5.4.1: Our Social Relationships with Friends and Peers

Learning Objectives

• Describe the nature of friendships and peer status in middle childhood.
• Understand the influences of peers and friends in adolescence.

Friendship and Peer Status

Colton and Parker have been best friends since first grade. Now in fifth grade, they are inseparable. Colton always helps Parker when she needs extra help with schoolwork, and Parker always helps Colton when he is feeling shy and nervous around other kids. Despite their differences, Parker and Colton have a lot in common; they grew up on the same street and both enjoy skateboarding, eating pizza, and telling jokes.

Lately, Parker has had problems with a bully at school, who has been teasing her about her long braids. Colton has helped Parker stand up to the bully, supporting her when she’s feeling down. Thanks to their friendship, Parker has felt more resilient and braver.

A new streaming channel in which skateboarders try tricks on logs has captivated the two friends. Parker really wants to go skateboarding in the woods after school, but Colton is nervous that skating on logs and tree stumps might be more dangerous than the videos let on. He’s trying to come up with a way to convince his friend to stay at the skate park where there are other people around.

In this section, you learn more about friendships, bullying, and the role of the media in the elementary school years.

Friendship in Middle Childhood (6 years old to 11 years old)

Our capacity to form and develop friendships changes in middle childhood in some fundamental ways. Proximity and similarity are still important criteria for friends, but similarity is no longer superficial or based on just demographic characteristics (Afshordi & Liberman, 2021). In middle childhood, children begin to select friends with shared interests (Afshordi & Liberman, 2021), like favorite music, shows, and hobbies, but they also rely on social cognition and relationship skills. Children who display high levels of empathy, altruism, and cooperation tend to attract more friends and playmates. A child who is outwardly aggressive or extremely withdrawn and shy may be overlooked as a possible friend or struggle with loneliness. Friendships in middle childhood can be particularly helpful in the goal of finding acceptance and inclusion and learning the rules of social and emotional engagement (Parker & Gottman, 1989).

Friendships grow in middle childhood as children begin to focus more on having positive, reciprocal friendships and developing trust with varying degrees of friendship (Maunder & Monks, 2019). Friendship has several functions: (1) it provides children with a sense of self-worth and value, (2) it is associated with learning new social and emotional skills and finding new interests, (3) it promotes resilience in children by providing companionship and support, and (4) it influences development through shared cultures and experiences (Bukowski, 2001; Parker & Gottman, 1989). Children who have at least one close friend at this age are more likely to display confidence, emotional stability, and positive coping techniques (Maunder & Monks, 2019). They also tend to have high levels of academic achievement, cognitive focus, and problem-solving and perspective-taking skills. Finally, children with more friends are more likely to experience high peer status, peer acceptance, and wider opportunities for play and inclusion (Maunder & Monks, 2019).

One way for researchers to assess peer status is to use research on peer social evaluations (van den Berg et al., 2015). Children receive a copy of their class roster and are asked to select all the classmates with whom they like spending time, and those with whom they dislike spending time. Researchers then count the number of positive and negative nominations given to each child and sort them into four categories: popular, rejected, controversial, or peer-neglected (Figure 5.10). (The classifications are not shared with the children and are used only for research purposes.) Children who receive many positive and few negative nominations are considered to be popular or well-liked in their classroom. In this context, a popular child describes a child who receives multiple positive nominations indicating that they are liked by many children. These children tend to display more prosocial and cooperative behaviors, have a high level of empathy, and apply positive coping techniques.

Figure 5.10 Researchers can gain understanding into peer status as an element of social development through studies that anonymously have children provide input about which classmates they most enjoy spending time with (Bukowski et al., 2012). (CC BY 4.0; Rice University & OpenStax)

Those who receive few positive and many negative nominations are considered to be a rejected child by their peer group and might be actively excluded, victimized, bullied, and ridiculed. Sometimes rejected children display high levels of aggression and hostility or low levels of cooperation. Or they may have a visible disability, a developmental delay, or poor hygiene or belong to an ethnic, linguistic, or gender minority. Children who experience peer rejection are at risk of developing higher levels of depression, loneliness, and isolation (Sakyi et al., 2015). However, when rejected children have at least one good reciprocal friendship, they may be protected from these negative risks (Pedersen et al., 2007). Peer rejection that is the result of bias and social exclusion can also be prevented through creating a positive and inclusive school environment (Lynn Mulvey et al., 2017).

