TY - JOUR
T1 - The upsides and downsides of the dark side
T2 - A longitudinal study into the role of prosocial and antisocial strategies in close friendship formation
AU - Ciarrochi, Joseph
AU - Sahdra, Baljinder K.
AU - Hawley, Patricia H.
AU - Devine, Emma K.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 Ciarrochi, Sahdra, Hawley and Devine.
PY - 2019
Y1 - 2019
N2 - Resource control theory (RCT) posits that both antisocial and prosocial behaviors combine in unique ways to control resources such as friendships. We assessed students (N = 2,803; 49.7% male) yearly from junior (grades 8-10) to senior high school (11-12) on antisocial (A) and prosocial (P) behavior, peer nominated friendship, and well-being. Non-parametric cluster analyses of the joint trajectories of A and P identified four stable profiles: non-strategic (moderately low A and P), bi-strategic (moderately high on A and P), prosocial (moderately low A and moderately high on P), and antisocial (moderately low on P, and very high on A). There were clear benefits to youth using bi-strategic strategies in junior high: they attracted relatively high levels of opposite sex friendship nominations. However, this benefit disappeared in senior high. There were also clear costs: bi-strategic youth experienced relatively low well-being, and this effect was significantly more pronounced for females than males. Prosocial youth were the only ones who maintained both high friendship numbers and high well-being throughout high school. We discuss the cost/benefit trade-offs of different resource control strategies.
AB - Resource control theory (RCT) posits that both antisocial and prosocial behaviors combine in unique ways to control resources such as friendships. We assessed students (N = 2,803; 49.7% male) yearly from junior (grades 8-10) to senior high school (11-12) on antisocial (A) and prosocial (P) behavior, peer nominated friendship, and well-being. Non-parametric cluster analyses of the joint trajectories of A and P identified four stable profiles: non-strategic (moderately low A and P), bi-strategic (moderately high on A and P), prosocial (moderately low A and moderately high on P), and antisocial (moderately low on P, and very high on A). There were clear benefits to youth using bi-strategic strategies in junior high: they attracted relatively high levels of opposite sex friendship nominations. However, this benefit disappeared in senior high. There were also clear costs: bi-strategic youth experienced relatively low well-being, and this effect was significantly more pronounced for females than males. Prosocial youth were the only ones who maintained both high friendship numbers and high well-being throughout high school. We discuss the cost/benefit trade-offs of different resource control strategies.
KW - Empathy
KW - Resource control theory
KW - Self-concept and self esteem
KW - Sex differences
KW - Well-being
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85064394139&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00114
DO - 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00114
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85064394139
SN - 1664-1078
VL - 10
JO - Frontiers in Psychology
JF - Frontiers in Psychology
IS - FEB
M1 - 114
ER -