Childreen's Perr Cultures

8/3/2019 Childreen's Perr Cultures

1/25

Children's Peer Cultures

Author(s): William A. Corsaro and Donna EderReviewed work(s):Source: Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 16 (1990), pp. 197-220Published by: Annual ReviewsStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2083268 .

Accessed: 05/11/2011 09:21

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Annual Reviews is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toAnnual Review of

Sociology.

http://www.jstor.org
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=annrevshttp://www.jstor.org/stable/2083268?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/2083268?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=annrevs


2/25

Annu. Rev. Sociol. 1990. 16:197-220Copyright? 1990 by Annual Reviews Inc. All rights reserved

CHILDREN'SPEER CULTURESWilliamA. Corsaro and Donna EderDepartmentof Sociology, IndianaUniversity, Bloomington, Indiana 47405KEY WORDS: children, socialization, peers, culture, adolescents

INTRODUCTIONThe Importanceof Peer Culture in Theories of ChildDevelopmentand SocializationDespite its long historyas an important oncept in sociological theory, therehave been few studiesof children'speerculture.By peerculture,we meanastableset of activitiesorroutines,artifacts,values, and concerns that childrenproduceand share n interactionwithpeers. Mostresearchon peer culturehasfocused on adolescent peer values, interests, and identities (Coleman 1961,Cusick 1972, Simmons & Blyth 1987). Recently, however, detailedethnographic tudies have been madeof interactiveprocesseswithin the peercultureof preschoolandelementaryschool children Berentzen1984, Corsaro1985, Davies 1982, Fine 1987, Goodwin 1989, Mandell 1986, Rizzo 1989,Thorne 1986), as well as of preadolescentsand adolescents (Eder 1985,Everhart1983, Lesko 1988, Willis 1981, Wulff 1988). In this chapterweexamine these and other studies: (a) to describeactivities, routines, values,and concerns within the peer culturesof children from the preschool yearsthroughadolescence; (b) to identifyspecific themes andchangesin children'speercultures andhow these are relatedto demandsfromthe adultworld;and(c) to develop the theoretical mplicationsof the researchfor an interpretivetheory of childhood socialization.Before turningto these issues, we will first consider the place of peer

1970360-0572/90/0815-0197$02.00


3/25

198 CORSARO & EDERculturein various theoriesof child development andsocialization. Our pur-pose is to identify the individualisticbias of most theories and to stress theimportanceof peer culturefor the developmentof an interpretive heory ofchildhood socialization.BEHAVIORIST THEORIES Until the mid-1960s most theories of child de-velopment were behaviorist, with an emphasis on modeling and reinforce-ment as the key mechanismsin humanlearning. Given the power of adultsand their control over valued culturalresources, it is not surprising thatbehaviorists stress the importanceof adult inputsto children. Children arerelegated to a passive role, and socialization is seen as a unilateralprocesswith children shapedand moldedby adults. Thus,research rom this perspec-tive often involves attempts o discoverand measureconsistencies and varia-tions in adult socialization practices. The peer groupplays a minor role in thesocialization process initially; but with growing autonomyfrom adults inadolescence, the peer group can become an importantsource of reinforce-ment.Overall, the behavioristapproachplaces little emphasison social interac-tion and culture. Its individualisticbasis andemphasison simplistic processes(imitation and reinforcement)to explain complex phenomenon has comeundercriticismin recentyears. In fact, some behaviorists see Bandura1986)have recently incorporated ognitive elements into their theories of learningand development. One result of the questioningof the narrownessof thebehaviorist position has been a definite trend toward the acceptanceof aconstructivist approach n developmental psychology.CONSTRUCTIVIST THEORIES Best represented in the cognitive devel-opmental theoryof Piaget (1950, 1968), the constructivistapproachstressesthe child's active role, arguing that children interpret, organize, and useinformation romtheenvironmentand, in theprocess, acquireadult skills andknowledge. Several importantdevelopmentshave accompanied the generalacceptanceof the constructivistposition. First, numerous scholars have ex-tended Piaget's work on intellectual development to the study of socialcognition, suggesting thatchildren often interact with others in response todisequilibria (Damon 1977, Turiel 1983, Youniss 1980). The increasingconcern with children's social cognition has led to numerous studies ofchildren's social relations and friendships.In fact, some constructivist heo-rists (Youniss 1980) now arguethatpeers may be as importantas adultsforchildren's acquisitionof social skills and knowledge.Although these developmentsare clearly in the right direction, the con-structivistapproach ike behaviorismstill relies on what Harre(1986) terms"the doctrine of individualism."For example, understandingof children's


4/25

CHILDREN'S EERCULTURES 199interactionsremains at an interpersonalevel. Interpersonal lignments (e.g.adult-child versus peer) are compared and contrastedto show how theydifferentially affect individualdevelopment. But how interpersonal elationsreflect cultural systems, or how children,throughtheir participation n com-municative events, become part of and in turn collectively reproducethesecultural patternsis not seriously considered.This adherenceto individualism s also seen in the overwhelmingconcernwith the endpointof development. For example, work on social cognitionfocuses on identifying stages in the abstractconception of friendship.Chil-dren's conceptions are elicited through clinical interviews, and their un-derdevelopedconceptionsarecompared o those of competentadults(Damon1977, Youniss 1980). Yet, constructivists ail to study what it is like to be orhave a friend in children's social worlds or how developing conceptions offriendship get embeddedin peer culture.INTERPRETIVE THEORIES One importantoutcomeof the acceptance of theconstructivist approachin developmentalpsychology has been the recenttranslationand interpretation f the theoreticalwork of the Soviet psycholo-gist, Vygotsky (Vygotsky 1978, Wertsch1986). Vygotsky's views extend theconstructivist emphasis on children's activities beyond acknowledgingthatthey are interactive events to emphasizing that such events are basic toproducing and maintainingculturalsystems. Although Vygotsky providedafoundationfor a more culturally orientedview of socialization, much of hisresearch focused on individual development.Vygotsky's views have, however, influenced a number of scholars whoargue that theories of socialization must breakfree from the individualisticdoctrine that sees social developmentsolely as the privateinternalizationofadult skills and knowledge (Bruner 1986, Cicourel 1974, Corsaro 1988,Valsiner 1987, Wertsch1989). These theoristsoffer an interpretiveapproachwhich maintains that childhood socialization is a collective process thatoccurs in a publicrather han a privaterealm. In this view, it is "notjust thatthe child must makehis knowledgehis own, but that he mustmakeit his ownin a community of those who share his sense of belonging to a culture"(Bruner 1986:127). The approachis essentially interpretive, stressing thatchildren discovera world endowed withmeaningandhelp to shapeandsharein their own developmentalexperiencesthroughtheirparticipationn every-day cultural routines (Corsaro& Rizzo 1988, Schieffelin & Ochs 1986).Althoughthe degree of children'sparticipationn such routinesis affectedby cultural values and increases with age and experience, the interpretiveview calls into questionthe linearmodel of socialization that sees childhood-only as a period of apprenticeshipthat prepareschildren for competentmembershipn adultsociety. The interpretive pproachviews developmentas


5/25

200 CORSARO& EDERreproductiveratherthan linear. From this perspective, children enter into asocial nexus and, by interactingand negotiatingwith others, establish un-derstandings hatbecome fundamental ocial knowledgeon which they con-tinuallybuild. Thus, the interpretivemodel refines the notion of stages byviewing developmentas a productive-reproductiverocessof increasingden-sity and a reorganization f knowledgethatchangeswith children's develop-ing cognitive andlanguageabilities and with changes in their social worlds.A majorchange in children'sworlds is their movementoutside the family.By interactingwith playmatesin organizedplay groups and nurseryschools,children produce the first in a series of peer cultures in which childhoodknowledge and practices are graduallytransformed nto the knowledge andskills necessary to participatein the adult world. A major aim of the in-terpretiveapproachs thedocumentation f peerculturesand thedevelopmentof a better understandingof their crucial role in childhood socialization.Peer Culturesas Autonomousand Creative Social SystemsChildren's participation n cultural routines is an essential element of thesocializationprocess. In adult-child nteraction,children are often exposed tosocial knowledge they do not fully grasp. However, because of the predict-able participant tructureof culturalroutines, interactionnormallycontinuesin an orderly fashion, and ambiguitiesare often left to be pursued over thecourse of children's interactive experiences. A frequent pattern involveschildren's exposure to social knowledge and communicative demands ineveryday activities with adults which raise confusions, uncertainties,fearsand conflicts that are later reproducedand readdressed n the activities androutines making up peer culture(Corsaro 1985).However, the productionof peer culture is a matter neither of simpleimitation nor of direct appropriation f the adult world. Childrencreativelyappropriatenformation from the adult world to producetheir own uniquepeer cultures. Such appropriations creative in that it both extendsor elabo-rates peer culture(transforms nformation rom the adult world to meet theconcerns of the peer world) and simultaneouslycontributes o the reproduc-tion of the adultculture.Thus, children'speercultureshave anautonomyandirreducibility (Willis 1981) that make them worthy of documentationandstudy in their own right.We referto this processof creativeappropriation s interpretivereproduc-tion in line with Giddens' notion of the duality of social structure.In histheoryof structurationGiddensarguesthat "the structural ropertiesof socialsystems are both medium and outcome of the practices they recursivelyorganize" (1984:25). It is in this sense that the interpretiveapproachdiffersfrom other reproductive heories of socialization and education(Bowles &Gintis 1976, Bourdieu& Passeron 1977). These theories have focused pri-