Children with a high number of both positive and negative nominations are well-liked in their peer group but strongly disliked by some others. They are considered a controversial child and may be more likely to use relational aggression to covertly intimidate some classmates while behaving cooperatively with others (van den Berg et al., 2015). They may be class leaders who are noticed by everyone, trendsetters, outspoken children, class clowns, or those whom some aspire to be like.

Children who receive a smaller number of both positive and negative nominations are categorized as an average child, which puts them in the largest category. Finally, children with a low number of positive and negative nominations are considered to be a peer-neglected child. They are more likely to be shy, quiet, and withdrawn from the peer group. Although they do not have bullies or enemies, they do not have friends or close allies either. They may be new to a school or have a high level of absenteeism and thus be relatively unknown by others. Early research speculated that children who experience peer neglect may also feel higher levels of anxiety, loneliness, and isolation (Newcomb et al., 1993). However, more recent research has found that peer-neglected children may actually look much more like the average or popular children and are simply nominated less (Marinucci et al., 2023; Muñoz–Silva et al., 2020).

Parents play a role in establishing the way their children are perceived by their peers. Essentially, children generalize to their peers the social behaviors they learned with their parents. In particular, the parenting style children experience influences their relationships with their peers (Rose et al., 2022). Children who have authoritarian parents (strict and harsh) tend to be less popular than children with authoritative parents (warm and responsive). The quality of friendships in children has also been linked to the quality of attachment they had with their parents earlier in life (Wong et al., 2020). Children who had a secure attachment with a parent have more positive peer relationships (Delgado et al., 2022).

Friends and Peers in Adolescence (approximately 10 years old to 18 years old)

As children become adolescents, they usually begin spending more time with their peers and less time with their families, and these peer interactions are increasingly unsupervised by adults. Children's notions of friendship often focus on shared activities, whereas adolescents' notions of friendship increasingly focus on intimate exchanges of thoughts and feelings. During adolescence, peer groups evolve from primarily single-sex to mixed-sex. Adolescents within a peer group tend to be similar to one another in behavior and attitudes, which has been explained as a function of homophily, that is, adolescents who are similar to one another choose to spend time together in a "birds of a feather flock together" way. Adolescents who spend time together also shape each other's behavior and attitudes.

Figure \(\PageIndex{1}\). Image source.

Peers can serve both positive and negative functions during adolescence. Negative peer pressure can lead adolescents to make riskier decisions or engage in more problematic behavior than they would alone or in the presence of their family. For example, adolescents are much more likely to drink alcohol, use drugs, and commit crimes when they are with their friends than when they are alone or with their family. One of the most widely studied aspects of adolescent peer influence is known as deviant peer contagion (Dishion & Tipsord, 2011), which is the process by which peers reinforce problem behavior by laughing or showing other signs of approval that then increase the likelihood of future problem behavior.

However, peers also serve as an important source of social support and companionship during adolescence, and adolescents with positive peer relationships are happier and better adjusted than those who are socially isolated or have conflictual peer relationships.

Crowds are an emerging level of peer relationships in adolescence. In contrast to friendships, which are reciprocal dyadic relationships, and cliques, which refer to groups of individuals who interact frequently, crowds are characterized more by shared reputations or images than actual interactions (Brown & Larson, 2009). These crowds reflect different prototypic identities, such as jocks or brains, and are often linked with adolescents' social status and peers' perceptions of their values or behaviors.

The Role of Friends in Emerging and Early Adulthood

Summarizing his review of the research on friendship development, Jeffrey Arnett concluded that “friendships change over the course of emerging adulthood, and such changes are more closely linked to life transitions (e.g., transition to college, starting a career, changing romantic status, transition to parenthood) than to age-related developmental changes. Perhaps changes in friendships also reflect changing needs in terms of support for developmental tasks” (Arnett, 2015, p. 224).

