Aspectos éticos:

In late childhood, a distinction emerges between two types of peer group status, ‘being liked’ and ‘being popular’, and the distinction between them increases further across adolescence (Cillessen & Borch, 2006; Cillessen & Mayeux, 2004). The extent to which a child is liked or disliked is usually defined in terms of acceptance and rejection (Cillessen, Schwartz, & Mayeux, 2011), whereas the extent to which a child is seen as popular is mostly defined as a reputational measure of status, visibility, and impact in the peer group (also referred to as perceived popularity; Cillessen & Mayeux, 2004; Cillessen et al., 2011). Being popular is a strongly valued and salient construct in the social lives of children in late childhood, since, for example, popular children are seen by their peers as having frequent interactions, and as being com- petent, talented, and socially well-connected (e.g., LaFontanta & Cillessen, 2002). How may having a popular social status in the peer group be associated with forgiveness? To understand this possible association, it is helpful to consider what is known about the role of popularity in children’s prosocial tendencies more generally. In the extant developmental literature, popularity is often viewed as a ‘mixed blessing’, as it is associated with a set of both positive and negative correlates (e.g., Cillessen & Rose, 2005). For example, being popular in the peer group is, especially in late childhood (4-6 graders; LaFontana & Cillessen, 2002), associated with higher levels of aggression, in particular social or relational aggression (i.e., aggression that is manipulative or excluding; e.g., Cillessen & Mayeux, 2004; Cillessen & Rose, 2005; LaFontana & Cillessen, 1998; Rodkin & Roisman, 2010; Rose, Swenson, & Waller, 2004; Sandstrom & Cillessen, 2006). At the same time, several studies have demonstrated that being popular also includes prosocial skills. For example, popularity has been linked to cooperation, helpfulness, kindness, and trustworthiness (e.g., De Bruyn & Cillessen, 2006; LaFontana & Cillessen, 2002; Xie, Li, Boucher, Hutchins, & Cairns, 2006; but see Sandstrom & Cillessen, 2006), particularly if the popular child is also high in social acceptance. Similarly, Andreou (2006) found a positive association between popularity and peer-rated social intelligence (i.e., social awareness, social skills, and social information pro- cessing).

This picture is further complicated by differences between boys and girls. There is ample empirical evidence that the association between popularity and social acceptance is stronger for boys than for girls, suggesting that particularly for boys popularity is related to better social skills (e.g., Cillessen & Mayeux, 2004; LaFontana & Cillessen, 2002; Prinstein & Cillessen, 2003). In fact, popularity seems to damage girls’ likeability in later adolescence (Cillessen & Mayeux, 2004; Mayeux, Sandstrom, & Cillessen, 2008). This has been explained by the fact that girls have more aspirations of becoming popular (e.g., Eder, 1985), which could lay the groundwork for girls who achieve ‘popularity’ to become disliked by other

girls as a result of jealousy. Moreover, there is some evidence indicating that popular girls tend to use more relational aggression than popular boys (Cillessen & Mayeux, 2004; but see Prinstein & Cillessen, 2003; Rose et al., 2004).

While it is difficult to theorize about the question how popularity may affect forgiveness in particular, the findings discussed above provide some clues for un- derstanding how popularity may be associated with forgiveness. Basically, these previous findings suggest that there are two possible alternative predictions. Considering the positive link between popularity and aggression, popularity may be negatively associated with forgiveness. Indeed, several studies have demonstrated that children who behave in a more hostile and aggressive way are less likely to forgive offending others (e.g., Flanagan et al., 2012; Peets et al., 2013). We refer to this as the popularity-antisocial hypothesis. In contrast, studies on the role of pop- ularity in social intelligence and prosocial behavior suggest an alternative prediction. As noted, research indicates that there is a positive relationship between popularity and social skills, and this association is stronger for boys than for girls (Cillessen & Mayeux, 2004; LaFontana & Cillessen, 2002; Lease, Kennedy, & Axelrod, 2002). Thus, assuming that forgiveness requires well developed social skills to preserve valuable relationships even when hurt (e.g., McCullough & Hoyt, 1999; Chapter 3), popularity and forgiveness actually may be positively associated, and perhaps especially for boys. We refer to this as the popularity-prosocial hypothesis.

STUDY 4.1

In Study 4.1, we explored the association between forgiveness and popularity among children in grade 4 to 6 of elementary school, and examined whether this association differed for boys and girls. Popularity was measured using peer nomi- nations (Cillessen & Mayeux, 2004; Lansu & Cillessen, 2012). Also, we measured social preference using peer nominations, which allowed us to assess the specificity of the effects for popularity. To measure forgiveness tendencies, we first asked children to recall a past offense by one of their classmates. Level of forgiveness was measured with both a self-report and a behavioral measure.