6/25

CHILDREN'SPEER CULTURES 201marily on access to cultural resourcesand differentialtreatmentby teacherswhich leads to socializationand education outcomesin line with the prevail-ing class system. Inthisdeterministicview the "actuallyvaried, complex, andcreativefield of humanconsciousness, culture,andcapacityis reducedto thedry abstractionof structuraldetermination"Willis 1981:204).In contrast, in the interpretiveview structure s seen as both constrainingand enabling. The process is interpretive n the sense that children do notmerely individually internalize the external adult culture. Rather childrenbecome a partof adult cultureand contribute o its reproduction hrough heirnegotiations with adults and their creative productionof a series of peercultures with other children.

A majortask for socialization theoristsis the identificationof the centralelementsof peerculturesthroughout hildhood and adolescence.Once identi-fied these elements can then be analyzed in terms of their meaning, theirorganizationalsignificance within peer culture, and for their contribution othe reproductionof the adultworld. We now turn to a review of studies thathave begun to address these issues.PEER CULTUREIN EARLY CHILDHOODThe Social Worldsof YoungChildrenAlthough children's sense of belonging to a peer culture is supportedandextendedin a wide rangeof social-ecologicalsettings, the directstudyof peerinteraction s relatively recent, with most studiesconfinedto a single setting(usually the school classroom or playground).Therehave, however, been afew studies in the home, neighborhood,and community.Researchon the sharingand transmissionof peer culturethrough nterac-tion with siblings or playmatesin the home setting is rare. The pioneeringresearchby Dunn (1988, also see Schutzeet al 1986) on the sibling relation-ship providessome clues to how the widerpeer cultureis first introduced oyoung childrenby older siblings. Recentcross-cultural esearchon languagesocialization is useful in estimating the role of siblings (Eisenberg 1986,Miller 1986).In addition to interaction with siblings, young children normally haveextendedcontact with same age peers in the home. Althoughsuch interactiveexperiences vary across cultural, social class, and ethnic groups, for mostchildren hese interactionsnvolve fairlybriefperiodsof play withone or twoother children under close parental supervision. Mueller (1972) hasdocumentedhow object-centeredcontacts(cooperativeplay with toys) serveas a basis for the emergence of social interchangeduringthe second year.With furtheranguage developmentthese interchangesareexpanded o sharedroutines among toddlers who have a history of interaction and may


7/25

202 CORSARO & EDERserve as the beginningsof friendshipanda peer culture(Budwig et al 1986,Vandell & Mueller 1980).Studies of peer play and culturein the neighborhoodand community aremorenumerous.While Heath's(1983) impressivestudyof language, life, andwork in communitiesand classrooms documents young children's introduc-tion to peer culture in neighborhoods in small town and rural settings,Goodwin's (1989) ethnographyof elementaryschool children sheds light onchildren'sproductionof peercultureon thestreetsof Philadelphia.A growingnumberof studieslook atpeerinteractionandculture n the neighborhoodandplaygroundoutside the United States. The classic descriptionsof children'sfolklore by Opie & Opie (1959, 1969) andGomme (1964) generated nterestin children's social worlds in Europe. Recently we have seen a movementtowardmore analyticworkon children's cultures with important esearchbyBerentzen (1989) on Norwegian children's peer culture in the home andneighborhood, and Katriel's (1985; 1987) studies of peer routines in theeveryday life of Israeli children.With a majority of young children now attending child care and earlyeducationprograms n most industrialsocieties, there is increasingconcernaboutthe effects of suchexperienceson children's lives. As a result,we haveseen several studies of children's play and culture in preschool settings(Berentzen 1984, Corsaro 1985, 1988, Corsaro & Rizzo 1988, Mandell1986). Finally, there have been additional studies of elementary schoolchildren'speer culturein the classroom andplayground(Best 1983, Davies1982, Hanna 1988, Rizzo 1989, Sluckin 1981, Thorne 1986).Overall, recent research has identified specific processes, routines, con-cerns, andvalues in children's cultures. The studiessuggest thatpeer cultureemerges, develops, and is maintained and refined across the various socialsettings making up children's worlds. We now turn to a review of thesefindings and an interpretation f their importancefor peer culture.Social Relations and Peer ConcernsAlthougha wide rangeof featuresof the peerculture of young children havebeen identified, two central themes consistently appear:childrenmake per-sistent attemptsto gain control of their lives and to share that control witheach other. In the preschool years thereis an overridingconcernwith socialparticipationand with challenging and gaining controlover adultauthority.Once childrenmove into elementaryschool such challengingof adultauthor-ity persists,but there is also a gradualmovementtowardsocial differentiationwithin the peer group. This differentiation s markedby negotiations andconflictsas childrenattempt o gaincontrolover the attitudesandbehaviorsofpeers.


8/25

CHILDREN'SEERCULTURES 203SHARING AND FRIENDSHIP A consistent finding in studies of young chil-dren's peer interaction s that solitary play is rare and that childrenexpendconsiderable time and energy in establishing and maintainingpeer contacts(Corsaro1985, Rizzo 1989, Rubin et al 1976). Gaining access to playgroups,maintaining oint action, and making friends are complex processes for youngchildren. Gaining access is particularlydifficult in preschool settings sinceyoung children tendto protect shared space, objects, andongoing play itselffrom the intrusionsof others. Corsaro (1985) argues that this tendency isdirectly relatedto the fragilityof peer interaction, hemultiple possibilities ofdisruption n most preschool settings, and the children's desire to maintaincontrol over shared activities. Several studies (Corsaro 1979, Dodge et al1983, Forbes et al 1982) have documented the complex "access strategies"children develop in theirpersistent attemptsto overcome resistance to entrybids. These strategiesreflect children's acquisitionof essential social skillsfor entry into and participation n peer culture.Having gained access to play groups, children discover that it is in thecourse of sharedplay that the meaning of the concepts of friend andpeerarise. For example, Corsaro(1981) found thatnurseryschool children usetheirdeveloping conceptionof friendship o buildsolidarityand mutualtrust,often marking the importanceof shared activity with the phrase "We'refriends, right?" On the other hand, while friendshipserves these specificintegrative unctionsfornurseryschool children,Corsaronotedfew examplesof enduring riendshipsbased on therecognitionof personalcharacteristics fplaymates. However, this finding does not deny that such friendships mayexist among preschoolchildren in the home andneighborhood.Clearlythereis a need for studies of children's friendshipsin such settings.Rizzo (1989) reports that first grade children appearedto have an in-ternalized concept of friendship which served multiple functions in peerrelations. Specifically, Rizzo found that first grade children "attempted odetermine he existence of friendshipby comparing he internalconceptwithspecific featuresof interactionswith frequentplaymates,to act in accordancewith this concept when with their friends, and to object when their friendsfailed to live up to theirexpectations" Rizzo 1989:105). Rizzo arguesfurtherthatdisputes resultingfrom suchobjectsnotonly helpedthe childrenobtain abetterunderstanding f whattheycouldexpect fromeach other as friends,butalso broughtaboutintrapersonaleflectionresulting n the children'sdevelop-mentof unique insightinto theirown actionsand roles as friends(see Davies1982 and Goodwin 1982a for similarfindings regardingdisputesand friend-ship).Several studies have identified routines that stress communal sharinginpeer culture:Goodwin's (1985) study of negotiations duringthe game of"jumprope";Mishler(1979) on "tradingandbargaining"of six year olds at


9/25

204 CORSARO& EDERlunchtime in elementary school; and Katriel's (1987) analysis of ritualizedsharingamong Israelichildren.Althoughthe identificationof such routines scentral in studies of peer culture, we only have space to discuss Katriel'sstudy in some detail.The sharing routineKatriel identified (xibudim)usually occurred on theway home from school:

A groupof five childrenapproaches hefalafel [snackor treat] stand. One exclaims "I'mbuying." Anothercounters, "Bexibadim!Bexibadim!"in a melodious chant. He gets afalafel portion,holds it in his hands,and all take a bite inturn,with a gay clamor. Afterthethirdone has eaten, the buyer mutters, "Hey, beraxmanut" with pity) and offers it to thelast child. He then eats his falafel, walking along with his friends. (Katriel 1987:309)As the exampleillustrates,the routinehas a definitestructure:a) openingorannouncementof an intention to buy a treat by a particular child; (b)acknowledgmentby other children usually involving the exclamation "Be-xibuidim!bexibudim!"utteredin a melodious chant; (c) thepurchase of thetreat by the proposer;(d) the offering and sharingof the treat, with eachaccompanyingchild taking a small bite; and (e) the optional recycling of asecond roundof sharing.As we can see from theexample, the sharingroutineinvolves delicatenegotiation n that, as Katrielhas noted, the bite size has tobe regulatedso thateverybody gets a share with abouthalf of the treat eft forthe owner(e.g. the owner'srequestforpitybeforeofferingthe lastbite, in theexample). This and other aspects of the routinesupportKatriel's insightfulinterpretationof the routine as a "symbolic sacrifice in which one's self-interest and primordialgreed are controlledand subordinated o an idea ofsociality shapedby particular ulturalvalues, such as equalityandgeneralizedreciprocity"(1987:318).CONTROLAND AUTONOMY Children'sattempts o challenge adult author-ity andgaincontrolover their lives are amajoraspectof peerculturefrom theearliestyears. For example, Dunn (1988) reportsa majorincreasein amuse-ment at forbiddenacts between 14 and 24 monthsin children she studiedinhome settings. Laughingat such misdeeds was also often shared with oldersiblings as a challenge to parentalauthority.Once children enter child careand educationsettings, they quickly developa strong group identity (Corsaro1985, Rubin 1980) that is strengthenedby challenging and even mockingteachersand other adultcaretakers Best 1983, Corsaro1985, Davies 1982).Additionally,childrenproducea wide set of innovativeroutinesandpracticesthat indirectly challenge and circumventadult authority (Berentzen 1989,Corsaro 1990, Davies 1982, Hanna 1988, Nasaw 1985).Corsaro(1985, 1990), in line with Goffman (1961), has referredto suchroutinesas secondaryadjustments.A frequentsecondaryadjustmentnvolves


10/25

CHILDREN'SEERCULTURES 205the use of subterfuge.For example in both the United States and Italy therewas a rulethat prohibited or severely restricted) hebringingof toys or otherpersonalobjectsfrom home to nurseryschool. Such objectswere attractive ootherchildren because they were differentfrom the everydaymaterials n theschool. As a result, the teachers were constantly settling disputes aboutsharingthe personal objects. Therefore, the rule specified that such objectsshouldnot be brought o school, andif they were, theymustbe stored n one'slocker until the end of the day. In both the Americanand Italian schools thatCorsaro studied, the childrenattempted o evade this ruleby bringingsmallpersonal objects that they could easily conceal in their pockets. Particularfavoriteswere toy animals,Matchboxcars, sweets, andchewing gum. Sweetswere a preferredchoice becausethe child andpeers could share the forbiddenobjects and thengo on to consume the evidence, often with teachers close athand.The teachers often overlook these violations because the natureof thesecondaryadjustmentsoften eliminates the organizationalneed to enforce therule. The children share and play with smuggled personal objects sur-reptitiouslyto avoid detectionby the teachers.If the childrenalways playedwith personalobjects in this fashion, there wouldbe no conflict and hence noneed for the rule. Thus, "in an indirectway the secondary adjustmenten-dorses the organizationalneed for the rule"(Corsaro1990:23).Finally, children attempt to gain control over fears, confusions, andcuriosities from the adultworld throughtheirparticipationn numerousplayroutines, rituals, and games (Corsaro1985, Garvey 1984, Goodwin 1985,1988, Gottman1986). Corsaro(1988, Corsaro& Heise 1989) has identifiedthe structureand meaning of one such play routine in the peer culture ofAmericanand Italianchildren. The routine("approach-avoidance")nvolvesthe identificationof a threateningagentor monster,the carefulapproach,andthe escape from the monster after an attack ensues.The routinehas two key features.First,the threatened hildrenhave a greatdeal of control because they initiate and recycle the routine throughtheirapproach, and they have a reliable means of escape (home base) in theavoidancephase. Second, in the productionof the routinethe children sharein the building tension, excitement of the threat, and relief andjoy of theescape. Overall, approach-avoidancedemonstrateshow childrencope withreal fears by incorporatinghem into peer routinesthey produceand control.Several cross-cultural tudiesof children'splay (Schwartzman1978, Barlow1985) reportvariantsof the approach-avoidanceoutine, suggestingthattheroutinemay be a universal featureof peer culture.CONFLICT AND SOCIAL DIFFERENTIATION While social participationandfriendship are central elements of peer culture, there is a clear patternof


11/25

206 CORSARO & EDERincreased differentiationandconflict in peer relationsthroughoutchildhood.The firstsign of social differentiations increasinggender separation.Gendersegregationbegins in preschool (Berentzen 1984) and becomes so dramaticnelementaryschool that"it is meaningfulto speakof separategirls' andboys'worlds"(Thorne 1986:167). Studies of these separateworlds show thatboysinteractin larger groups (Lever 1976), engage in more aggressive and com-petitive play (Best 1983, Goodwin 1980ab), and frequently organize theiractivities and relations aroundorganized sports (Fine 1987, Lever 1976,Thorne & Luria 1986).Thorne, however, argues that much of the research tends to exaggeratedifference, and that the studies "ignore similarities, with little theoreticaleffort to integrate indingsof both similarityanddifference:(1986:170). She(1986, 1989; Thorne& Luria 1986) offers a social contextualapproach hatstresses variation n cross-gendercontactsor "borderwork,"ravellingin theworld of the other sex (e.g. "tomboys"), and situationsof easeful cross-gender interaction.Thorne's work along with recent researchby Goodwin(1980ab, 1985, 1989) and Hughes (1988) challenges many earlier findingsregardingthe lack of conflict and competitionin girls' interactionsand thesimple structureof girls' peer play.

This recent researchon conflict in girls' peerinteraction eflectsa growinginterest in the role of conflict in children's friendships and peer culture(Shantz 1987, Shantz & Hobart 1989). Studies of conflict in peer culturechallenge the assumption that such behavior is inherently disruptive anddisorderly, demonstratinghatconflicts anddisputes providechildrenwith aricharena orthe developmentof language, interpersonal nd social organiza-tion skills and knowledge (Goodwin & Goodwin 1988).Although preschool children frequently quarrelover possession of playmaterialsandentryinto play groups, they are also capableof highly complexargumentsand debates regardingthe natureof fantasy play and claims oropinionsabouttheir social andphysicalworlds(Corsaro& Rizzo 1988, 1990,Eisenberg& Garvey 1981, Genishi & Di Paolo 1982, Pontecorvo & Orsolini1989). Research on peer conflict among elementaryschool children clearlyshows how disputesare a basic means forconstructing ocial order,cultivat-ing, testing, and maintaining friendships, and developing and displayingsocial identity (Boggs 1978, Davies 1982, Fine 1987, Goodwin 1980ab,1982a, Goodwin & Goodwin 1988, Katriel 1985, Maynard 1985, Rizzo1989).An especially impressive example of research on children's disputeroutines s Goodwin's(1980a) analysisof gossip disputes amongblack femalepreadolescents. Unlike the direct competitive disputes of males (Goodwin1982a, Labov 1972), black females frequently engage in gossip disputesduring which absent parties are evaluated. The airing of such grievances


12/25

CHILDREN'S PEER CULTURES 207frequentlyculminatesin he-said-she-saidconfrontions n which one girl (A)challenges another girl (B) aboutwhat B told a third girl (C) about A.Goodwin's analysis specifies the complex linguistic embeddingstructuresthat thechildrenuse in such confrontations o ordera field of events, negotiateidentities, and to construct social order. The gossip routine is importantbecause it is inappropriateo insult, command, or accuse others openly in thegirls' peer culture. Thus, the he-said-she-saidroutine provides "an eventthroughwhich complaintsaboutothers may be aired and charactermay begenerated" Goodwin 1980a:688).Overall, this review indicates the existence of a rich peer cultureamongyoung children. From the first years of life, children collectively produceinnovative peer cultures that play a centralrole in the socialization process.The review also demonstrates he importanceof studyingsocializationexperi-ences from the children's perspective by directly entering their everydayworlds.PEER CULTUREIN ADOLESCENCEPeer RelationsStudiesof adolescent culturein school settings consistently reportthatbeingwith friends is the most salientaspectof school life for most students(Cusick1972, Everhart1983, Willis 1981). This is largelybecausefriendshipgroupsprovidestudents with the opportunities o engage in interactions hatprovidethe basis of theirculture. Through hese interactionsyouth develop theirowninterpretationsof significant meanings while they produce humorous andotherplayful routineswhich become central to their microcultures Everhart1983, Willis 1981, Fine 1987, Wulff 1988).