“Change” here can refer to changes in the number of friends we have, who they are, and the qualities, functions, and outcomes of our friendships. Arnett’s conclusion is consistent with Selman’s classic theory of friendship development (1980), which asserts that friendships in emerging adulthood evolve to autonomous interdependence. In this stage, friends appreciate and respect each other’s individuality and identity but also rely on each other for the support needed to achieve their own goals. For example, when asked about personal goals such as academic success or physical fitness, college students indicated they would rather spend time with friends who help them to achieve those goals than friends who actually share the characteristics they hope to acquire (Slotter & Gardner, 2011; Aron et al., 2022). In other words, friendships in early adulthood.

Research finds that young adult friendships can promote and create interconnections among the three elements of self-determined behavior-- relatedness, autonomy, and competence (Figure 12.12). Young adults who perceive that their friends will be there to help them when they need it have higher self-esteem (Langheit & Poulin, 2024). Stronger friendship attachments in emerging adulthood are also positively associated with progress on developmental tasks, such as identity exploration, taking on responsibility for others, and becoming more independent (Schnyders et al., 2018). Self-determination also predicts positive well-being, and close and supportive friendships in early adulthood reduce feelings of loneliness and increase happiness (Demir et al., 2015; Nicolaisen & Thorsen, 2017).

Figure 12.12 Relatedness, autonomy, and competence are all positively affected by strong friendships in early adulthood. (Credit: Modification of "two woman lying on bed" by Disabled and Here, CC BY 4.0)

Friendships become deeper in early adulthood, characterized by increasing intimacy and trust, and they often provide more social support than family during times of change (Arnett, 2007; Lee & Goldstein, 2016; Miething et al., 2017; Schnyders et al., 2018). Friends confide in and seek advice from each other about their dating and sex lives, which they might not be comfortable discussing with family members (Carlson, 2014; Tagliabue et al., 2018; Astle et al., 2022). Friendship networks also expand in young adulthood (Wrzus et al., 2013). For example, many first-year college students rely more on their friends from home during their first semester, but research finds that making new friends within the new roles and settings of early adulthood increases a sense of belonging and promotes long-term well-being (Paul & Brier, 2001; Strayhorn, 2018; Patel & Ploughman, 2024).

High-quality and supportive relationships with friends during early adulthood are predictive of psychological and physical health, regardless of race or ethnicity (Szkody et al., 2021). However, the social networks of those who are White and educated include a larger proportion of friends than among those who are Black or have less education (Ajrouch et al., 2024). People of color are more likely to have kin-friends, meaning family members such as cousins who function in friendship roles. Friendships tend to form within the settings of our daily routines such as school, work, and community, and the college experience in particular may expand the proportion of friends (compared to family) in a person’s social network (Ballard, 2019; Plummer et al., 2016). (Figure 12.13).

Figure 12.13 High-quality and supportive relationships with friends during early adulthood are predictive of psychological and physical health. (Credit: Modification of "three women and two men standing and smiling" by canweallgo/Unsplash CC0)

However, college students from low socioeconomic backgrounds often feel like outsiders in a college setting and are unsure how to get involved in campus activities where they might form supportive new friendships (Rubin, 2012; Peteet et al., 2015). In fact, having friends with higher perceived socioeconomic status actually increased feelings of incompetence in low-socioeconomic students (MacInnis et al., 2019). In contrast, young adults who form close friendships with someone of a different racial or ethnic identity report that, while the depth and intimacy of these friendships took longer to build than with adults of their own identity, the resulting closeness increased their understanding of diverse perspectives. Young adults are more likely than middle-aged adults to have a close friendship with someone of a different racial or ethnic identity, and being a person of color and having a higher education increases the likelihood of having a cross-ethnic friendship (Plummer et al., 2016).

