On the microfoundations of the link between classroom social norms and behavioral development

This article focuses on the link between social norms and behavioral development as presented in research on norms regarding bullying and aggression. The aim is to present a conceptual framework for how classroom norms may explain children's decisions to defend others or refrain from defending. Norms emerge from group consensus about what is appropriate in given social circumstances, and can also shape, constrain, and redirect behavior at the individual level. The study of norms has gained much attraction in peer relation research, and has turned attention to group-level processes, often defined at the classroom level, which create and sustain shared meanings that impact behavioral and social adjustment. Norm conformity, pluralistic ignorance, and power balance are presented as potential micro-level mechanisms for the link between classroom popularity (or rejection) norms and defending behavior. Directions for further research are discussed, including the need to assess and test the microfoundations directly, examine gender-specific versus common norms, focus on competing classroom norms, test developmental effects of norms, examine the impact of teachers on social norms, and pay attention to the influence of personal norms

Parent-Adolescent Discrepancies Regarding Adolescents' Peer-Related Loneliness:Associations with Adolescent Adjustment

Because loneliness is a subjective experience, it is often examined using self-reports. Yet, researchers have started to use other-reports to examine loneliness. As previous research suggests that discrepancies between self- and other views might have important implications for adolescents' mental health, the current study examines discrepancies in multi-informant reports on adolescents' loneliness in relation with prosocial behavior, aggression, and adolescents' parent-related loneliness. The sample consisted of 374 mother-adolescent dyads and 318 father-adolescent dyads (41.80% male, M (age) = 15.67 years, SD = 1.25). Results indicated that informants used different reference points to assess adolescents' peer-related loneliness, but were otherwise comparable. Moreover, informant discrepancies were associated with greater adolescents' reported parent-related loneliness. The current study did not provide evidence that discrepancies were related to prosocial or aggressive behavior. The current study adds to the notion that other-reports on loneliness show substantial convergence with self-reports. In addition, this study indicates that the discrepancy between other- and self-reports on loneliness holds valuable information for adolescent socio-emotional adjustment.</p

Changes in loneliness and coping strategies during COVID-19

The social distancing measures implemented to slow the spread of COVID-19 impacted many aspects of people's lives. Previous research has reported negative consequences of these measures for people's psychological well-being, and that people differed in the impact on their psychological well-being. The present study aimed to describe the different coping strategies Dutch people used to deal with these measures and to link these strategies to loneliness. In addition, the study aimed to examine mean-level changes in loneliness and to explore individual differences in loneliness change. We used data from 2009 participants of a panel study of representative Dutch households. We assessed coping strategies used during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in May 2020 and examined changes in loneliness between October 2019 (before COVID-19) and May 2020 (during the first wave of COVID-19). First, results showed that most people employed specific coping strategies. The most frequently used social strategies were chatting and (video)calling; the most frequently used non-social strategies were going outside, doing chores, watching TV, reading and self-care. Second, people who used more coping strategies reported lower levels of loneliness. Third, analyses revealed an average increase in loneliness between October 2019 and May 2020. Fourth, we observed two significant interaction effects, showing a stronger positive link between the number of social coping strategies and initial loneliness levels among those with a partner or living with others than for those who were single or lived alone. Yet, no moderating effects on changes in loneliness were found: people using more coping strategies did not differ in loneliness changes from people using fewer coping strategies. Together, findings suggest that loneliness increased in the Netherlands during the first phase of COVID-19 and that, while people's coping strategies were related to loneliness levels, they did not buffer against loneliness increases

Are victims of bullying primarily social outcasts? Person-group dissimilarities in relational, socio-behavioral, and physical characteristics as predictors of victimization

Existing literature has mostly explained the occurrence of bullying victimization by individual socioemotional maladjustment. Instead, this study tested the person-group dissimilarity model (Wright et al., Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50: 523–536, 1986) by examining whether individuals’ deviation from developmentally important (relational, socio-behavioral, and physical) descriptive classroom norms predicted victimization. Adolescents (N = 1267, k = 56 classrooms; Mage = 13.2; 48.7% boys; 83.4% Dutch) provided self-reported and peer-nomination data throughout one school year (three timepoints). Results from group actor–partner interdependence models indicated that more person-group dissimilarity in relational characteristics (fewer friendships; incidence rate ratios [IRR]T2 = 0.28, IRRT3 = 0.16, fewer social media connections; IRRT3 = 0.13) and, particularly, lower disruptive behaviors (IRRT2 = 0.35, IRRT3 = 0.26) predicted victimization throughout the school year

