Cited by 138Bullying, Victimization, and AggressionChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentEarly Childhood Education and Development

Concurrent and Longitudinal Relations between Children's Playground Behavior and Social Preference, Victimization, and Bullying

Boulton, Michael J·1999·Child Development

Abstract

Prior research with contrived play groups suggests that how children interact with one another can influence their social relationships, but few studies have been carried out to determine if this is the case in naturalistic settings. This study examined the concurrent and longitudinal links between four observational measures of 8- to 9-year-old children's (N = 89) playground behaviors/peer contacts (Alone, Conversation, Group Size, and Network) and three sociometric measures of their peer relationships (Social Preference, Bully, and Victim). The latter were assessed at 2 points within a school year, the first corresponding with the playground observations and the second 5 months later. Several of the concurrent correlations were found to be significant. For boys, Group Size was positively correlated with Bully Score and Social Preference Score, but negatively correlated with Victim Score; and time Alone was positively correlated with Victim Score. For girls, time Alone was positively correlated with Victim Score; Network was negatively correlated with Bully Score but positively correlated with Social Preference Score; and Group Size was positively correlated with Social Preference Score. The longitudinal analyses indicated that for boys, elevated levels of time Alone and, separately, Conversation, predicted the highest increases in Victim Score. For girls, low levels of time Alone predicted the sharpest increases in Social Preference Score. There was also some marginally significant evidence, p < .06, that among girls, high levels of time Alone predicted the greatest increases in Bully Score, and high levels of Conversation predicted the greatest increases in Social Preference Score. The theoretical and practical importance of these links between children's nonaggressive playground behaviors and their emerging peer relationships are discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/1467-8624.00068

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Boulton, M. J.
Affiliations
Keele University (GB)
Corresponding author
Boulton, Michael J
Venue
Child Development
Published
1999-07-01
Volume
70
Issue
4
Pages
944-954
ISSN
  • 0009-3920 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-8624
OpenAlex
W2150376647
Cited by
138
References
1
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 8
FWCI
4.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Child Development (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Bullying, Victimization, and Aggression
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
  • Social Sciences › Education › Early Childhood Education and Development
Keywords
peer relationships, social preferences, bullying, victimization, peer victimization, time alone, peer conversation, sociometric status, gender differences, children's peer interaction
MeSH terms
Child, Child Behavior Disorders, Psychology, Child, Choice Behavior, Female, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Peer Group, Play and Playthings, Sex Factors, Social Desirability, Social Perception, Time Factors, Crime Victims

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review