References

Afshordi, N., & Liberman, Z. (2021). Keeping friends in mind: Development of friendship concepts in early childhood. Social Development, 30(2), 331–342. doi.org/10.1111/sode.12493

Alanko, D. (2023). The health effects of video games in children and adolescents. Pediatric Review, 44(1), 23–32. doi.org/10.1542/pir.2022-005666

American Psychological Association (2024) Social media and the internet. https://www.apa.org/topics/social-media-internet

Anderson, L. R., Hemez, P. F., & Kreider, R. M. (2022). Living arrangements of children: 2019 [Report]. U. S, Census Bureau. https://www.census.gov/content/dam/C...mo/p70-174.pdf

Armitage, R. (2021). Bullying during COVID-19: the impact on child and adolescent health. British Journal of General Practice, 71(704), Article 122. https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp21X715073

Baumrind D. (1991). Effective parenting during the early adolescent transition, In P. A. Cowan & E. M. Herington (Eds.), Advances in Family Research Series: Family Transitions (pp. 111–163). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. doi.org/10.4324/9780203772393-11

Benito–Gomez, M., Williams, K. N., McCurdy, A., & Fletcher, A. C. (2020). Autonomy–supportive parenting in adolescence: Cultural variability in the contemporary United States. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 12(1), 7–26. doi.org/10.1111/jftr.12362

Björkqvist, K. (2018). Gender differences in aggression. Current Opinion in Psychology, 19, 39–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.03.030

Blakely–McClure, S. J., & Ostrov, J. M. (2016). Relational aggression, victimization and self–concept: Testing pathways from middle childhood to adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 45, 376–390. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-015-0357-2

Buehler, C. (2020). Family processes and children's and adolescents' well‐being. Journal of Marriage and Family, 82(1), 145–174. doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12637

Buist, K. L., & Vermande, M. (2014). Sibling relationship patterns and their associations with children’s competence and problem behavior. Journal of Family Psychology, 28(4), 529–537. doi.org/10.1037/a0036990

Bukowski, W. M. (2001). Friendship and the worlds of childhood. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 91, 93–105. doi.org/10.1002/cd.7

Bukowski, W. M., Cillessen, A. H. N., & Velásquez, A. M. (2012). Peer ratings. In B. Laursen, T. D. Little, & N. A. Card (Eds.), Handbook of developmental research methods (pp. 211–228). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

Cardoso–Leite, P., Buchard, A., Tissieres, I., Mussack, D., & Bavelier, D. (2021). Media use, attention, mental health and academic performance among 8 to 12 year old children. PLOS ONE, 16(11), Article e0259163. https://doi.org/10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0259163

Chen, P., Rao, S.– Y., Zhang, W., Jiang, Y.– Y., Xiang, Y., Xiang, N. X., Li, Y.– Z., Zhu, H.– Y., Su, Z., Cheung, T., Zhang, Q., Ng, C. H., & Xiang, Y.– T. (2024). Mental health status among children and adolescents in one-child and multichild families: a meta–analysis of comparative studies. Current Opinion in Psychiatry, 37(3), 147–161. doi.org/10.1097/yco.0000000000000935

Child and Adolescent Health Measurement Initiative. (2024). 2021-2022 National Survey of Children’s Health (NSCH) data query. Data Resource Center for Child and Adolescent Health supported by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), Maternal and Child Health Bureau (MCHB). Retrieved from https://www.childhealthdata.org/brow...ts?q=10523&r=1

Common Sense Media (2022). Infographic. The Common Sense Census: Media Use by Tweens and Teens, 2021. https://www.commonsensemedia.org/res...and-teens-2021

Costa, P. A., Tasker, F., & Leal, I. P. (2021). Different placement practices for different families? Children's adjustment in LGH adoptive families. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, Article 649853. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.649853

Craig, W. M., & Pepler, D. J. (2007). Understanding bullying: From research to practice. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne, 48(2), 86–93. doi.org/10.1037/cp2007010

Damaske, S., Bratter, J. L., & Frech, A. (2017). Single mother families and employment, race, and poverty in changing economic times. Social Science Research, 62, 120–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2016.08.008

Delgado, E., Serna, C., Martínez, I., & Cruise, E. (2022). Parental attachment and peer relationships in adolescence: A systematic review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(3), Article 1064. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19031064

