Effects of Gender Typicality and Atypicality in the Features and Similarities Models of Friendship Selection

• In Event: Poster Session 07
  In Poster Session: PS 07 Topic - Social Relationships

Abstract

Introduction: Peer relationships are particularly important during adolescence. Friendships, specifically, are associated with positive outcomes and adjustment, such as buffering against peer victimization (Boulton et al., 1999). Two models of friendship selection are well established. In the features model, friends are selected based on the possession of desirable features or characteristics (Aboud & Mendelson, 1996). The similarities model holds that friendships are forged based on similarities (Byrne & Griffitt, 1969). The current study focused on disentangling these two models in a Brazilian sample of early adolescents, specifically in terms of how gender-typical or -atypical early adolescents and their friends are.

Method: Participants were 148 early adolescents in the seventh and eighth grades in Curitiba, Brazil (Mage = 14.11, SDage = 1.10, 54.1% female). To measure peer liking, participants were provided with a list of participating classmates and indicated how much they liked each. Participants also nominated for each gender one best friend, one second-best friend, one third-best friend, and an unlimited number of other friends. Gender typicality and atypicality were measured using two peer nomination items (“Who in your class acts like a girl?” and “Who in your class acts like a boy?”). The number of same-gender nominations was divided by the size of the same-gender peer group to generate typicality and atypicality scores. Analyses were performed using logistic and traditional multilevel modeling to account for nonindependence and the nested nature of the data.

Results: Analyses concerning peer liking yielded support for both models of friendship selection. Not surprisingly, children liked peers who liked them back, reflecting support for the similarities model. Children liked peers who were higher in typicality more, and those high in atypicality less, supporting the features framework. However, regarding preference for same-gender peers, children liked those higher in typicality more, reflecting evidence for both models.

Results regarding friendship selection also supported both frameworks. As expected, children were more likely to choose a peer as a friend if that peer had also chosen them as a friend, supporting the similarities model. However, gender-atypical children were more likely to nominate gender-typical peers as friends, providing evidence for the features framework. Additionally, gender-atypical children were more likely to choose a gender-atypical peer as a friend, backing the similarities framework (Figure 1).

Analyses surrounding friendship closeness indicated that children were more likely to rate a peer who liked them as a closer friend, again providing support for the similarities perspective. However, being a reciprocated friend was not related to friendship closeness. Atypical friends were rated as being less close, but friendship typicality did not affect closeness, partially supporting the features model (Figure 2).

Conclusions: The current study examined gender typicality and atypicality as a function of two models of friendship selection: the features model and the similarities model. Not surprisingly, support was found for both. This extends existing research to a Brazilian sample. Future research should focus on replication of the current findings and ultimately, the development of a framework to reconcile the two frameworks of friendship selection.

Authors

• Mithra H. Pirooz, University of Nebraska - Omaha
  Presenting Author

• Cara Neufeld, University of Nebraska at Omaha
  Non-Presenting Author

• Jonathan Bruce Santo, University of Nebraska - Omaha
  Non-Presenting Author

• Josafá M. Da Cunha, Federal University of Parana
  Non-Presenting Author