Does an aggressor's target choice matter? Assessing change in the social network prestige of aggressive youth.

Abstract

Based on a social dominance approach, aggression is conceptualized as a strategy used to gain position, power, and influence within the peer network. However, aggression may only be beneficial when targeted against particular peers; both victims' social standing and the number of victims targeted may impact aggressors' social standing. The current study examined associations between aggressors' targeting tendencies (victims' social standing and number of victims) and aggressors' own social standing, both concurrently and over time. Analyses were conducted using three analytic samples of seventh and eighth grade aggressors (Ns ranged from 161 to 383, 49% girls; 50% Latina/o). Participants nominated their friends; nominations were used to calculate social network prestige. Peer nominations were used to identify aggressors and their victim(s). For each aggressor, number of victims and victims' social network prestige were assessed. Aggressors with more victims and with highly prestigious victims had higher social network prestige themselves, and they increased more in prestige over time than aggressors with fewer victims and less prestigious victims (though there were some differences across analytic samples). Findings have implications for the need to extend the social dominance approach to better address the links between aggressors and victims. Aggr. Behav. 43:364-374, 2017. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.