Eirich, R., McArthur, B. A., Anhorn, C., McGuinness, C., Christakis, D. A., & Madigan, S. (2022). Association of screen time with internalizing and externalizing behavior problems in children 12 years or younger: a systematic review and meta–analysis. JAMA Psychiatry, 79(5), 393–405. doi.org/10.1001%2Fjamapsychiatry.2022.0155

Evangelio, C., Rodriguez–Gonzalez, P., Fernandez–Rio, J., & Gonzalez–Villora, S. (2022). Cyberbullying in elementary and middle school students: A systematic review. Computers & Education, 176, Article 104356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104356

Evans, S. C., Dίaz, K. I., Callahan, K. P., Wolock, E. R., & Fite, P. J. (2021). Parallel trajectories of proactive and reactive aggression in middle childhood and their outcomes in early adolescence. Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology, 49, 211–226. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-020-00709-5

Fallesen P., & Ghler M. (2019). Family type and parents’ time with children: Longitudinal evidence for Denmark. Acta Sociologica, 63, 000169931986852. dx.doi.org/10.1177/0001699319868522

Fish, J.N., McInroy, L.B., Paceley, M.S. et al. (2020). “I’m kinda stuck at home with unsupportive parents right now”: LGBTQ youths’ experiences with Covid–19 and the importance of online support. Journal of Adolescent Health, 67(3), 450–452. https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.jadohealth.2020.06.002

Fuentes, M. C., Garcia, O. F., Alcaide, M., Garcia–Ros, R., & Garcia F. (2022). Analyzing when parental warmth but without parental strictness leads to more adolescent empathy and self-–oncept: evidence from Spanish homes. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 821. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1060821

Gaffney, H., Ttofi, M. M., & Farrington, D. P. (2021). What works in anti–bullying programs? Analysis of effective intervention components. Journal of School Psychology, 85, 37–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2020.12.002

Gao, G. (2015). Americans’ ideal family size is smaller than it used to be. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from http:/www.pewresearch.org/fact-bank/2015/05/08/ideal-size-of-the-american-family

Gates, G. J. (2015). Marriage and family: LGBT individuals and same–sex couples. The Future of Children, 25, 67–87. https://doi.org/10.1353/foc.2015.0013

Geerts–Perry, A. T., Riggs, S. A., Kaminski, P. L., & Murrell, A. (2021). Psychological well–being and family functioning in middle childhood: The unique role of sibling relational dynamics. Journal of Family Issues, 42(12), 2965–2985. doi.org/10.1177/0192513X21993191

Gladden, R. M., Vivolo–Kantor, A. M., Hamburger, M. E., & Lumpkin, C. D. (2014). Bullying surveillance among youths: Uniform definitions for public health and recommended data elements, version 1.0. [Report]. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/2159..._21596_DS1.pdf

Golombok, S., & Tasker, F. (2015). Socioemotional development in changing families. In M. H. Bornstein (Ed.), Handbook of Child Psychology and Developmental Science (pp. 1–45). Wiley. doi.org/10.1002/9781118963418

Hedderson, M. M., Bekelman, T. A., Li, M., Knapp, E. A., Palmore, M., Dong, Y., Elliott, A. J., Friedman, C., Galarce, M., Gilbert–Diamond, D., Glueck, D., Hockett, C. W., Lucchini, M., McDonald, J., Sauder, K., Zhu, Y., Karagas, M. R., Dabelea, D., Ferrara, A., & Environmental Influences on Child Health Outcomes Program (2023). Trends in screen time use among children during the COVID-19 pandemic, July 2019 through August 2021. JAMA Network oOpen, 6(2), Article e2256157. doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.56157

Hill, D., Ameenuddin, N., Chassiakos, Y. L. R., Cross, C., Radesky, J., Hutchinson, J., Boyd, R., Mendelson, R., Moreno, M. A., Smith, J., & Swanson, W. S. (2016). Media use in school-aged children and adolescents. American Academy of Pediatrics, 138(5), Article e20162592. doi.org/10.1542/peds.2016-2592

