Cited by 354Bullying, Victimization, and AggressionChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentChild and Animal Learning Development

Children's Social Constructions of Popularity

Lease, A. Michele, Kennedy, Charlotte A., Axelrod, Jennifer L.·2002·Social Development

Abstract

Children's social constructions of popularity were assessed with perceived popularity nominations (i.e., ‘Who are the most [least] popular students?’) in a sample of 487 fourth, fifth, and sixth grade elementary school students. Correlational and group‐difference analyses demonstrated that perceived popularity is moderately and positively related to sociometric popularity and social dominance. Perceived popular girls were viewed as prosocial, bright, and in possession of the expressive equipment of popularity (i.e., attractiveness and spending power); perceived popular girls who were not well‐liked (i.e., sociometrically popular) had these characteristics as well but also were above‐average (>.5 SD) on social aggression and social visibility (i.e., cool and athletic). Perceived popular boys were reported to be socially visible (i.e., cool and athletic) and with low levels of social withdrawal; perceived popular boys who were not well‐liked had these characteristics but also were reported to be socially aggressive, attractive, and to possess spending power. Finally, group comparisons revealed that perceived popularity, either alone or in combination with sociometric popularity, is accompanied by more social prerogatives (i.e., admiration, leadership, social control) than sociometric popularity alone. It was argued that being perceived as popular is a key determinant of social power in peer groups of older elementary school students.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/1467-9507.00188

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?

  • A high sociometric peer status is a significant predictor of well-being as well as academic success and effective intra- and interpersonal functioning later in life.

    “A high sociometric peer status is a significant predictor of well-being as well as academic success and effective intra- and interpersonal functioning later in life (Lease, Kennedy, Axelrod, 2002; Kiuru i in., 2020; Wentzel, Jablansky, Scalise, 2021).”
  • A number of studies have consistently confirmed correlations between children's social intelligence and their sociometric peer status.

    “Therefore, it is only natural that a number of studies have consistently confirmed correlations between the social intelligence of children and their sociometric peer status (Lease, Kennedy, Axelrod, 2002; Meijs et al., 2010).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lease, A. M., Kennedy, C. A., & Axelrod, J. L.
Affiliations
  • University of Georgia (US)
  • University of Maryland, College Park (US)
Venue
Social Development
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2002-01
Volume
11
Issue
1
Pages
87-109
ISSN
  • 0961-205X (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-9507
OpenAlex
W1969165780
Cited by
354
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 59 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 25 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 21 · 2012: 18
FWCI
11.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Social Development (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 › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Child and Animal Learning Development
Keywords
perceived popularity, sociometric popularity, social dominance, social power, peer nominations, social aggression, social visibility, social withdrawal, gender differences, elementary school students, peer groups

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