Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
This article was downloaded by: [Adams State University]On: 04 December 2014, At: 07:58Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK
European Journal ofDevelopmental PsychologyPublication details, including instructions for authorsand subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/pedp20
Children’s cross-ethnicfriendships: Why are theyless stable than same-ethnicfriendships?Philipp Jugerta, Peter Noacka & Adam Rutlandb
a Department of Psychology, University of Jena, Jena,Germanyb School of Psychology, University of Kent, Canterbury,UKPublished online: 16 Oct 2012.
To cite this article: Philipp Jugert, Peter Noack & Adam Rutland (2013)Children’s cross-ethnic friendships: Why are they less stable than same-ethnicfriendships?, European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 10:6, 649-662, DOI:10.1080/17405629.2012.734136
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2012.734136
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all theinformation (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, orsuitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressedin this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not theviews of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content shouldnot be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions,claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities
whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connectionwith, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expresslyforbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Ada
ms
Stat
e U
nive
rsity
] at
07:
58 0
4 D
ecem
ber
2014
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF DEVELOPMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2013Vol. 10, No. 6, 649–662, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2012.734136
Children’s cross-ethnic friendships: Why are they less stable than same-ethnic friendships?
Philipp Jugert1, Peter Noack1, and Adam Rutland2
1Department of Psychology, University of Jena, Jena, Germany 2School of Psychology, University of Kent, Canterbury, UK
Previous findings suggest that children’s cross-ethnic friendships are less stable than same-ethnic friendships. However, it is not clear why this is. This study examined stability of same- and cross-ethnic friendships among 10-year-old children over the course of five months. Analyses focused on both individual-level data (comparing 82 German and 37 Turkish children) and social network data (comparing 125 German and 172 non-German children). We predicted that children high in empathy and who perceived peer norms about cross-ethnic friendships to be positive would have more stable cross-ethnic friendships. Results showed that cross-ethnic friendships were indeed less stable than same-ethnic friendships. Empathy marginally predicted stability of cross-ethnic friendships while peer norms only predicted German but not Turkish children’s cross-ethnic friendship stability. Further, children high in empathy were less likely to be deselected by their cross-ethnic friends and similarity in empathy between cross-ethnic friends increased the longevity of their friendship.
Keywords: Cross-ethnic friendships; Stability; Children; Social network analysis.
Research suggests that cross-ethnic friendships are associated with less prejudice (e.g., Feddes, Noack, & Rutland, 2009). Yet, despite their value, cross-ethnic friendships are found to be less stable (Hallinan & Williams,
Correspondence should be addressed to Philipp Jugert, Department of Psychology, University of Leipzig, Seeburgstr. 14–20, D-04103 Leipzig, Germany. E-mail: [email protected]
This research was supported by grants from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft [GRK622] and the European Commission 7th Framework Programme, FP7-SSH-2007-1 [225282].
Philipp Jugert is now at the Department of Psychology, University of Leipzig. Adam Rutland is now at the Department of Psychology, Goldsmiths, University of London.
© 2013 Taylor & Francis
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Ada
ms
Stat
e U
nive
rsity
] at
07:
58 0
4 D
ecem
ber
2014
650 JUGERT, NOACK, RUTLAND
1987; Lee, Howes, & Chamberlain, 2007). We define friendship stability as enduring friendships that last over a period of a few months. Recently, research by Jugert, Noack, and Rutland (2011) has shown that positive peer norms about cross-ethnic friendships negatively predicted preference for same-ethnic friendships over time. However, a major shortcoming of previous research is that we know little about the characteristics that facilitate the stability of cross-ethnic friendships. Therefore, in this study we examined whether empathy and positive peer norms about having cross-ethnic friendships were associated with stability of cross-ethnic friendships over a five-month period among 10-year-old ethnic majority and minority children.
Friendship stability is an important index of the depth of a friendship, particularly among children who are approaching adolescence and for whom intimacy becomes a major building block of friendship (Schneider, Dixon, & Udvari, 2007). Thus, it is worrying that research has found a lack of stability in cross-ethnic friendships compared to same-ethnic friendships (Aboud, Mendelson, & Purdy, 2003; Lee et al., 2007; Schneider et al., 2007). Some have argued that cross-ethnic friendships may be less stable because they are of less quality and afford less intimacy than same-ethnic friendships (e.g., Aboud et al., 2003). Yet, research by Schneider and colleagues (2007) suggested that cross-ethnic friendships are no more likely to dissolve than same-ethnic friendships because they are of a poor quality. Hence it is puzzling that despite being similar in quality (see also Smith & Schneider, 2000) cross-ethnic friendships are less stable that same-ethnic friendships (Lee et al., 2007). Consequently, this research suggests that other factors than friendship quality might be responsible for the shorter longevity of cross-ethnic friendships.