The social cognitions of victims of bullying:A systematic review

The nature of the relation between victimization of bullying and social information processing is unclear. The prevention hypothesis predicts that victims focus more on negative social cues to prevent further escalation. In contrast, the reaffiliation hypothesis predicts that victims focus more on positive social cues to restore the social situation. Alternatively, the desensitization hypothesis predicts that victims become increasingly insensitive to social cues because of a numbing effect. This systematic review examines evidence for these three hypotheses on the relation between victimization and social information processing. The focus is on two phases of social information processing: encoding of social information (attending to and registration of social cues) and interpreting social information (making sense of multiple social cues simultaneously). These phases are important prerequisites for behavioral responses. The systematic search led to the inclusion of 142 articles, which were published between 1998 and 2021 and received quality assessment. The studies included on average about 1600 participants (range: 14–25,684), who were on average 11.4 years old (range: 4.1–17.0). The topics covered in the literature included attention to and accurate registration of social cues, peer perception, attribution of situations, empathy, and theory of mind. The results were most often in line with the prevention hypothesis and suggested that victimization is related to a negative social-cognitive style, as shown by a more negative perception of peers in general and more negative situational attribution. Victimization seemed unrelated to abilities to empathize or understand others, which contradicted the desensitization hypothesis. However, desensitization may only occur after prolonged and persistent victimization, which to date has been sparsely studied. The reaffiliation hypothesis could not be thoroughly examined, because most studies did not include positive social cues. In bullying prevention, it is important to consider the negative social information processing style related to victimization, because this style may impede the development of positive social interactions

Social Needs and Happiness:A Life Course Perspective

Both the fulfilment of affection, status, and behavioral confirmation needs and their role in happiness may differ along the adult lifespan. We examined age-graded differences in (a) the fulfilment of the need for affection, status, and behavioral confirmation, (b) disharmonious profiles of need fulfillment (e.g., high affection but low status), and (c) the associations between these needs and happiness. Data from 11,406 Dutch respondents (age range 18–87 (M = 44.82, SD = 14.62), 67% female) were collected via hoegekis.nl and categorized over six age groups (early, young, middle-aged and late adults, young-old and oldest-old). Age-graded differences in social need fulfilment and their link to happiness were examined using regression analyses. Need fulfillment profiles were identified with LCA cluster analyses. Age-graded differences in social need fulfilment were virtually absent (Cohen’s d = 0.20 or smaller) and their link with happiness was stable across the age groups. Social need fulfilment profiles were harmonious as people reported either low, middle, or high need fulfilment in general, irrespective of age. The idea that different social needs are more important in different phases of adult life received only weak support in our data. No strategic investment in specific social needs was observed (no substitution-effects).People typically differed in their capacities to fulfil their affection, status, and behavioral confirmation needs in general, regardless of age. The implications of these results for the social production function theory of wellbeing and socioemotional selectivity theory are outlined in the discussion

Lower Sensitivity to Happy and Angry Facial Emotions in Young Adults with Psychiatric Problems

Many psychiatric problem domains have been associated with emotion-specific biases or general deficiencies in facial emotion identification. However, both within and between psychiatric problem domains, large variability exists in the types of emotion identification problems that were reported. Moreover, since the domain-specificity of the findings was often not addressed, it remains unclear whether patterns found for specific problem domains can be better explained by co-occurrence of other psychiatric problems or by more generic characteristics of psychopathology, for example, problem severity. In this study, we aimed to investigate associations between emotion identification biases and five psychiatric problem domains, and to determine the domain-specificity of these biases. Data were collected as part of the 'No Fun No Glory' study and involved 2,577 young adults. The study participants completed a dynamic facial emotion identification task involving happy, sad, angry, and fearful faces, and filled in the Adult Self-Report Questionnaire, of which we used the scales depressive problems, anxiety problems, avoidance problems, Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) problems and antisocial problems. Our results suggest that participants with antisocial problems were significantly less sensitive to happy facial emotions, participants with ADHD problems were less sensitive to angry emotions, and participants with avoidance problems were less sensitive to both angry and happy emotions. These effects could not be fully explained by co-occurring psychiatric problems. Whereas this seems to indicate domain-specificity, inspection of the overall pattern of effect sizes regardless of statistical significance reveals generic patterns as well, in that for all psychiatric problem domains the effect sizes for happy and angry emotions were larger than the effect sizes for sad and fearful emotions. As happy and angry emotions are strongly associated with approach and avoidance mechanisms in social interaction, these mechanisms may hold the key to understanding the associations between facial emotion identification and a wide range of psychiatric problems

Justify your alpha

Benjamin et al. proposed changing the conventional “statistical significance” threshold (i.e.,the alpha level) from p ≤ .05 to p ≤ .005 for all novel claims with relatively low prior odds. They provided two arguments for why lowering the significance threshold would “immediately improve the reproducibility of scientific research.” First, a p-value near .05provides weak evidence for the alternative hypothesis. Second, under certain assumptions, an alpha of .05 leads to high false positive report probabilities (FPRP2 ; the probability that a significant finding is a false positive

Justify your alpha

In response to recommendations to redefine statistical significance to p ≤ .005, we propose that researchers should transparently report and justify all choices they make when designing a study, including the alpha level