During adolescence, best friendships are also increasingly valued as asourceof mutual ntimacy. Manyadolescentsreport hattheirbest friendshipsare characterizedby acceptance,understanding, elf-disclosure, and mutualadvice. Close friendshipsprovideadolescentswith an importantopportunityfordeveloping greaterself-knowledge througha processof mutualreflection.In contrast, parentsare perceived as being less acceptingand more likely toact as experts or authorities. Since these factors are likely to impede theprocess of mutual reflection, adolescents tend to discuss their problems,feelings, fears, and doubts with best friends rather hanparents (Youniss &Smollar 1985).The importanceof mutualintimacy and openness in friendshipincreasesduring adolescence, often replacing the importanceof friendship choicesbased on popularity Youniss& Smollar1985). Loyaltyandcommitmentalsobecome more salient in later adolescence, often replacingthe importanceofsharedactivities (Bigelow & LaGaipa 1980). Finally, older adolescentstend


13/25

208 CORSARO & EDERto be more similar in terms of attitudestoward school, college plans, andachievementthanare youngeradolescents(Epstein 1983). This greatersim-ilarityis assumed to be the result bothof moreselectivity in choosing friendsand of peer influence.There is also considerablediversityin the experience and basis of friend-ship for females and males. As in early childhood, female friendshipgroupstend to be closely knitandegalitarian,while malefriendshipgroupstendto beloosely knit with clear status hierarchies(Karweit & Hansell 1983). Forexample, Youniss& Smollar(1985) found that female friends aremorelikelyto engage in intimatedisclosure, sharingtheirproblems, feelings, fears, anddoubts with their close friends. However, while males are less likely toengage in intimatedisclosure,40%of the close malefriendships n theirstudydid involve a high degree of mutual intimacy. For other males, sharedactivitiescontinue to be an importantbasis for friendship hroughoutadoles-cence. These findings indicatethat while gender and developmentaldiffer-ences areimportantn the experienceof friendship,thereis also considerablediversitywithin gender groupsas well as withingroupsof adolescentsof thesame age.Finally, there are importantdifferencesin the experienceof friendshipbysocial class. In an ethnographic tudyof high school students,Eckert(1988)found that studentsfrom middle-classbackgrounds,andespecially those whowere members of elite groups, were more likely to base theirfriendshipsoninterests and activities, often switching their friendshipsas their interestschange. In contrast, studentsfrom working-class backgroundsplaced moreemphasison loyalty andstability,with friendshipsdetermining heir involve-mentin activities insteadof vice versa. Lesko(1988) reportssimilarfindingsfrom her ethnographic study of a Catholic high school. Girls who weremembersof the elite grouptended to value social and academiccompetitionand were less loyal to their friends than were girls in other groups.These findings point to the importanceof peer statusin adolescence. Asstudents move into middle or junior high schools, they are suddenly con-fronted with a much larger group of same age peers. This allows for thepossibilityof morecliques formingas well as for a hierarchyof cliques to beestablished.If certain studentshave morepositive visibility they arelikely toform the core of the elite group since in this type of environment,status isoften based on "being known"by your peers (Eder 1985).Adolescentsare most likely to gain positive visibility throughparticipationin extracurricular ctivities, especially those like male athletics that drawlarge groups of spectators (Gordon 1957, Coleman 1961, Cusick 1973,Karweit1983, Eder & Parker1987). Theseactivities also tendto give positivevisibility to female cheerleaders(Eder 1985, Eder & Parker1987). Statushierarchiesare often unidimensional n early adolescence, with limited ave-


14/25

CHILDREN'S PEER CULTURES 209nues for peer statusforbothmalesandfemales. Thismaybe due in part o thefact that middle school and junior high schools tend to offer fewer ex-tracurricular ctivities butmay also reflect a greaterconcernwith school-widepopularityat this age. In high school, several elite groupsmay be based ondifferent types of activities (Larkin 1979), with participation n multipleactivities often leading to higher status (Karweit 1983).On the otherend of thecontinuum,several studies havefocusedon rejectedchildren;these studies find that childrenwho are disliked by their peers inearly childhood continue to be disliked in adolescence(Coie & Dodge 1983,Coie et al 1988). These psychologists attributesuch persistentrejection topoorsocial skills andaggressivebehavioron the partof therejectedchildren.However, anotherstudy, focused on "bullies" and "whippingboys," foundthat bullies tended to initiate the most fights andthat "whippingboys," whotended to be disliked by peers, were more often the targets of aggression(Olweus 1978). Olweus believes thata varietyof social processes contributeto the persistenceof thesepatterns, ncludingsocial contagionorthetendencyfor other peers to imitate the aggressive "bullies." Using an ethnographicapproach,Evans & Eder(1989) also found that isolatesin middle school tendto be thetargetsof aggressionand that thepersistenceof therejection s due inpart to attempts by other students to distinguish themselves from thosestudents they perceive to be deviant. The processes which contribute o lowpeerstatus andpeer rejectionneedfurthernvestigationsincerejectedstudentsare often not membersof peer groupsandthus are not exposed to importantaspects of peer culture.Peer ConcernsWhile the main concerns of the peer culture of students from middle-classbackgroundsare closely tied to visible school activities and to the dynamicsfor obtaining peer status, peer concerns of working-class students oftenrepresenta rejectionof academic concerns and the social values of the elitegroup. Also, to the extent that concern with peer status decreases in lateradolescence, it is often accompanied by increased diversity in peer sub-cultures.One of the early studies of adolescent culture found white middle-classmales to be primarilyconcernedwith athleticskills, dating, sexual prowess,anddrinkingprowess (Schwartz& Merton1966). More recentstudiesreporta continuedinterest in athletic and other extracurricular ctivities throughwhich middle-classmales receive statusfrom peers as well as some controlover school resourcesincludinguse of space and time (Eckert1988). Someathleticevents, such as football, continue to promotea concern with tough-ness andaggressioneven amongmiddle anduppermiddle class males (Kess-ler et al 1985, Eder& Parker1987). Otherrecent studieshave found a trend


15/25

210 CORSARO& EDERtoward greater diversity within white middle-class males, leading to thedevelopmentof numerousmicrocultureswith distinct interestsand concerns(Kinney 1989).The avenues for peer status for white middle-class girls are based less onachievement.In early adolescence, middle-class females gain statusthroughactivities such as cheerleading and through friendshipswith popular girls(Eder 1985). This contributes o a greater ocus on social skills and a greaterconcern with beingwell liked (Rosenberg& Simmons 1975). By high school,there is again more diversity among white middle-classgirls. Girls in moreelite groupsare concerned withbeing "ineverything,"andthey see the idealstudentas someone with lots of involvements(Lesko 1988). Other middle-class girls, describedas "mellows"or "normals,"place a strongeremphasison friendship and are often more concerned with family and nonschoolactivities (Lesko 1988, Kinney 1989).Working-classmales tend to have much less control over school resources,thus a majorconcern within their subcultures s seeking more control overtheir lives throughdefiance of rules, authority,and academicwork (Willis1981, Everhart 1983). Their peer cultures also focus on fighting, insultexchanges, and other forms of humor since these are activities over whichthey have more control and which are viewed as masculine (Kessler et al1985, Willis 1981). Other studies have examinedworking-classstudentsinthe "burnout" ubculture Eckert 1988, Lesko 1988) where there is an openpursuitof pleasure through drinking, smoking, and "bumming"around.Studies of blackworking-classandlower-class maleshave reported imilarfindings. The mainconcerns of the streetpeer groupsin inner-cityneighbor-hoods were toughness, trouble, excitement, autonomy,and cleverness. Statusamongthese males was determinedprimarilyby courageand skill in physicalfighting, experiencein deviantbehavior,and skills in variousverbalactivitiessuch as ritualinsulting, story-telling,andjoke-telling (Labov 1972). A studyof working-classblacks in a junior high school found that they perceivedthemselves andwere perceived by othersto be tough, aggressiverule break-ers, unconcernedwith school (Schofield 1982). MacLeod(1987), however,found thatwhile white lower-class males were concerned with fighting abil-ity, quick wit, and group solidarity,black males were more concerned withathleticability and male-female interaction.He also found thatblack maleswere more involved in school activities, especially athleticactivities, and hadhighercareer aspirationsthan did white males.White working-classfemales are also often likely to view themselves as"non-conformists"and "trouble-makers"within the school environment.However, they are more likely thanmales to engage in less visible forms ofdeviance duringclass such as reading magazines, passing notes, and day-dreaming Griffin 1985;Wulff 1988). Those whojoin "burnout" eer cultures