We adopted a person-by-environment perspective to study the factors that contribute to the stability of same- versus cross-ethnic friendships. Consequently, we focused on identifying individual and social factors. Emotional empathy, an individual factor and peer group norms, a social factor, can be seen as proxies for socioemotional competencies and group-level processes, respectively. Thus, by focusing on these two factors we sought to cover two potential major causes for deselection of cross-ethnic friendships that have been suggested in the recent literature (Kawabata & Crick, 2011; Killen & Rutland, 2011).
In this study we examined whether emotional empathy is an important factor in retaining cross-ethnic friendships. Emotional empathy, the ability to share the perceived emotions of another and thus to put oneself emotionally ‘‘in the shoes’’ of another person (cf. Eisenberg & Strayer, 1987), is an important form of social competence. Research suggests that emotional empathic children are more likely to engage in prosocial behaviour (Eisenberg, Fabes, Miller, & Shell, 1990) and children who
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Ada
ms
Stat
e U
nive
rsity
] at
07:
58 0
4 D
ecem
ber
2014
STABILITY OF CROSS-ETHNIC FRIENDSHIPS 651
display prosocial behaviour are more likely to have cross-ethnic friendships (Aboud & Levy, 2000; Lease & Blake, 2005) and to maintain cross-ethnic friendships once established (Eisenberg et al., 2009; Kawabata & Crick, 2011).
Thus, we suggested that children with increased emotional empathy would be more likely to engage in sustained cross-ethnic friendships because they are able to engage in emotional perspective taking and show compassion for the other ethnic group. These children may endorse diversity in friendships and are less likely to discriminate on the basis of physical attributes, thereby increasing the chances for sustained cross-ethnic friendships. We proposed that emotional empathy would be uniquely associated with the stability of cross-ethnic friendships. As Aboud and Levy (2000) have argued, developmentally advanced socioemotional competencies, including empathy may enhance cross-ethnic interactions. Further, Kawabata and Crick (2008) provided evidence that cross-ethnic friendships were uniquely associated with social-emotional adjustment. Accordingly, emotional empathy may be especially important to maintain cross-ethnic friendships.
In this study we also examined whether peer norms were associated with the stability of cross-ethnic friendships. Previous developmental research has suggested that perceived peer-group norms about cross-ethnic friendships (i.e., the perception of what types of behaviour the peer group regards as acceptable) may also affect their stability. This research shows that as children move from middle into late childhood being included in peer groups becomes increasingly important to them (Horn, 2006) and so they become more sensitive towards which types of behaviour are sanctioned by their peers (Abrams, Rutland, & Cameron, 2003; Rutland, Cameron, Milne, & McGeorge, 2005).
Two recent theoretical perspectives are relevant here. First, social identity development theory (SIDT; Nesdale, 2004) assumes that children are more likely to show ethnic prejudice and socially exclude those from a different group if they think their own group condones such actions and it is seen as typical behaviour for the group. This effect of peer group norms has been shown in the context of bullying behaviour (Ojala & Nesdale, 2004) and ethnic prejudice (Nesdale, Maass, Durkin, & Griffith, 2005). SIDT also predicts the converse; that is group norms supportive of friendships or inclusion towards the out-group promote these outcomes, and research supports these predictions (Nesdale, Griffith, Durkin, & Maass, 2005). Second, the developmental subjective group dynamics model (Abrams et al., 2003) focuses not only on intergroup bias but also intragroup bias. Thus, the model assumes that from middle childhood on children may not only exclude other peers because they are from a different group but also exclude peers from
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Ada
ms
Stat
e U
nive
rsity
] at
07:
58 0
4 D
ecem
ber
2014
652 JUGERT, NOACK, RUTLAND
within their group who deviate from their group’s norms. Thus, according to both perspectives, children in middle childhood should be particularly aware of peer-group norms because if they do not follow their group’s norms they risk exclusion.
Few studies have tested the effects of peer-group norms in the context of cross-ethnic friendships. For example, Hallinan and Williams (1987) showed that classroom climate, which may be considered a norm (i.e., the degree to which cross-ethnic classroom interactions are encouraged) influences cross-ethnic friendship stability. More recently, research by Jugert et al. (2011) has also shown that positive peer norms about cross-ethnic friendships negatively predicted preference for same-ethnic friendships over time. However, we know little about whether peer-group norms may be connected with the maintenance of cross-ethnic friendships.
