Understanding Popularity in the Peer System

Much research has focused on youth who are rejected by peers; who engage in negative behavior, in cluding aggression; and who are at risk for adjustment problems. Recently, researchers have become increasingly interested in high-status youth. A distinction is made be tween two groups of high-status youth: those who are genuinely well liked by their peers and engage in pre dominantly prosocial behaviors and those who are seen as popular by their peers but are not necessarily well liked. The latter group of youth is well known, socially central, and emulated, but displays a mixed profile of prosocial as well as aggressive and manipulative behaviors. Research now needs to address the distinctive characteristics of these two groups and their developmental precursors and consequences. Of particular interest are high-status and socially powerful aggressors and their impact on their peers. The heterogeneity of high-status youth complicates the understanding of the social dynamics of the peer group, but will lead to new and important insights into the developmental significance of peer relationships. KEYWORDS?peer relations; popularity; social status Developmental psychologists continue to be interested in the social structure and dynamics of the peer group in childhood and adolescence. Peer status is an important construct in their research. In the past, much of this research has been driven by a concern for children and adolescents with low social status, who operate at the fringe of the peer system and may be categorized as rejected. As a result, much has been learned about the ori gins of peer rejection and its effects on development (Asher & Coie, 1990). More recently, researchers have become increas ingly interested in peer-group members with high social status. Interestingly, high-status children and adolescents do not form a uniform group. For example, consider the profiles of two eighth graders, Tim and Jason. Tim is well liked by his peers. He is genuinely nice to others and helps out when needed. Tim is athletic but does not use his physical abilities to aggress against others. In fact, Tim tends to avoid even verbal confrontations when possible, pre ferring instead to find prosocial ways of solving conflicts. Compared with Tim, Jason is better known by his classmates but he is not necessarily well liked. Even peers who do not know him personally know who he is. Many of Jason's classmates imitate his style of dress and taste in music and would like to be better friends with him so they could be part of the in-crowd. Jason can be very nice to other kids but can also intimidate them when provoked or angry, or can manipulate social situations to his advantage. Developmental psychologists know a fair amount about youth like Tim. Youth who are well liked by others are categorized by peer-relations researchers as sociometrically popular. Socio metrically popular youth generally display high levels of pro social and cooperative behavior and low levels of aggression (Rubin, Bukowski, & Parker, 1998). But although develop mentalists would refer to Tim as sociometrically popular, he is not the type of person most youth would consider one of their "popular" peers. They think of popular peers as those who, like Jason, are well known, socially central, and emulated (Adler & Adler, 1998). In recent years, developmentalists have begun to study more seriously youth like Jason, referring to them as perceived popular, rather than sociometrically pop ular. Although evidence suggests that perceived-popular youth have aggressive traits in addition to prosocial ones, youth aspire to be popular like Jason more than they aspire to be like Tim (Adler & Adler, 1998). Accordingly, it is important to consider seriously the meaning and function of these divergent forms of popularity. In this article, we consider how perceived-popular youth are similar to and different from sociometrically popular youth. Specifically, we discuss: (a) the conceptualization and meas urement of sociometric and perceived popularity, (b) the social behavior of sociometrically and perceived-popular youth, and (c) the adjustment outcomes for the two groups. We conclude by outlining important directions for future research. Address correspondence to Antonius H.N. CiUessen, Department of Psychology, University of Connecticut, 406 Babbidge Rd., U-1020, Storrs, CT 06269-1020; e-mail: antonius.ciUessen@uconn.edu. 102 Copyright ? 2005 American Psychological Society Volume 14?Number 2 Antonius H.N. CiUessen and Amanda J. Rose SOCIOMETRIC VERSUS PERCEIVED POPULARITY Traditionally, the study of peer relations has focused on socio metric status, how well liked (or rejected) youth are by their peers (Asher & Coie, 1990; Coie & CiUessen, 1993). Several decades of research have provided data on the behavioral and adjustment correlates of sociometric status (Kupersmidt & Dodge, 2004). This research provides a crucial foundation for understanding peer relations. Recently, researchers have begun to examine perceived popularity as a unique but equally important dimension. Edu cational sociologists have long recognized the social power (influence over others) of perceived-popular youth as evidenced by qualitative descriptions of them by their peers (Adler & Adler, 1998; Eder, 1985). Only in the past 5 to 10 years have researchers begun to study perceived popularity with quanti