16/25

CHILDREN'S PEER CULTURES 211openly pursue pleasure and are explicit about their sexuality, with somefemales emphasizing sensuality in their appearance(Lesko 1988). At thesame time, in these groupsthereis less concern with "beingnice" and moredirectness in interaction styles than is found among many middle-classfemales (Goodwin 1982, Lesko 1988).Some studies have found considerableethnic diversityin the concerns ofworking-class females. While white females are often concerned with ro-mance and marriageas a source of status, black and Asian females are morecritical of romance myths and less concerned with getting a boyfriend(McRobbie 1978, Griffin 1985). However, a studyof an interracialgroupofworking-classfemales in Britain(Wulff 1988)found thatthesegirls had manysimilar concerns and wereprimarily nterested n "growingup,"which meanthaving more responsibility as well as having romantic and sexual rela-tionships. Theywere also concernedwithexcitementandheightenedpleasureas well as with ethnicityandexpressionsof ethnicity.Because these girlshadfrequentopportunities o interact hrough he youth club, they were develop-ing perspectiveson ethnicitythat differedfromthoseof their parentsand werealso developing concerns and perspectivesthat crossed ethnic boundaries.Interactive Processes and Language ActivitiesEthnographersndsociolinguistshaverecentlybegunto paymoreattention otheprocesses by which adolescentpeerculturesarecreated.Willis (1981), forexample, found that informal group interaction and humor are essentialelements for creating and maintaininga counter-culture.His work demon-strateshow everyday activitiesare critical for establishinga shared nterpreta-tion on what it means to be working-classmales.Wulff (1988) has argued hat microcultures ftenhave considerablediversi-ty, includingindividualswith different deas, interests,andperspectives.Sheviews culture as somethingdistributedmong people in a group, with someindividualsreflectingcertainmeaningsmorestronglythrough heirpersonalit-ies than do others. For example, the most populargirl in the club embodiedthe sharedvalue of maturity.

As long as Doreen remaineda memberof the club, she was its most popularmember,thegirl whom the greatestnumberof the others woulddescribeas a friend. She was more of ayoung woman than the others: tall, beautiful, often with a sophisticatedhair style. Shecould also tell stories about ove dramasatparties orolderteenagers.At the sametime, hermaturitydistanced her slightly from the rest of the girls, but this only increased theiradmiration or her. (Wulff 1988, p. 75)

Certain ocalities andeventscan also manifestthemeaningsof the subculture.Thus, a subculture s createdthroughsharedsignificant events, recurrentor


17/25

212 CORSARO & EDERunique experiencesin certainlocalities, andthe appearanceandbehaviorsofcertain individuals.Another approach o understanding he creationof subcultures s to exam-ine the language activities that provide the basisfor informalgroup ife. As inresearch on younger children, the concern is to identify the resources andskills needed to build the interaction.Suchconstructionoften involves adoles-cents incorporatingtheir own unique contributions and modifications toaspectsof adult culture.Languageactivitiesare crucialfor cultureproductionsince it is through anguagethat shared nterpretations evelop. Some of theactivities in which adolescents routinely engage include insulting, teasing,story-telling, and gossip.

Althoughmost researchon insultinghas involved black male adolescents(Labov 1972, Kochman1983, Goodwin1982a), recent studies have looked atsuch speech events among white males and black and white working-classfemales (Everhart1983, Goodwin 1982a). Studies of ritualinsulting amongmales have shownhow being able to interpretnsults as playfulandrespond-ing with more clever or elaborate insults are essential skills for successfulparticipationn certainmale subcultures.Males who lackthese skills aremorelikely to become targetsof serious ridiculeor physical attacksas the conflictescalates (Labov 1972, Everhart1983). On the other hand, by respondingplayfully to insults, a sense of solidaritybased on shared interpretationsdeveloped (Everhart 1983). At the same time, since this activity is oftencompetitive in nature it also provides males with a way to establish andreinforce statushierarchies(Labov 1972, Goodwin 1982a).Another form of group humor that has been studied recently is playfulteasing. Hereagain, interpreting easingremarksas playfulandresponding na playful mannerare essential skills (Fine 1984, Eder 1990). If someonefailed to respondin a playful mannerwhen being teased, othergroupmem-bers might encouragethem to not take the teasing commentsseriously as inthis example from a group of seventh grade girls:

Nancy was theretodayandthey wereteasingher aboutputtingcatsupon herfood and alsoabouthow shortherpantswere. (Theyare her mother'spantsand aretwo inches too short.)Also, when she was gone, Betty wrote in Nancy's book andNancy was really angrywithher when she came back. Most of the girls in the group were looking at Nancy andlaughing; hey kept saying, "Laugh."Theywantedher to laughand not be angry,orbe ableto be kidded. (Eder 1990, p. 8)

On the otherhand, some adolescentswere able to turn a potentiallyseriousinsult into a teasing remarkby responding playfully, as in this example:They were kidding Sylvia for awhile abouthername and variousthings.Then at one pointRitasaid, "Sylvia's showingoff herbra with herwhite tee-shirt,"referring o the fact that


18/25

CHILDREN'S PEER CULTURES 213you could see her bra throughhertee shirt. Sylvia wasn'tinsultedor hurt. Insteadshe liftedup her shirtand said, "WhenI show off my bra, I'll do it like this!"(Eder 1990, p. 24).

Finally, teasing is more loosely structuredhan ritual insulting, allowing forcollaborativeparticipationwhich can buildsolidarity among the "teasers"aswell as the targets.While there is a loose structureand familiarity o teasingroutines, they also allow novel responses given their playful, humorousnature.Storytelling s also a commonactivity among adolescents, takinga varietyof forms including fight storiesand collaborativenarratives.Since stories arebased on past experiences, full participationdepends on shared experiencesamong groupmembers. In fact, the greaterthe priorsharedknowledge, themore likely group members will be able to interpretthe story accurately.Shuman(1986) found that the females who had the mostknowledge about afight were entitledto tell fight stories, andonly those who were close friendswere allowed to hear certain fight stories such as those involving familydisputes. Otherstudies have found thatstorytellingis used among males todemonstratecleverness and the importanceof certainevents (Labov 1972,Goodwin 1982a). Finally, storytellingin peer culture is often collaborative(Goodwin 1982b, Eder 1988) with collaborationserving both to strengthengroup ties and to allow for the development of shared perceptions andorientations.Although gossip is a common activity among adolescents, it has not beenadequatelystudied. In a study of younger adolescents, Eder & Enke (1988)found thatgossip was an importantmeans for transmittinggenderconcernsregardingappearance nd conceited behavior.Malegossip, on the otherhand,occurred less frequentlyand focused primarilyon the athletic achievementsand physical abilities of other males. There was a strong emphasison con-sensus within groups making it difficult for members to express counterviewpoints unless they spoke up immediately. However, on certain topicssuch as romance there was less consensus, since heregossip was a meansfordeveloping new group norms. Parker& Gottman (1989) also found thatgossip was primarilyused forgroupsolidarity n early adolescence,but thatinlateradolescence, gossip providedanentryinto thepsychological explorationof the self. In anotherstudyof older adolescentfemales, Fine (1986) foundthat gossip was used primarilyto clarify moral concerns and values. Thefemales Fine studied were concerned with reaching consensus, and theyminimizedpotentialconflictby expressingcounterviews in ways thatallowedtheir views to be easily modified.These studies of speech activities suggest that some activities are morepredominantn some subcultures hanare others, and that the functionsthatcertain speech activities serve within a given subculturemay change over


19/25

214 CORSARO& EDERtime. Manyof the studiesshow how speechactivities serve to makemeaningsand interpretations isible to others, thus makingsharedmeanings possible.Through detailed studyof activities such as these, we can betterunderstandthe role which adolescents play in defining and shaping their own peercultures.CENTRALTHEMES IN PEER CULTUREFROM EARLYCHILDHOODTHROUGHADOLESCENCEA major featureof the socialization process is children'sproductionof andparticipation n a series of peer cultures in which childhoodknowledge andpracticesaregradually ransformednto theknowledgeandskills necessarytoparticipatein the adult world. Although there have been no longitudinalstudies documentingchildren's transitionfrom one peer culture to another,the previous review of recent studies allows us to identify specific patternsand themes of peer culturesthroughoutchildhood and adolescence.One centraltheme in peer cultureis the importanceof sharing and socialparticipation. In the preschool and early elementaryschool years childrenimmensely enjoy simply doing things together (Corsaro 1985, Parker &Gottman1989). However, generatingsharedmeaningand coordinatingplayare difficult tasks for young children. Thus, childrenspend a great deal oftime creatingandprotectingbasic activities androutinesin theirpeerculture(Corsaro 1985). Although these routinesreflect a range of concerns in thepeer culture, they most importantlyprovide young children with a sense ofexcitement and emotional security.In preadolescenceand adolescence, childreneasily generate and sustainpeer activities. However, they have now collectively produced a set ofstratifiedgroups, and issues of acceptance, popularity,and group solidaritybecome paramount.The primarilynonverbalplay routinesof early childhoodaregraduallyreplacedby verbal activities(Labov 1972, Goodwin 1982, Fine1987). Gossip is a centralactivity since it reaffirmspeer group membershipandreveals basic values and beliefs of groupmembers(Eder& Enke 1988,Parker& Gottman 1989).A second centralthemeof peerculture nvolves children'sattempts o dealwith confusions, concerns, fears, and conflicts in theirdaily lives. Althoughsome of these disturbancesare generatedwithin the peer cultureitself, theyoften arise from children'sexperiencesin the adultworld. Youngchildrenarefrequentlywarnedof dangersby caretakersand moreindirectlythrough heirexposuresto movies andfairytales. Children,in turn, frequently ncorporatea wide rangeof fears anddangers (from threateningagentssuch as monstersand witches to dangerousevents like fires, floods, and becoming lost) intotheirpeer culture. By engaging in sharedfantasy play (Corsaro 1985, Gott-