By combining analyses at the individual, dyad, and group level using advanced social network analyses we sought to deepen our understanding about the processes underlying the deselection of cross-ethnic friends. Specifically, we sought to study both main effects of children’s characteristics (e.g., gender, age) and effects of similarity in characteristics on deselection of cross-ethnic friendships. The similarity-attraction hypothesis posits that children select friends based on similarity in various characteristics, such as age, gender, ethnicity, and common interests (Aboud & Mendelson, 1996). Still, as friendships entail a relationship between equals (Bukowski & Sippola, 1996), similarity may also be important for the stability of a friendship. An interesting possibility is that children may use surface characteristics like age, gender, and ethnicity initially to select their friends but as they get to know their friends better less visible characteristics like traits (e.g., empathy) and attitudes (e.g., perceived peer-group norms) may become more relevant. Thus, when children realize that they are not similar with respect to traits and attitudes to their friend they may decide to terminate the friendship. This may be particularly relevant in cross-ethnic friendships where children already differ in ethnicity. Moreover, using a social network approach allowed us to control for network effects on friendship deselection. Previous research has mainly adopted an individual or dyad perspective on cross-ethnic friendships. However, children and adolescents typically have multiple friendships that together make up social networks (Snijders, 2001). This is relevant as it has been shown that children use the structure of the social network to make decisions about friendship selection (Burk, Kerr, & Stattin, 2008). While network effects on friendship deselection have thus far only been shown among adolescents (van Zalk, Kerr, Branje, Stattin, & Meeus, 2010) it is likely that they operate among children as well.
We hypothesized that cross-ethnic friendships would be less stable than same-ethnic friendships. We also hypothesized that children high in
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Ada
ms
Stat
e U
nive
rsity
] at
07:
58 0
4 D
ecem
ber
2014
STABILITY OF CROSS-ETHNIC FRIENDSHIPS 653
empathy and who perceived positive peer-group norms regarding cross-ethnic friendships would be more likely to have stable cross-ethnic friendships. In addition, we explored whether similarity in empathy and peer-group norms would predict stability of cross-ethnic friendship dyads.
METHOD
Participants
The sample was drawn from 17 fifth-grade classrooms from four lower track and three comprehensive secondary schools.1 The student body was on average 42% German, 20% Turkish, and 38% other or mixed-ethnic background (e.g., Albanian, Polish, Russian, etc.). None of the other ethnic groups made up more than 5% of the sample. The areas of the schools were predominantly low socioeconomic status (SES) as evidenced by neighbourhood statistics from the local bureau of statistics. At Time 1 a total of 269 children participated and 245 children took part five months later at Time 2. Although 232 children participated in both waves (attrition: 14%), for the individual analysis we examined the data of only German (n ¼ 82) and Turkish (n ¼ 37) students who had at least one reciprocated friend (Mage ¼ 10 years, 7 months, SD ¼ 0.68; 52% female).2 The Turkish children were predominantly second- and third-generation immigrants. Four children were born in Turkey, of which two reported that they had been in Germany for nine and ten years, respectively. The 91 students from other ethnic groups provided data necessary to determine the number of cross-ethnic friends held by German and Turkish students.3 For the social network analysis we used the full sample as described below.
1In the German school system children are separated after elementary school into different track schools on the basis of academic performance. Elementary school lasts four years in most German states. The highest track ‘‘Gymnasium’’ enables students to go on to study at University. The lower tracks enable students to study at polytechnic schools or to do an apprenticeship. The majority of ethnic minority children are clustered in lower track schools and comprehensive schools (Bildungsberichterstattung, 2008). Comprehensive schools differ from lower track schools in that they may also include students from the higher track.
2Our analysis concentrated on German majority and Turkish minority group children because the other groups were small and would not make a meaningful unit of analysis.
3Thus, there were on average 12 classmates per classroom and about five same-ethnic peers to nominate. For a German child, any reciprocated friendship with a peer that was not German was considered a cross-ethnic friendship. In parallel, any friendship of a Turkish child with a non-Turkish child was considered cross-ethnic. Thus, minority–minority dyads were also treated as cross-ethnic friendships.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Ada
ms
Stat
e U
nive
rsity
] at
07:
58 0
4 D
ecem
ber
2014
654 JUGERT, NOACK, RUTLAND
Procedure
Data were collected at the middle (January 2008; T1) and end (June 2008; T2) of the pupils’ first year of secondary school. Thus, we were assured that children had been together in the same class for six months already and were in a position to make informed friendship decisions. Questions were matched to gender and the order of questions referring to ethnic groups was counterbalanced. Measures are described in the order, in which they appeared in the questionnaire.
