Peer rejection and social network isolation aren’t the same thing in early adolescence, according to new research.
For years, psychology researchers have treated peer rejection and social network isolation as being somewhat interchangeable when it comes to early adolescence; it was thought that if kids fell into one of those two groups, they fell into the other.
The new research finds that socially isolated kids face different risks.
“Broadly speaking, there are two types of socially marginalized groups in early adolescence,” says Kate Norwalk, lead author of the study and an assistant professor of psychology at North Carolina State University. “There are kids who face peer rejection, meaning they are disliked by other kids; and there are kids who are experiencing social network isolation, meaning they don’t have a group of friends. Historically, I think researchers have treated these two groups as being the same.
“What I wanted to explore with this study is whether these two groups are actually distinct from each other, and what that means for the well-being of these kids. We know a lot about rejected kids—there’s decades of research on them. But we really haven’t paid any attention to isolated kids. And, as it turns out, they are very different.”
For their study, Norwalk and her collaborators drew on data from 1,075 students in 5th, 6th, and 7th grade. The students were surveyed twice a year for two years. The study measured peer rejection by asking the students who they “liked least” in their class. They measured social network isolation by asking kids to describe who in their class “hangs out together;” kids who were not named were considered isolated, because they were not identified as being part of any peer group. Students were also asked which students in their classes exhibited a range of specific behaviors. Lastly, students were asked whether they thought peers would help them if they were being bullied.
Simply put, the researchers found that there were clear distinctions between kids who were rejected and kids who were isolated.
“There was very little overlap between the two groups,” Norwalk says. “Most of the kids who were liked least in a class still had some sort of peer group; and the kids who didn’t have a peer group weren’t especially disliked.”
In fact, one of the only things the two groups had in common was that being in either the rejected group or the isolated group was associated with an increased risk of victimization—meaning that students in either group were more likely than other kids to be picked on or bullied.
But while each group was also associated with other behavioral challenges, the nature of those challenges varied significantly.
Students in the rejected group were more likely than other kids to exhibit aggressive behavior, such as bullying and disrupting class. They were also less likely to exhibit prosocial behavior, such as being kind and doing well in the classroom.
This was not the case with students in the isolated group, who were more likely to exhibit internalizing behaviors, such as being shy and withdrawn. Kids in the isolated group were also the only ones who generally reported that they would not expect support from their peers if they were bullied.
“This study shows that students facing peer rejection and students dealing with social isolation have different profiles and face different risks,” Norwalk says. “What’s more, isolated kids may be more likely to fly under the radar precisely because they’re not causing problems in class or bullying other kids.
“But children grappling with social isolation clearly need support. The internalization behaviors we see associated with isolated kids in this study are often early symptoms of mental health challenges. And because they are isolated, teachers and parents may be less likely to identify them as victims of bullying—even as they struggle with less peer support against bullying,” Norwalk says.
“I think we—parents, teachers, counselors, researchers—need to find ways to better identify and support those kids.”
The study appears in the Journal of Youth and Adolescence. Coauthors are from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the University of South Carolina, and the University of Pittsburgh. Support for the work came from the Institute of Educational Sciences.
Source: NC State
Related Books:
Atomic Habits: An Easy & Proven Way to Build Good Habits & Break Bad Ones
by James Clear
Atomic Habits provides practical advice for developing good habits and breaking bad ones, based on scientific research on behavior change.
Click for more info or to order
The Four Tendencies: The Indispensable Personality Profiles That Reveal How to Make Your Life Better (and Other People's Lives Better, Too)
by Gretchen Rubin
The Four Tendencies identifies four personality types and explains how understanding your own tendencies can help you improve your relationships, work habits, and overall happiness.
Click for more info or to order
Think Again: The Power of Knowing What You Don't Know
by Adam Grant
Think Again explores how people can change their minds and attitudes, and offers strategies for improving critical thinking and decision making.
Click for more info or to order
The Body Keeps the Score: Brain, Mind, and Body in the Healing of Trauma
by Bessel van der Kolk
The Body Keeps the Score discusses the connection between trauma and physical health, and offers insights into how trauma can be treated and healed.
Click for more info or to order
The Psychology of Money: Timeless lessons on wealth, greed, and happiness
by Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money examines the ways in which our attitudes and behaviors around money can shape our financial success and overall well-being.
Click for more info or to order
This article originally appeared on Futurity