20/25

CHILDREN'S PEER CULTURES 215man 1986) and producing games, routines, and rituals (Corsaro 1988,Schwartzman 1978) children more firmly grasp and deal with social repre-sentations of evil and the unknownin the security of the peer culture.For older children, the peer group (especially same-sex friendshipgroups)provides a secure base for making sense of and dealing with new demandsregardingpersonalrelations, sexuality, and identity development(Fine 1981,Parker& Gottman1989). Everydayactivitiesin preadolescentandadolescentcultureenablepeersto negotiateandexplorea wide rangeof normsregarding:personal appearance nd thepresentation f self, friendshipprocesses, hetero-sexualrelations,andpersonalaspirationsand achievement.Throughactivitieslike gossip, teasing andinsultroutines,collaborativestory-telling, and humor(Eder 1988, 1989, Eder& Enke 1988, Fine 1984, 1987, Goodwin 1982a,b,Labov 1972, Lesko 1988, Wulff 1988), adolescents indirectly explore de-veloping norms and expectations withoutthe risk of direct confrontationandembarrassment.A final themein peercultureis children'sresistance to and challenging ofadult rules and authority.Childrenchallenge adult rules in the family fromthe firstyearsof life (Dunn 1988, Miller 1986). Such activitybecomes morewidespreadand sophisticatedwhen children discover their common interestsin day care settingsandnurseryschools. In suchsettingschildrencooperative-ly produce a wide set of practicesin which they both mock and evade adultauthority.In fact, many of these "secondaryadjustments"o adult rules aremore complex (structurally ndinteractively) han the rules themselves(Cor-saro 1985, 1989).Althougholder childrencontinue to resist adultauthority,early childhoodand preadolescentcultures are characterizedby a focus on interpersonalrelations and differences among peers. However, with greaterfreedom andautonomyon the one hand and lack of full adult statuson theother,resistanceof adult authority eemergesas animportanteatureof adolescentpeerculture(Griffin 1985, Wulff 1988). In fact, several studies of working-classmaleshave documentedthe existence and significance of well-developed "countercultures"for adolescent socialization and education(Everhart 1983, Willis1981). Overall, it is clear that the resistance of adult rules and authorityprovideschildrenwith a sense of controland autonomy,and for this reasonsuch resistance may be a universal featureof peer culture.

While recent studieshave allowed us to identifythe above patterns,thereare still substantialgaps in our knowledge of children'speer cultures.First,althoughthe number of studies of routines and language activities in peerculture has increased, a clear need exists for more research of this type.Routines and language activities are of crucial importancebecause it isthroughsuch activitiesthatpeerculture s producedandmaintained.Second,most of the studies to datehave identifiedfeaturesof peer culturein educa-


21/25

216 CORSARO& EDERtional settingsor other formalorganizations ike clubs or athleticteams. Morework is needed in informalsettings like the home, neighborhood,andplay-ground as well as in businesses that cater to youth (fast food restaurants,shopping malls, cinemas, video game salons, etc). In some of these environ-ments such as neighborhoodsettings, adolescents are less likely to be segre-gated by gender, and they tend to engage in a wider variety of activities.Thus, peer interaction n these settingsis important or exposing adolescentsto a greaterdiversityof peer culturesandinteractivestyles (Goodwin 1989).We also need to know much more about children'speerrelations in the workplace. Some of the best workon peerculture n worksettingsis the historicalanalysis by Nasaw (1985) on American urban children at the turn of thecentury and by Berggreen (1988) on Norwegian children. Both of thesestudies show how children's work and play often coexisted and how peerculture was tied to the requirementsand the economic rewards of labor.Recent studiesby Solberg (1988) on Norwegianchildren's workin the home,by Gullestad(1988) on young girls' interactionswhile "walking"andcaringfor infantsin Oslo, andby Hundeide(1988) comparingthe social worlds ofNorwegianandAsian childrennicely demonstrate he importanceof work inthepeercultureof youngchildren. Studies such asthese notonly increase ourknowledge of featuresof peer culture, they also provide the kind of com-parativedata necessary to document cultural diffusion (Fine 1987).Although there have been several ethnographicstudies of particularpeergroups over several months or even years, no longitudinal studies chartchildren'stransitions rom one peercultureto another.A clear need exists forsuch studiesof childrenas they move from preschoolsettingsto elementaryschool, from elementary school to junior high, from junior high to highschool, and finally from high school to college or full-time employment.Finally, historical and cross-culturalwork on children's peer cultures islacking. Such studiesarenecessaryfor discoveringuniversal featuresof peercultureandfordocumentinghow elementsof the world of childrenandadultsinteractover time and across diverse culturalgroups.A greatdeal of theoreticaldevelopmentandresearchon peer relations andfriendshipshas occurredrecently in developmental psychology (Berndt &Ladd 1989, Gottman& Parker1986, Mueller & Cooper 1986). Most of thisworkis in line with what we earlierreferred o as the constructivistapproachto socialization.Overall,this researchhasgreatlyincreasedourknowledgeofchildren'speer relations and social development.In fact, some studies havereported indingsandinterpretations erymuchin line withthe generaltrendsin peer culture we outlined above (Gottman & Mettetal 1986, Parker &Gottman1989). However, the focus of these studiesis on individualdevelop-ment. Social structureand cultureare seen as "social-ecological niches" that


22/25

CHILDREN'SPEER CULTURES 217embody demandsto which individualchildrenmustadapt(Parker& Gottman1989).As we argued earlier, sociological approaches o socializationmust breakfree from this individualistic emphasis. Social structureand cultureare notmerely staticniches or environments, hey arepublicandcollective processesof negotiation and interpretative pprehension Cicourel 1974, Geertz 1973,Rosaldo 1984). Fromthis interpretiveperspective,socializationis not only amatterof adaptationand internalization,but also a process of appropriation,reinvention, and reproduction. Central to this view of socializationis theappreciation f the importanceof communalactivity-children's negotiating,sharing, and joint culture creating with adults and peers (Bruner 1986,Vygotsky 1978). Althoughrecentwork on both adult-childandpeer interac-tion fromthis interpretiveperspectivehas greatlyincreasedour understandingin this area, much work remains to be done.LiteratureCitedAsher, S. R., Gottman, J., eds. 1981. TheDevelopmrentof Children's Friendships.New York: CambridgeUniv. PressBandura, 1986. Social Foundations ofThought and Action: A Social CognitiveTheory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-HallBarlow, K. 1985. Playand learningin a Sepiksociety. Presented at Ann. Meet. Am. An-thropol. Assoc. 84th, Washington,DCBerentzen, S. 1984. Children ConstructingTheir Social World.BergenStud. Soc. An-thropol. No. 36. Bergen, Norway: Univ.BergenBerentzen, S. ed. 1989. Ethnographic

Approachesto Children'sWorldsand PeerCultures. Trondheim Norway: NorwegianCtr. Child Res.Berentzen,S. 1989. The interactional ontextsof children's peer groupactivities. See Be-rentzen 1989, pp. 9-43Berggreen,B. 1988. Infantilization f childrenas an historical process. In Proc. Conf.GrowingInto a ModernWorld,vol. 2, ed.K. Ekberg,P. Mjaavatn,pp. 829-42. Trond-heim, Norway:NorwegianCtr. Child Res.Berndt, T., Ladd, G. eds. 1989. Peer Rela-tionshipsin Child Development.New York:WileyBest, R. 1983. We've All Got Scars.Bloomington:Ind. Univ. PressBigelow, B. J., LaGaipa, J. 1980. The de-velopmentof friendshipvalues and choice.In Friendshipand Social Relations in Chil-dren, ed. H. C. Foot, A. J. Chapman,J.Smith, pp. 15-44. New York:Wiley

Boggs, S. 1978. The development of verbaldisputingin part-Hawaiian hildren. Lang.Soc. 7:325-44Bourdieu, P., Passeron, J. 1977. Reproduc-tion. Beverly Hills, Calif: SageBowles, S., Gintis, H. 1976. Schooling inCapitalistAmerica. New York: BasicBruner, J. 1986. Actual Minds, PossibleWorlds. Cambridge, Mass: HarvardUniv.PressBudwig, N., Strage, A., Bamberg, M. 1986.The constructionof joint activities with anage-mate: The transition from caregiver-child to peerplay. See Cook-Gumperz t al1986, pp. 83-108Cicourel, A. V. 1974. Cognitive Sociology.New York: FreeCoie, J. D., Dodge, K. A., Kupersmidt,J.1988. Peergroupbehaviorand social status.In The Rejected Child, ed. S. Asher, J.Coie, 1988. New York: CambridgeUniv.PressCoie, J. D., Dodge, K. A. 1983. Continuitiesand changes in children's social status: Afive-year longitudinal study. Merrill-Pal.29:261-82Coleman, J. 1961. The Adolescent Society.