Measures
Friendship was assessed using a peer-nomination technique adapted from Aboud et al. (2003). Participants had to rate every same-sex classmate on a 5-point scale (1 ¼ Best friend, 2 ¼ Good friend, 3 ¼ OK friend, 4 ¼ OK but not really a friend, and 5 ¼ Don’t know very well). Each participant received a class list that contained a number associated with each name (e.g., ‘‘Girl 1: Tina S.’’). In the questionnaire, they then had to tick the box on the scale under Girl 1, Girl 2, etc. Dyads that rated each other as best or good friends were counted as mutual friends. Mutual friends were considered stable if they had been friends at T1 and T2, and dropped if they had been friends at T1 but not at T2.
Perceived peer group norms about cross-ethnic friendships were assessed with four items measuring both perceptions of German and Turkish children’s norms (Cameron & Rutland, 2008). For further details please consult Jugert et al. (2011). The correlations between the in-group and out-group norms items were high (all rs 4 .60) suggesting that both German and Turkish children perceived in-group and out-group norms about cross-ethnic friendships to be quite similar (cf. Jugert et al., 2011). Cronbach’s alphas at Times 1 and 2 were .85 and .82, for German children, and .82 and .86, for Turkish children.
We measured empathy using an 8-item scale devised by Nesdale, Griffith et al. (2005) with items like ‘‘It makes me happy when I see another kid win a prize’’ or ‘‘Seeing a kid who is crying makes me feel like crying’’. The items were scored on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (Not at all) to 5 (A lot). In addition, above each point on the scale was a picture of an animal, with the pictures systematically increasing in size. Cronbach’s alphas at Times 1 and 2 were .78 and .81, for German children, and .87 and .85, for Turkish children.
Analysis
We analysed the data at both an individual and a network level. First, we looked at whether cross-ethnic friendships were less stable than
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Ada
ms
Stat
e U
nive
rsity
] at
07:
58 0
4 D
ecem
ber
2014
STABILITY OF CROSS-ETHNIC FRIENDSHIPS 655
same-ethnic friendships with a mixed-design analysis of variance (ANOVA). Second, we sought to predict the probability of having stable cross-ethnic friendships using logistic regression analyses. Third, we used longitudinal social network analysis. One possible way of doing this is to use actor-oriented models of network evolution (Snijders, 2001) implemented in the Simulation Investigation for Empirical Network Analyses (SIENA) program (Ripley, Snijders, & Preciado, 2012). This method has been successfully used to assess processes of friendship selection and deselection (van Zalk et al., 2010). With SIENA we could examine deselection processes, that is, the extent to which attributes of both partners in a friendship dyad predicted the dissolution of previously existing friendship dyads. This is an indirect way of studying friendship stability. One advantage of this method is that it effectively controls for the interdependency inherent in friendship dyads and networks and that it takes into account characteristics of both partners in the friendship dyad as predictors of friendship stability.
To form the network included in this analysis, we used the full sample, including participants who were not German or Turkish. We created a network specifically for cross-ethnic friendships where a tie between two actors denoted a cross-ethnic friendship and a non-tie denoted a same-ethnic or no friendship. Cross-ethnic refers to friendships between German (n ¼ 125) and non-German (n ¼ 172) participants in this case. Because valued ties are not implemented in SIENA yet, we dichotomized the friendship measure (0 ¼ Values greater than or equal to 4 and 1 ¼ Values less than or equal to 3). As we had gathered data on same-sex friendships from seventeen classrooms, this resulted in 34 networks per time point. We combined the different networks in one large network per time point, indicating by structural zeros that ties between the networks were not permitted (Ripley et al., 2012).
RESULTS
Stability of same- vs. cross-ethnic friendships
We tested whether cross-ethnic friendships were less stable than same-ethnic friendships using proportions of stable friends as the dependent variable. The proportions were calculated for each participant by dividing the number of stable friends by the participant’s original number of friends (the sum of stable and dropped friends). Proportions were calculated separately for same- and cross-ethnic friends. A 2 (Participant’s Ethnicity: German, Turkish) 6 2 (Ethnicity of Friend: same-ethnic, cross-ethnic) mixed-design
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Ada
ms
Stat
e U
nive
rsity
] at
07:
58 0
4 D
ecem
ber
2014
656 JUGERT, NOACK, RUTLAND
ANOVA4 revealed a significant main effect for Friend’s Ethnicity, F(1, 117) ¼ 16.45, p 5 .001, Zp
2 ¼ .12. Inspection of means indicated, as expected, that cross-ethnic friends were less stable than same-ethnic friends (Ms ¼ 0.66 vs. 0.82, p 5 .001).
