations Developmental changes in peer relations Friendships Next: Lect. #13a: Emotions Go in Peace