New York: FreeCook-Gumperz,J., Corsaro,W. A., Streeck,J. eds. 1986. Children's Worldsand Chil-dren's Language. Berlin:MoutonCorsaro,W. A. 1979. "We'refriends, right?":Children'suse of access ritualsin a nurseryschool. Lang. Soc. 8:315-36Corsaro,W. A. 1981. Friendship n the nurs-ery school: Social organizationin a peer


23/25

218 CORSARO& EDERenvironment.See Asher & Gottman 1981,pp. 207-41Corsaro, W. A. 1985. Friendship and PeerCulture in the Early Years. Norwood, NJ:AblexCorsaro, W. A. 1988. Routines in the peerculture of American and Italian nurseryschool children. Social Educ. 61:1-14Corsaro, W. A. 1990. The underlife of thenurseryschool: Youngchildren's socialrep-resentationsof adultrules. In Social Repre-sentations and the Developmentof Knowl-edge, ed. B. Lloyd, G. Duveen, pp. 11-26.Cambridge:CambridgeUniv. PressCorsaro, W. A., Rizzo, T. A. 1988. Dis-cussione and friendship:Socializationpro-cesses in the peer cultureof Italiannurseryschool children.Am. Sociol. Rev. 53:879-94Corsaro,W. A., Rizzo, T. A. 1990. Disputesin the peer culture of Americanand Italiannursery school children. In Conflict Talk,ed. A. D. Grimshaw, pp. 21-66, Cam-bridge: CambridgeUniv. PressCorsaro, W. A., Heise, D. R. 1989. Eventstructuremodels from ethnographicdata.Sociological Methodology, In pressCusick, P. 1973. Inside High School. NewYork: Holt, Rinehart& WinstonDamon, W. 1977. The Social World of theChild. San Francisco:Jossey-BassDavies, B. 1982. Life in the Classroom andPlayground: The Accounts of PrimarySchool Children. London:RoutledgeDodge, K., Schlundt, D., Schocken, I., De-Lugach, J. 1983. Social competence andchildren's sociometric status: The role ofpeer group entry strategies. Merrill-Pal.29:309-36Dunn, J. 1988. The Beginningsof Social Un-derstanding. Oxford:Basil BlackwellEckert, P. 1988. Adolescent social structureand the spreadof linguistic change. Lang.Soc. 17:183-208Eder, D. 1985. The cycle of popularity:In-terpersonalrelationsamong female adoles-cents. Sociol. Educ. 58:154-65Eder,D. 1988. Buildingcohesionthroughcol-laborative narration. Soc. Psych. Q. 51:-225-35Eder, D. 1990. The role of teasing in adoles-cent peer culture.In Sociological StudiesofChild Development, Vol. 4. ed., S Cahill.Greenwich, Ct: JAI. In pressEder, D., Enke, J. 1988. Gossip as a meansfor transmitting and developing socialstructure. Pres. Am. Sociol. Assoc. Meet.Atlanta, GeorgiaEder, D., Parker, S. 1987. The culturalproduction and reproduction of gender:The effect of extracurricularactivities onpeer group culture. Sociol. Educ. 60:200-213Eisenberg, A. 1986. Teasing: Verbal play in

two Mexicano homes. See Schieffelin &Ochs 1986, pp. 182-97Eisenberg, A., Garvey, C. 1981. Children'suse of verbal strategies in resolving con-flicts. Discourse Processes 4:149-70Ekberg, K., Mjaavatn,P. E., eds. 1988. Proc.Conf. GrowingInto a ModernWorld, Vols.1, 2, & 3, Trondheim, Norway, 1987Trondheim:Norwegian CentreEpstein, J. 1983. Examining theories ofadolescentfriendships.See Epstein& Kar-weit 1983, pp. 39-62Epstein, J. L., Karweit, N., eds. 1983.Friends in School: Patternsof Selection andInfluencein SecondarySchools. New York:Academic

Evans, C., Eder, D. 1989. "No exit": Pro-cesses of social isolation in the middleschool. Pres. Am. Sociol. Assoc. Meet. SanFrancisco, Calif.Everhart,R. 1983. Reading, Writingand Re-sistance:AdolescenceandLaborina JuniorHigh School. Boston: RoutledgeFine, G. A. 1981. Friends, impressionman-agement, and preadolescentbehavior. SeeAsher & Gottman1981, pp. 29-52Fine, G. A. 1984. Humorousinteractionandthe social constructionof meaning: Makingsense in a jocular vein. In Studies in Sym-bolic Interaction, vol 4, ed. N. Denzin,83-101. Greenwich, Conn:JAIFine, G. A. 1986. The social organizationofadolescent gossip: The rhetoric of moralevaluation.See Cook-Gumperz,Corsaro,&Streeck pp. 405-23Fine, G. A. 1987. With the Boys: LittleLeague Baseball and Preadolescent Cul-ture. Chicago:Univ. Chicago PressForbes, D., Katz, M., Paul, B., Lubin, D.1982. Children'splans forjoining play:Ananalysis of structureand function. In Chil-dren's Planning Strategies, ed. D. Forbes,M. Greenberg, pp. 61-79. San Francisco:Jossey-BassGarvey, C. 1984. Children's Talk. Cam-bridge, Mass: HarvardUniv. PressGeertz, C. 1973. The Interpretation of Cul-tures. New York: BasicGenishi, C., Di Paolo, M. 1982. Learningthrough argument n a preschool. In Com-municating in the Classroom, ed. L. C.Wilkinson, pp. 49-68. New York:Academ-ic

Giddens, A. 1984. The Constitutionof Soci-ety. Oxford, England:PolityGoffman, E. 1961. Asylumns. Garden City,NY: AnchorGomme, A. 1964. The Traditional Games ofEngland, Scotland,andIreland. 2 vol. NewYork: DoverGoodwin, M. H. 1980a. "He-said-she-said":Formalculturalprocedures or the construc-tion of a gossip dispute activity. Am.Ethnol. 7:674-95


24/25

CHILDREN'SPEER CULTURES 219Goodwin, M. H. 1980b. Directive/responsespeech sequences in girls' and boys' taskactivities.In Womenand Languagein Liter-atureand Society, ed. S. McConnell-Ginet,

R. Borker, N. Furman, pp. 157-73. NewYork: PragerGoodwin, M. H. 1982a. Processes of disputemanagement among urban Black children.Am. Ethnol. 9:76-96Goodwin, M. H. 1982b. "Instigating":Storytelling as a social process. Am. Ethnol.9:799-819Goodwin, M. H. 1985. The serious side ofjump rope: Conversationalpractices and so-cial organization in the frame of play. J.Am. Folklore 98:315-30Goodwin, M. H. 1989. Language as SocialProcess: ConversationalPractices in UrbanBlack Children. Bloomington: Ind. Univ.PressGoodwin, M. H., Goodwin, C. 1988. Chil-dren's arguing.In Language, Gender, andSex in a ComparativePerspective, ed. S.Phillips, S. Steele, C. Tanz, pp. 200-248.New York: CambridgeUniv. PressGordon,C. W. 1957. TheSocial Systemof theHigh School: A Study in the Sociology ofAdolescence. Glencoe, Ill: Free PressGottman,J. 1986. The world of coordinatedplay: Same-and cross-sex friendship inyoung children. See Gottman & Parker,1986, pp. 139-91Gottman, J., Mettetal,G. 1986. Speculationsabout social and affective development:Friendship and acquaintanceship throughadolescence. See Gottman& Parker,1986,pp. 192-240Gottman, J., Parker, J., eds. 1986. Con-versations of Friends: Speculations onAffective Development. New York: Cam-bridge Univ. PressGriffin, C. 1985. Typical Girls?: YoungWomenFrom School to the Job Market.London:RoutledgeGullestad, M. 1988. Children's care for chil-dren. See Ekberg& Mjaavatn1988, vol. 3,pp. 1205-17Hanna, J. L. 1988. Disruptive School Be-havior: Class, Race and Culture. NewYork:Holmes & MeierHarr6, R. 1986. The step to social con-structionism.In Childrenof Social Worlds:Development n a Social Context,ed. M. P.