Predicting stability of cross-ethnic friendships
To explain the probability of having stable cross-ethnic friendships we performed logistic regression analysis, taking into account the respective contribution of ethnic group membership, empathy, peer-group norms as well as their interactions.5 We compared children with stable cross-ethnic friendships with children who had no stable cross-ethnic friendships. All variables were entered simultaneously. The results are displayed in Table 1. The probability of having stable cross-ethnic friendships is (marginally) higher for children who display empathy (B ¼ 0.81, odds ratio ¼ 2.24, p ¼ .088). There was a marginally significant interaction between ethnic group and perceived peer-group norms (B ¼ 71.66, odds ratio ¼ 0.19, p ¼ .077). To examine this interaction further, we conducted separate regression analyses for German and Turkish children. These analyses showed that increasing perceived peer norms resulted in more stable cross-
TABLE 1 Summary of logistic regression predicting stability of cross–ethnic friendships
Stable (vs. unstable)
B SE Wald statistic Odds ratio
Ethnic group 0.80 0.50 2.53 2.23 Empathy 0.81 0.47 2.91* 2.24 Norms 1.12 0.69 2.69 3.07 Norms 6 Ethnic group –1.66 0.94 3.12* 0.19 Constant –0.42 0.31 1.90 0.66
Note: Final model Stable (vs. unstable): 2 log likelihood ¼ 108.41; w 2(5) ¼ 12.45; p 5 .05; Nagelkerke R2 ¼ .18. *p 5 .10.
4We did not include gender as a between-subjects factor in this and the following analyses as initial analyses showed no significant gender effects. We also repeated the same analysis where we entered the number of same-ethnic and cross-ethnic friendships at the first assessment as covariates to control for the number of friendships. The results remained virtually the same. The main effect of friend’s ethnicity was still significant even though it was reduced in magnitude, F(1, 115) ¼ 5.50, p 5 .05, Zp
2 ¼ .05. 5We initially also included the interaction between peer norms and empathy as well as the
three-way interaction between ethnic group, peer norms, and empathy. However, since these interactions were not significant, we dropped these variables from the analysis.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Ada
ms
Stat
e U
nive
rsity
] at
07:
58 0
4 D
ecem
ber
2014
STABILITY OF CROSS-ETHNIC FRIENDSHIPS 657
ethnic friendships for German (B ¼ 1.53, odds ratio ¼ 4.6, p ¼ .017) but not for Turkish children (B ¼ 7 0.53, odds ratio ¼ 0.59, p ¼ .408).
We repeated the same analysis using stability of same-ethnic friendships as the dependent variable to verify that the effects of empathy and peer norms on friendship stability were unique to cross-ethnic friendships. Consistent with this notion, the overall model was not significant, 2 log likelihood ¼ 54.32; w 2(5) ¼ 0.73, p ¼ .981; Nagelkerke R2 ¼ .02, and there were no significant predictor variables (all ps 4 .350).
Longitudinal social network analysis
The dependent variable was changes in friendship nominations, specifically deselection of cross-ethnic friends, which refers to the change of a friend dyad at Time 1 to a non-friend dyad at Time 2. For each independent variable, higher negative significant values of estimates indicated that higher scores on an independent variable predicted a lower likelihood of deselecting a cross-ethnic friend versus not deselecting a cross-ethnic friend. We controlled for three structural network effects: Density, the number of outgoing ties; deselection reciprocity, the extent to which friendship deselection is reciprocated; and deselection transitivity, the tendency of individuals not to be friends with the friends of their non-friends (balance). It is important to control for these effects to avoid overestimation of the importance of our predictor variables (Snijders, 2001). Regarding our central predictors, ethnicity (0 ¼ Not German, 1 ¼ German), empathy and peer-group norms, we included the deselection effects for ego, alter, and in the case of empathy and norms also for similarity. The ego-effect refers to the actor’s activity; a positive parameter will imply the tendency that actors with higher values on this covariate decrease their out-degrees more rapidly. The alter-effect refers to the actors’ popularity to other actors; a positive parameter will imply the tendency that the in-degrees of actors with higher values on this covariate decrease more rapidly. A significant positive similarity effect denotes that actors prefer to dissolve ties to others with dissimilar values on this variable. We also included two-way interaction effects between ethnicity and empathy and ethnicity and peer-group norms. The results are summarized in Table 2.