Human Rights Watch (2020, November 5) Bullying, violence common in schools worldwide: Governments should urgently tackle education–related abuses. https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/11/05/...ools-worldwide

Huston, A. C., & Ripke, M. N. (Eds.). (2006). Developmental contexts in middle childhood: Bridges to adolescence and adulthood. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511499760

Jensen, T. M., & Sanner, C. (2021). A scoping review of research on well‐being across diverse family structures: Rethinking approaches for understanding contemporary families. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 13(4), 463–495. doi.org/10.1111/jftr.12437

Jiménez, T. I., Estévez, E., Velilla, C. M., Martín–Albo, J., & Martínez, M. L. (2019). Family communication and verbal child–to–parent violence among adolescents: The mediating role of perceived stress. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(22), 4538. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16224538

Kovess–Masfety, V., Keyes, K., Hamilton, A., Hanson, G., Bitfoi, A., Golitz, D., Koç, C., Kuijpers, R., Lesinskiene, S., Mihova, Z, Otten, R., Fermanian, C., & Pez, O. (2016). Is time spent playing video games associated with mental health, cognitive and social skills in young children?. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 51(3), 349–357. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-016-1179-6

Lansford, J. E. (2022). Annual research review: Cross–cultural similarities and differences in parenting. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, and Allied Disciplines, 63(4), 466–479. doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.13539

Lee, H., Ryan, L. H., Ofstedal, M. B., & Smith, J. (2021). Multigenerational households during childhood and trajectories of cognitive functioning among US older adults. The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, 76(6), 1161–1172. doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbaa165

Li, D., & Guo, X. (2023). The effect of the time parents spend with children on children's well-being. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, Article 1096128. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1096128

Li, M., Cai, M., Zhong, H., & Liu, H. (2021). Comparisons of academic achievements of one–only children vs. children with siblings in China. Current Psychology: A Journal for Diverse Perspectives on Diverse Psychological Issues, 40, 5658–5671. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-020-01263-5

Lohbeck, A. (2022). Reactive and proactive aggression among children and adolescents: a latent profile analysis and latent transition analysis. Children, 9(11), Article 1733. https://doi.org/10.3390/children9111733

Long, Y., & Li, Y. (2020). The longitudinal association between social status insecurity and relational aggression: Moderation effects of social cognition about relational aggression. Aggressive Behavior, 46(1), 84–96. doi.org/10.1002/ab.21872

Lynn Mulvey, K., Boswell, C., & Zheng, J. (2017). Causes and consequences of social Exclusion and peer rejection among children and adolescents. Report on Emotional & Behavioral Disorders in Youth, 17(3), 71–75. www.researchgate.net/publica...nd_Adolescents

Marinucci, M., Pancani, L., & Riva, P. (2023). Exploring the peer status prototypes: A large–scale latent profile analysis on high‐school students from four European countries. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 64(1), 40–52. doi.org/10.1111/sjop.12863

Maunder, R., & Monks, C. P. (2019). Friendships in middle childhood: Links to peer and school identification, and general self-worth. The British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 37(2), 211–229. doi.org/10.1111/bjdp.12268

Muñoz–Silva, A., De la Corte de la Corte, C., Lorence–Lara, B., & Sanchez–Garcia, M. (2020). Psychosocial adjustment and sociometric status in primary education: Gender differences. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, Article 607274. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.607274

Murray–Close, D., Lent, M. C., Sadri, A., Buck, C., & Yates, T. M. (2024). Autonomic nervous system reactivity to emotion and childhood trajectories of relational and physical aggression. Development and Psychopathology, 36(2), 691–708. https://doi.org/10.1017/s095457942200150x

Nagata, J. M., Ganson, K. T., Iyer, P., Chu, J., Baker, F. C., Gabriel, K. P., Garber, A. K., Murray, S. B., & Bibbins–Domingo, K. (2022). Sociodemographic correlates of contemporary screen time use among 9-and 10-year-old children. The Journal of Pediatrics, 240, 213–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpeds.2021.08.077

