14 research outputs found

    Is It Bad to Be Good? An Exploration of Aggressive and Prosocial Behavior Subtypes in Adolescence

    Full text link
    Research in aggressive behavior development has distinguished between proactive (i.e., intended to achieve an instrumental goal) and reactive (i.e., emitted as an emotional response to provocation) subtypes of aggression. A similar distinction has not been made with regard to prosocial behavior. In this study, subtypes of both aggressive and prosocial behavior and their relation to aggression-supporting social cognitions were examined in a sample of 250 early and middle adolescents. Adolescents completed behavior rating scales and a measure of their beliefs about the acceptability of responding aggressively. Principal components analysis identified 3 subtypes of aggressive and prosocial behavior: aggressive, prosocial, and proactive prosocial. Proactive prosocial behavior was positively correlated with aggression and aggression-supporting beliefs, while other prosocial behavior was negatively correlated with these constructs. Findings are discussed in the context of aggressive behavior development and with regard to traditional views of prosocial behavior as altruistic.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/45296/1/10964_2004_Article_478822.pd

    Connections between attitudes, group norms, and behavior in bullying situations

    No full text
    Contains fulltext : 64018.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)We examined the connections between attitudes, group norms, and students’ behaviour in bullying situations (bullying others, assisting the bully, reinforcing the bully, defending the victim, or staying outside bullying situations). The participants were 1220 elementary school children (600 girls and 620 boys) from 48 school classes from Grades four, five, and six, i.e., 9–10, 10–11, and 11–12 years of age. Whereas attitudes did predict behaviour at the student level in most cases (although the effects were moderate after controlling for gender), the group norms could be used in explaining variance at the classroom level, especially in the upper grades. The class context (even if not classroom norms specifically) had more effect on girls’ than on boys’ bullying-related behaviours
    corecore