Results showed significant main effects for empathy alter (Est. ¼ 70.51, SE ¼ 0.25, p 5 .05) and empathy similarity (Est. ¼ 72.61, SE ¼ 1.29, p 5 .05). These results indicate that children high in empathy were less likely to be deselected by their friends and that similarity in empathy between friends predicted less deselection between them. There were no significant interactions between ethnicity and empathy. There were also no significant main effects for peer-group norms but there was a significant
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Ada
ms
Stat
e U
nive
rsity
] at
07:
58 0
4 D
ecem
ber
2014
658 JUGERT, NOACK, RUTLAND
TABLE 2 Social network model pertaining to cross–ethnic friendship deselection
Variable Est. SE
Density –0.41* 0.15 Deselection
Reciprocity 1.21* 0.38 Balance –0.14* 0.07 Ethnicity ego –0.68 0.47 Ethnicity alter –0.16 0.37 Empathy ego 0.16 0.31 Empathy alter –0.51* 0.25 Empathy similarity –2.61* 1.29 Norms ego –0.20 0.41 Norms alter 0.43 0.30 Norms similarity –0.33 1.15 Ethnicity ego 6 Empathy ego –0.65 0.56 Ethnicity alter 6 Empathy alter 0.03 0.44 Ethnicity ego 6 Empathy alter 0.80 0.48 Ethnicity alter 6 Empathy ego 0.17 0.49 Ethnicity ego 6 Empathy similarity 0.89 2.27 Ethnicity alter 6 Empathy similarity 0.14 2.52 Ethnicity ego 6 Norms ego –0.50 0.79 Ethnicity alter 6 Norms alter 0.92 0.69 Ethnicity ego 6 Norms alter –1.18* 0.59 Ethnicity alter 6 Norms ego –0.40 .59
Ethnicity ego 6 Norms similarity –0.86 1.99 Ethnicity alter 6 Norms similarity –1.40 2.17
Note: *p 5 .05.
ethnicity ego 6 norms alter interaction (Est. ¼ 71.18, SE ¼ 0.59, p 5 .05). Unfortunately, it is not possible to resolve this interaction by ethnic group because this would require a separate analysis for German and non-German children, which is not possible given the nature of our dependent variable cross-ethnic friendships. We may speculate, however, that the significant interaction signifies that the magnitude of the effect for norms alter differs for German and non-German children, which is in line with the results from the logistic regression analysis. Finally, the included structural network effects were all significant. The density effect is difficult to interpret by itself but must always be included to control for the density in the network (Ripley et al., 2012). The effect for deselection reciprocity was significant and positive (Est. ¼ 1.21, SE ¼ 0.38, p 5 .05), indicating that friendship dissolution tended to be reciprocated. The effect for deselection balance was significant and negative (Est. ¼ 70.13, SE ¼ 0.07, p 5 .05), signifying that children tend not to directly deselect the friends of their non-friends over time.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Ada
ms
Stat
e U
nive
rsity
] at
07:
58 0
4 D
ecem
ber
2014
STABILITY OF CROSS-ETHNIC FRIENDSHIPS 659
DISCUSSION
We replicated previous findings from North America that cross-ethnic friendships are less stable than same-ethnic friendships (e.g., Aboud et al., 2003) in a European context. In addition, we showed that empathy and positive peer norms about cross-ethnic friendships were related to the maintenance of cross-ethnic friendships over a five-month period. Moreover, these findings were supported by longitudinal social network analysis, which has been rarely used yet in the study of cross-ethnic friendship stability (Lee et al., 2007).
Our finding regarding the role of empathy is consistent with the view that advanced social skills are necessary to reduce prejudice and discrimination, thereby overcoming formidable obstacles to cross-ethnic interaction (Aboud & Levy, 2000). We showed that empathy might not only increase out-group liking but can also increase the chances that children keep their cross-ethnic friendships. In line with Lease and Blake (2005), our results confirm that children who have lasting cross-ethnic friendships are not socially maladjusted but instead possess superior social skills in form of empathy. Similarly, findings by Kawabata and Crick (2008) suggest that cross-ethnic friendships are uniquely associated with prosocial behaviour. Thus, even though prosocial behaviour plays an important role in promoting formation and stability of friendships regardless of ethnic composition (Aboud & Mendelson, 1996), our results add to increasing evidence that social competence is crucial to cross ethnic boundaries. We argue that the ability to take the social and emotional perspective of another afforded by empathy may equip children with the necessary skills to endure possible misunderstandings and conflicts that are more likely to arise in cross-ethnic than same-ethnic friendships (Schneider et al., 2007).