National Institute of Child Health and Human Development – Director’s Corner. (2023, February). Understanding how digital media affects child development. https://www.nichd.nih.gov/about/org/...opment-feb2023

National Institute of Child Health and Human Development – Director’s Corner. (2024, March). Elucidating the effects of digital media on children.https://www.nichd.nih.gov/about/org/od/directors_corner/prev_updates/effects-digital-media-children-march2024

Newcomb, A. F., Bukowski, W. M., & Pattee, L. (1993). Children's peer relations: a meta-analytic review of popular, rejected, neglected, controversial, and average sociometric status. Psychological bulletin, 113(1), 99. https://doi.org/ 10.1037/0033-2909.113.1.99

Oliveira, C. B., Pinto, R. Z., Saraiva, B. T., Tebar, W. R., Delfino, L. D., Franco, M. R., Silva, C. C. M., & Christofaro, D. G. (2020). Effects of active video games on children and adolescents: A systematic review with meta‐analysis. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports, 30(1), 4–12. doi.org/10.1111/sms.13539

Olweus, D., & Limber, S. P. (2018). Some problems with cyberbullying research. Current Opinion in Psychology, 19, 139–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.04.012

Paine, A. L., Hashmi, S., Howe, N., Johnson, N., Scott, M., & Hay, D. F. (2022). “A pirate goes nee-nor-nee-nor!” Humor with siblings in middle childhood: A window to social understanding?. Developmental Psychology, 58(10), 1986–1998. doi.org/10.1037/dev0001403

Parker, J. G., & Gottman, J. M. (1989). Social and emotional development in a relational context: Friendship interaction from early childhood to adolescence. In T. J. Berndt & G. W. Ladd (Eds.), Peer relationships in child development (pp. 95–131). John Wiley & Sons. www.researchgate.net/publica...to_adolescence

Patterson, C. J. (2017). Parents' sexual orientation and children's development. Child Development Perspectives, 11(1), 45–49. doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12207

Pedersen, S., Vitaro, F., Barker, E. D., & Borge, A. I. (2007). The timing of middle–childhood peer rejection and friendship: Linking early behavior to early–adolescent adjustment. Child Development, 78(4), 1037–1051. doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.01051.x

Pepler, D., & Cummings, J. (2016). Bullying in early childhood. In O. N. Saracho (Ed.), Contemporary Perspectives on Research on Bullying in Early Childhood Education (pp. 35–59). IAP Information Age Publishing. psycnet.apa.org/record/2016-61788-003

Pew Research Center (2018). Teens: Social Media & Technology. Retrieved from https://www.pewresearch.org/internet...chnology-2018/

Pitchford, N. J., & Outhwaite, L. A. (2019). Secondary benefits to attentional processing through intervention with an interactive maths app. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, Article 2633. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02633

Radesky J. S., Weeks, H. M., Ball, R., Schaller, A., Yeo, S., Durnez, J., Tamayo–Rios, M., Epstein, M., Kirkorian, H., Coyne, S., & Barr, R. (2020) Young children's use of smartphones and tablets. Pediatrics, 146(1), Article e20193518. doi.org/10.1542/peds.2019-3518

Raley, R. K., & Sweeney, M. M. (2020). Divorce, repartnering, and stepfamilies: A decade in review. Journal of Marriage and Family, 82(1), 81–99. doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12651

Reid Chassiakos, Y. L., Radesky, J., Christakis, D., Moreno, M. A., Cross, C., Hill, D., Ameenuddin, N., Hutchinson, J., Levine, A., Boyd, R., Mendelson, R., & Swanson, W. S. (2016). Children and adolescents and digital media. Pediatrics, 138(5), Article e20162593. doi.org/10.1542/peds.2016-2593

Richter, A., Adkins, V., & Selkie, E. (2022). Youth perspectives on the recommended age of mobile phone adoption: Survey study. JMIR Pediatrics and Parenting, 5(4), Article e40704. https://doi.org/10.2196/40704