Richards, P. Light, pp. 287-96. Cam-bridge, Mass.: HarvardUniv. PressHeath, S. B. 1983. Ways with Words: Lan-guage, Life, and Work n CommunitiesandClassrooms. New York: CambridgeUniv.PressHughes, L. A. 1988. "But that's not reallymean":Competingin a cooperativemode.Sex Roles. 19:669-687Hundeide, K. 1988. Contrastinglifeworlds:Slum children and Oslo middleclass chil-

dren'sworld views. See Ekberg& Mjaavatn1988, vol. 2, pp. 646-58Karweit, N. 1983. Extracurricular ctivitiesand friendship selection. See Epstein &Karweit 1983, pp. 131-140Karweit, N., Hansell, S. 1983. Sex differ-ences in adolescent relationships: Friend-ship and status. See Epstein & Karweit1983, pp. 115-130Katriel, T. 1985. Brogez: Ritual and strategyin Israeli children's conflicts. Lang. Soc.14:467-90Katriel, T. 1987. "Bexibadim!": Ritualizedsharingamong Israeli children. Lang. Soc.16:305-20Kessler, S., Ashenden, D., Connell, R., Dow-sett, G. 1985. Genderrelations n secondaryschooling. Sociol. Educ. 58:34-47Kinney, D. 1989. Dweebs, headbangers, andtrendies:Adolescent identity ormation andchange withinsocio-cultural contexts. PhDthesis. Ind. Univ., BloomingtonKochman, T. 1983. The boundary betweenplay and nonplay in black verbal dueling.Lang. Soc. 12:329-37Labov, W. 1972. Language in the Inner City:Studies in the Black English Vernacular.Philadelphia:Univ. Penn. PressLarkin,R. 1979. SuburbanYouth n CulturalCrisis. New York: OxfordLesko, N. 1988. SymbolizingSociety: Stories,Rites and Structure in Catholic HighSchool. Philadelphia:FalmerLever, J. 1976. Sex differences in the gameschildrenplay. Soc. Probl. 23:478-87MacLeod, J. 1987. Ain't No Makin' It:Leveled Aspirations in a Low-IncomeNeighborhood.Boulder, Colo: WestviewMandell, N. 1986. Peer interaction in daycare settings: Implications for social cog-nition. In Sociological Studies of ChildDevelopment, ed. P. A. Adler and P.Adler, vol. 1, pp. 55-79, Greenwich,Conn:JAIMaynard,D. 1985. On the functions of socialconflict among children.Am. Sociol. Rev.50:207-23McRobbie, A. 1978. Workingclass girls andthe culture of femininity. In Women TakeIssue, ed. Women's Studies Group: Ctr.Contemp. Cult. Stud., Univ. Birmingham,pp. 96-108. London: HutchinsonMiller, P. 1986. Teasing as languagesocialization and verbal play in a whiteworking-class community. See Schieffelin& Ochs 1986, 199-212Mishler, E. 1979. "Won'tyou trade cookieswith the popcorn?":The talk of tradesamong six-year-olds. In Language, Chil-dren, and Society: The Effects of SocialFactors on Children's Learning to Com-municate, ed. 0. Garnica, M. King, pp.221-36. Elmsford,NY: PergamonMueller, E. 1972. The maintenanceof verbal


25/25

220 CORSARO & EDERexchanges between young children. ChildDev. 43:930-38Mueller, E., Cooper, C., eds. 1986. Processand Outcome in Peer Relationships. NewYork: AcademicNasaw, D. 1985. Childrenof the City.GardenCity, NY: AnchorOlweus, D. 1978. Aggression in the Schools:Bullies and WhippingBoys. London:WileyOpie, I., Opie, P. 1959. The Lore and Lan-guage of School Children. Oxford:OxfordUniv. PressOpie, I., Opie, P. 1969. Children's GamesinStreet and Playground. Oxford: OxfordUniv. PressParker,J., Gottman,J. 1989. Social andemo-tional development in a relationalcontext:Friendship nteraction romearly childhoodto adolescence. See Brendt & Ladd 1989,pp. 95-132Piaget, J. 1950. The Psychology of In-telligence. London: RoutledgePiaget, J. 1968. Six Psychological Studies.New York: VintagePontecorvo, C., Orsolini, M. 1989. Discuss-ing and explaining a story at school. Dis-course Processes. In pressRizzo, T. A. 1989. FriendshipDevelopmentAmong Children in School. Norwood, NJ:AblexRosaldo,M. 1984. Towardananthropologyofself and feeling. In Culture Theory:Essayson Mind, Self, and Emotion, ed. R.Schweder, R. LeVine, pp. 137-58. Cam-bridge:CambridgeUniv. PressRosenberg, F., Simmons, R. 1975. Sex differ-ences in the self-concept in adolescence.Sex Roles 1:147-59Rubin, K., Maioni, T., Hornung, M. 1976.Free play behaviors in middle- and lower-class preschoolers:Partenand Piaget revisit-ed. Child Dev. 47:414-19Rubin, Z. 1980. Children's Friendships.Cambridge,Mass: HarvardUniv. PressSchieffelin, B. 1986. Teasing and shaminginKalulichildren'sinteractions.See Schieffe-lin & Ochs 1986, pp. 165-181Schofield, J. 1982. Black and White n School.New York: PraegerSchutze, Y., Kreppner,K., Paulsen, S. 1986.The social construction of the siblingrelationship.See Cook-Gumperz t al 1986,pp. 129-46Schwartz, G., Merton,D. 1967. The languageof adolescence: An anthropologicalapproach to the youth culture. Am. J.Sociol. 72:453-68Schwartzman,H. 1978. Transformations:TheAnthropology of Children's Play. NewYork: PlenumShantz, C. 1987. Conflicts among children.Child Dev. 58:283-205

Shantz, C., Hobart, C. 1989. Social conflictand development: Peers and siblings. SeeBrendt & Ladd 1989, pp. 71-94Shuman, A. 1986. Storytelling Rights. Cam-bridge:CambridgeUniv. Press.Simmons, R., Blyth, D. 1987. MovingIntoAdolescence: The Impact of PubertalChange and School Context, New York:AldineSluckin, A. 1981. Growing Up in the Play-ground. London: RoutledgeSolberg, A. 1988. The working life of chil-dren. See Ekberg & Mjaavatn1988, vol. 2,pp. 1069-82Thorne, B. 1986. Girls and boys together ...but mostly apart: Gender arrangements nelementary school. In Relationships andDevelopment, ed. W. Hartup,Z. Rubin, pp.167-84. Hillsdale, NJ: ErlbaumThorne, B. 1989. Crossingthe genderdivide:What "tomboys"can teach us about pro-cesses of genderseparationamong children.See Berentzen et al 1989, 139-73. In pressThorne, B., Luria, Z. 1986. Sexuality andgender in children's daily worlds. Soc.Probl. 33:176-89Turiel, E. 1983. The Development of SocialKnowledge. New York: CambridgeUniv.PressValsiner, J. 1987. Cultureand the Develop-ment of Children's Action. New York:WileyVandell, D. L., Mueller, E. 1980. Peer playandfriendshipsduring hefirst two years. InFriendshipand ChildhoodRelations,ed. H.C. Foot, A. J. Chapman,J. R. Smith, 181-208. New York:WileyVygotsky, L. S. 1978. Mind in Society. Cam-bridge, Mass.: HarvardUniv. PressWertsch, J. ed. 1986. Culture, Communica-tion, and Cognition: Vygotskian Per-spectives. New York: Cambridge Univ.PressWertsch,J. 1989. A socioculturalapproach omind. In Child Development Today andTomorrow, ed. W. Damon, 14-33. SanFrancisco:Jossey-BassWillis, P. 1981. Learning to Labour: HowWorking Class Kids Get Working ClassJobs. New York: ColumbiaUniv. PressWulff, H. 1988. TwentyGirls: Growing Up,Ethnicityand Excitement n a SouthLondonMicroculture. Stockholm Stud. Soc. An-thropol., No. 21. Stockholm, Sweden:Univ. StockholmYouniss, J. 1980. Parents and Peers in SocialDevelopment: A Sullivan-Piaget Perspec-tive. Chicago:Univ. Chicago PressYouniss, J., Smollar,J. 1985. Adolescent Re-lations withMothersFathers and Friends.Chicago:Univ. Chicago Press

Documents

Childreen's Perr Cultures