This study further showed that peer norms play an important role in regulating majority group children’s friendships with cross-ethnic peers. Other studies have shown that children’s decisions to engage in cross-ethnic friendships are affected by perceived peer norms (Aboud & Sankar, 2007; Jugert et al., 2011). This study extends this research and shows for the first time that peer norms also affect (majority) children’s decisions to maintain cross-ethnic friendships. This finding points to the importance of group processes in the formation of children’s friendships. Developmentally, children become more selective in their friendship formation and maintenance as they approach adolescence (Pica-Smith, 2011). While younger children are more likely to focus on visible similarities like age, gender, and ethnicity when making friendship decisions older children may focus more on who is perceived as acceptable by their peer group.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Ada
ms
Stat
e U
nive
rsity
] at
07:
58 0
4 D
ecem
ber
2014
660 JUGERT, NOACK, RUTLAND
Yet, the interactive results of peer-group norms on cross-ethnic friendship stability suggests that peer norms only affected German children’s decisions on whether to maintain cross-ethnic friendships. One explanation for this finding may be that Turkish children are more influenced in their friendship decisions by norms and rules in the family than by peer-group norms. Support for this notion comes from studies showing that Turkish children living in the Netherlands display higher personal collectivism than native Dutch children (Verkuyten & Masson, 1996). Moreover, research also shows that adolescents of collectivistic cultural groups rely more on the opinions of parents who often monitor the friendship choices of their children very closely (Yu & Berryman, 1996). Future studies should thus attempt to measure perceived parental norms to see whether children from collectivist groups consider parental norms more than peer norms when forming their friendships.
The results of this study point to some practical implications. Educators who are interested in promoting lasting cross-ethnic interactions in their schools should make use of available interventions that facilitate individual social skills like emotional empathy (e.g., Aboud & Levy, 2000). However, practitioners should also focus on group processes (e.g., peer norms) in order to be successful. Cooperative learning techniques like the jigsaw classroom (Aronson, Blaney, Stephan, Sikes, & Snapp, 1978) and extended inter-ethnic contact interventions (Cameron, Rutland, Brown, & Douch, 2006) may be an effective way to challenge existing detrimental peer norms and to create intergroup harmony.
This study had a number of limitations. First, the sample size was relatively small. Second, we cannot rule out the possibility that empathy could be the result rather than the cause of stable cross-ethnic friendships. Future studies should try to include larger samples, a wider age range and test alternative causal direction by including more measurement points.6
In conclusion, this study points to the role of empathy and peer norms in the maintenance of cross-ethnic friendships. Despite the limited scope of this study, we hope that our findings encourage future longitudinal analyses of friendship development in intergroup contexts.
Manuscript received 15 September 2011 Revised manuscript accepted 21 September 2012
First published online 16 October 2012
Even though we used longitudinal data, friendship stability can only be computed in the combination of two time points. Therefore one would need an additional assessment to test the alternative possibility that stability also affects empathy and norms.
6
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Ada
ms
Stat
e U
nive
rsity
] at
07:
58 0
4 D
ecem
ber
2014
STABILITY OF CROSS-ETHNIC FRIENDSHIPS 661
REFERENCESAboud, F. E., & Levy, S. R. (2000). Interventions to reduce prejudice and discrimination in
children and adolescents. In S. Oskamp (Ed.), Reducing prejudice and discrimination (pp. 269–294). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Aboud, F. E., & Mendelson, M. J. (1996). Determinants of friendship selection and quality: Developmental perspectives. In W. M. Bukowski, A. F. Newcomb, & W. W. Hartup (Eds.), The company they keep—Friendship in childhood and adolescence (pp. 87–112). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Aboud, F. E., Mendelson, M. J., & Purdy, K. T. (2003). Cross-race peer relations and friendship quality. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 27, 165–173.
Aboud, F. E., & Sankar, J. (2007). Friendship and identity in a language-integrated school. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 31, 445–453.
Abrams, D., Rutland, A., & Cameron, L. (2003). The development of subjective group dynamics: Children’s judgments of normative and deviant in-group and out-group individuals. Child Development, 74, 1840–1856.
Aronson, E., Blaney, N., Stephan, C., Sikes, J., & Snapp, M. (1978). Jigsaw groups and the desegregated classroom. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Bildungsberichterstattung. (2008). Bildung in Deutschland 2008: Ein indikatorengestutzter Bericht mit einer Analyse zu U bergangen im Anschluss an den Sekundarbereich I. Bielefeld, ¨
Germany: Bertelsmann. Bukowski, W. M., & Sippola, L. K. (1996). Friendship and morality: (How) are they related? In
W. M. Bukowski, A. F. Newcomb, & W. W. Hartup (Eds.), The company they keep— Friendship in childhood and adolescence (pp. 238–261). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Burk, W. J., Kerr, M., & Stattin, H. (2008). The co-evolution of early adolescent friendship networks, school involvement, and delinquent behaviors. Revue Franc aise de Sociologie, 49, 499–522.
Cameron, L., & Rutland, A. (2008). An integrative approach to changing children’s intergroup attitudes. In S. Levy & M. Killen (Eds.), Intergroup attitudes and relations in childhood through adulthood (pp. 191–203). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Cameron, L., Rutland, A., Brown, R. J., & Douch, R. (2006). Changing children’s intergroup attitudes toward refugees: Testing different models of extended contact. Child Development, 77, 1208–1219.