Rose, A. J., Borowski, S. K., Spiekerman, A., & Smith, R. L. (2022). Children's friendships. In P. K. Smith & C. H. Hart (Eds.), The Wiley‐Blackwell handbook of childhood social development (3rd ed., pp. 487–502). Wiley Blackwell. doi.org/10.1002/9781119679028.ch26

Rueger SY, Malecki CK, Pyun Y, Aycock C, & Coyle S (2016). A meta–analytic review of the association between perceived social support and depression in childhood and adolescence. Psychological Bulletin, 142, 1017–1067. doi.org/10.1037/bul0000058

Sakyi, K. S., Surkan, P. J., Fombonne, E., Chollet, A., & Melchior, M. (2015). Childhood friendships and psychological difficulties in young adulthood: An 18‐year follow‐up study. European Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 24(7), 815–826. https://doi.org/10.1007%2Fs00787-014-0626-8

Schacter, H. L., & Margolin, G. (2019). The Interplay of Friends and Parents in Adolescents' Daily Lives: Towards A Dynamic View of Social Support. Social development (Oxford, England), 28(3), 708–724. doi.org/10.1111/sode.12363

Scherger, S. (2023). 6 tips to reduce children’s screen time. Speaking of Health: Mayo Clinic Health Systems. Retrieved from www.mayoclinichealthsystem.o...ns-screen-time

Swit, C. S., & Slater, N. M. (2021). Relational aggression during early childhood: A systematic review. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 58, Article 101556. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2021.101556

Taylor, Z. E., & Conger, R. D. (2017). Promoting strengths and resilience in single–mother families. Child Development, 88(2), 350–358. doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12741

Teuber, Z., Tang, X., Sielemann, L., Otterpohl, N., & Wild, E. (2022). Autonomy–related parenting profiles and their effects on adolescents’ academic and psychological development: A longitudinal person–oriented analysis. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 51(7), 1333–1353. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-021-01538-5

Tripathi, M., & Mishra, S.K. (2020). Screen time and adiposity among children and adolescents: a systematic review. Journal of Public Health (Berlin), 28, 227–244. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10389-019-01043-x

Tucker, C. J., Finkelhor, D., & Turner, H. (2019). Patterns of sibling victimization as predictors of peer victimization in childhood and adolescence. Journal of Family Violence, 34(8), 745–755. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-018-0021-1

UNESCO. (2019). Behind the numbers: Ending school violence and bullying. https://www.unicef.org/documents/beh...e-and-bullying

UNICEF. (2019). UNICEF poll: More than a third of young people in 30 countries report being a victim of online bullying. https://www.unicef.org/press-release...nline-bullying

US Census. (2023). Several generations under one roof. Retrieved from https://www.census.gov

van den Berg, Y. H., Burk, W. J., & Cillessen, A. H. (2015). Identifying subtypes of peer status by combining popularity and preference: A cohort-sequential approach. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 35(8), 1108–1137. doi.org/10.1177/0272431614554704

Waller, R., Hyde, L. W., Klump, K. L., & Burt, S. A. (2018). Parenting is an environmental predictor of callous–unemotional traits and aggression: A monozygotic twin differences study. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 57(12), 955–963. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2018.07.882

Weidmann, R., Atherton, O. E., & Robins, R. W. (2024). Bidirectional associations between self-esteem and relational aggression from 5th to 11th grade. European Journal of Personality, 38(2), 123–140. doi.org/10.1177/08902070221141581

Wong, T. K., Konishi, C., & Cho, S. B. (2020). Paternal and maternal attachment: A multifaceted perspective on adolescents’ friendship. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 29(1), 217–226. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-019-01552-z

Yue, X., & Zhang, Q. (2023). The association between peer rejection and aggression types: A meta–analysis. Child Abuse & Neglect, 135, Article 105974. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2022.105974

Footnotes

• 3This study (UNESCO, 2019) uses the terms "Europe" and "North America."
• 4This study (Human Rights Watch, 2020) uses the term "LGBT."
• 5this study (Nagata et al., 2022) uses the terms "Black," "White," "Asian," "Native American," "Hispanic," "Latinx," "Latino/Hispanic," and "Latinx/Hispanic."