Method

Participants

Participants were children from grade 4 to 6 from 13 different elementary schools in the Netherlands. The data were collected in two cohorts with five months in between each data collection (cohort 1: n = 126; cohort 2: n = 201). In agreement with pro-

65 64

Forgiveness and The Peer Group Chapter 4

cedures of the schools, we used passive parental consent, which means that par- ents could indicate if they did not want their child to participate in the study. A total of 327 parents agreed that their child could participate (participation rate 88.9%). We excluded children who did not complete the questionnaire because they were absent (n = 8), could not think of a hurtful incident (n = 10), did not understand one of the measures (n = 7), or had missing data on one of the main variables (n = 6). A total sample of n = 296 children completed all elements of the study (133 boys and 163 girls). Participants ranged in age from 9 to 13 years (Mage = 10.46 years, SDage = .61). Participants received a small gift in exchange for their voluntary participation.

Procedure

Participants were tested in their own classroom for one hour. We started with a sociometric instrument to assess participants’ popularity and preference status. Next, participants were asked to bring to mind a past incident in which they felt hurt by one of their classmates (for a similar procedure, see Chapters 2 and 3). Participants were asked to briefly describe what happened. An example descrip- tion was: “A few days ago I heard my best friend gossiping about me.” Participants were then asked to what extent they were friends with that specific classmate at the time of the offense from 1 (not at all) to 7 (very much), M = 3.44, SD = 2.08, and how severe they thought the offense was from 1 (not severe) to 7 (very severe), M = 4.97, SD = 1.62.

We proceeded by measuring participants’ self-reported forgiveness level. In cohort 2, we also included a behavioral measure of forgiveness. Finally, participants were thoroughly debriefed and thanked for their participation.7,8

Measures

Social status. To assess social status of the children in the classroom, participants

were asked to name classroom peers who were most popular, least popular, they liked most, and liked least. Unlimited nominations were used, capped at a maximum of six peers for each question. Both same- and other-sex choices were allowed but no self-nominations. To guarantee confidentiality of the nominations, participants entered code numbers instead of names for each question. A final score for popularity was calculated as the difference between the standardized most popular and least popular scores received and standardizing the resulting difference scores within classrooms. A final score for preference was calculated as the difference between the standardized liked most and liked least scores received, again standardizing the resulting difference scores within classrooms (for a similar approach, see Lansu & Cillessen, 2012).

Self-reported forgiveness. Self-reported level of forgiveness was measured

with a modified version of the Transgression-Related Interpersonal Motivation Scale (TRIM; McCullough et al., 1998, see also Chapter 3). Example items were: when I think back to what my classmate did to me, “I would like to take revenge”, and “I find it difficult to act in a friendly way toward him/her” (recoded). Participants indicated their answers on a 7-point scale (1 = totally disagree, 7 = totally agree). As in previous research assessing children’s self-reported forgiveness levels (Chapter 3), we used 9 of the original 12 items. The mean of the 9 items was our indicator of forgiveness; M = 4.96, SD = 1.41, α = .87.

Behavioral forgiveness. At least one hour after they had finished the question-

naire, participants’ forgiveness behavior was tested individually in a separate room at school. They were asked to bring to mind the offense they recalled in the first part of the study. Participants then received 10 lottery tickets with which a movie ticket could be won, and were asked to divide them between themselves and the offending peer. We reasoned that the number of tickets given to the offender reflected the child’s level of forgiveness toward the offender, and thus served as our indicator of forgiving behavior (M = 3.08, SD = 1.54; see also Chapter 3). The number of tickets given to the offender correlated positively with self-reported forgiveness of the offender, r = .24, p = .001.

Results

We examined the correlations between the variables for boys and girls separately. As can be seen in Table 4.1, self-reported level of forgiveness was significantly cor- related with popularity and preference for boys, but not for girls. These simple correlations are in line with the popularity-prosocial hypothesis: higher levels of 7 In the second cohort, we instructed half of the children to think back to a hurtful incident by a classmate

that is their friend, and the other half to think of an incident by a classmate that is not their friend. Participants were asked to indicate to what extent they were friends with the classmate at the time of the offense from 1 (not at all) to 7 (very much). To increase power, we merged the two data files together, and used the perceived friendship measure (i.e., manipulation check in cohort 2) as our measure of perceived friendship in subsequent analyses. Importantly, adding time of data collection as a factor to the analyses did not change the pattern of results.

8 This study was part of a larger data collection, in which we also assessed several other sociometric nominations (e.g., bully, victim, relational aggression), children’s executive control capacities, and narcissistic tendencies (see Chapter 3).

popularity were associated with more forgiveness, but only for boys. Notably, partial analyses demonstrated that the results did not change when controlling for perceived severity of the offense.

Table 4.1

Intercorrelations of Main Variables

Preference Popularity Self-reported _Forgiveness

boys girls boys girls boys girls

Preference - -

Popularity .40** .50** - -

Self-reported Forgiveness .28* .05 .30** -.02 - - Behavioral Forgiveness .12 -.07 .18† .04 .21† .28*

Note.† p < .10, * p < .05, ** p < .001.