Eisenberg, N., Fabes, R., Miller, P. A., & Shell, R. (1990). Preschoolers’ vicarious emotional responding and their situational and dispositional prosocial behavior. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly: Journal of Developmental Psychology, 36(4), 507–529.
Eisenberg, N., Sallquist, J., French, D. C., Purwono, U., Suryanti, T. A., & Pidada, S. (2009). The relations of majority–minority group status and having an other-religion friend to Indonesian youths’ socioemotional functioning. Developmental Psychology, 45(1), 248– 259.
Eisenberg, N., & Strayer, J. (1987). Empathy and its development. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Feddes, A. R., Noack, P., & Rutland, A. (2009). Direct and extended friendship effects on minority and majority children’s interethnic attitudes: A longitudinal study. Child Development, 80, 337–390.
Hallinan, M. T., & Williams, R. A. (1987). The stability of students’ interracial friendships. American Sociological Review, 52, 653–664.
Horn, S. S. (2006). Group status, group bias, and adolescents’ reasoning about the treatment of others in school contexts. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 30, 200–218.
Jugert, P., Noack, P., & Rutland, A. (2011). Friendship preferences among German and Turkish preadolescents. Child Development, 82(3), 812–829.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Ada
ms
Stat
e U
nive
rsity
] at
07:
58 0
4 D
ecem
ber
2014
662 JUGERT, NOACK, RUTLAND
Kawabata, Y., & Crick, N. R. (2008). The role of cross-racial/ethnic friendships in social adjustment. Developmental Psychology, 44, 1177–1183.
Kawabata, Y., & Crick, N. R. (2011). The antecedents of friendships in moderately diverse classrooms: Social preference, social impact, and social behavior. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 35(1), 48–57.
Killen, M., & Rutland, A. (2011). Children and social exclusion: Morality, prejudice, and group identity. Chichester, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.
Lease, A. M., & Blake, J. J. (2005). A comparison of majority-race children with and without a minority-race friend. Social Development, 14, 20–41.
Lee, L., Howes, C., & Chamberlain, B. (2007). Ethnic heterogeneity of social networks and cross-ethnic friendships of elementary school boys and girls. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 53, 325–346.
Nesdale, D. (2004). Social identity processes and children’s ethnic prejudice. In M. Bennett & F. Sani (Eds.), The development of the social self (pp. 219–245). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
Nesdale, D., Griffith, J., Durkin, K., & Maass, A. (2005). Empathy, group norms and children’s ethnic attitudes. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 26, 623–637.
Nesdale, D., Maass, A., Durkin, K., & Griffith, J. (2005). Group norms, threat, and children’s racial prejudice. Child Development, 76, 652–663.
Ojala, K., & Nesdale, D. (2004). Bullying and social identity: The effects of group norms and distinctiveness threat on attitudes towards bullying. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 22, 19–35.
Pica-Smith, C. (2011). Children’s perceptions of interethnic and interracial friendships in a multiethnic school context. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 25(2), 119–132.
Ripley, R. M., Snijders, T. A. B., & Preciado, P. (2012). Manual for RSiena. University of Oxford, UK: Department of Statistics, Nuffield College.
Rutland, A., Cameron, L., Milne, A., & McGeorge, P. (2005). Social norms and self-presentation: Children’s implicit and explicit intergroup attitudes. Child Development, 76, 451–466.
Schneider, B. H., Dixon, K., & Udvari, S. (2007). Closeness and competition in the inter-ethnic and co-ethnic friendships of early adolescents in Toronto and Montreal. Journal of Early Adolescence, 27, 115–138.
Smith, A., & Schneider, B. H. (2000). The inter-ethnic friendships of adolescent students: A Canadian study. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 24, 247–258.
Snijders, T. A. B. (2001). The statistical evaluation of social network dynamics. Sociological Methodology, 31(1), 361–395.
van Zalk, M. H. W., Kerr, M., Branje, S. J. T., Stattin, H., & Meeus, W. H. J. (2010). It takes three: Selection, influence, and deselection processes of depression in adolescent friendship networks. Developmental Psychology, 46(4), 927–938.
Verkuyten, M., & Masson, K. (1996). Culture and gender differences in the perception of friendship by adolescents. International Journal of Psychology, 31, 207–217.
Yu, P., & Berryman, D. L. (1996). The relationship among self-esteem, acculturation, and recreation participation of recently arrived Chinese immigrant adolescents. Journal of Leisure Research, 28(4), 251–273.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Ada
ms
Stat
e U
nive
rsity
] at
07:
58 0
4 D
ecem
ber
2014
