Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Pacifists and Revenge-Seekers in Response to Unambiguous Peer Provocation

  • Empirical Research
  • Published:
Journal of Youth and Adolescence Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In order to better understand why some children retaliate when they feel provoked and others do not, the present study identified “pacifistically-oriented” children who made negative interpretations in response to unambiguous provocations, yet did not endorse revenge goals, and compared them to “revenge-seeking” children who also made negative interpretations but did endorse revenge goals. Groups were identified based on seventh graders’ (N = 367; 54.77% male; 22.89% racial/ethnic minority) responses to hypothetical situations in which a peer excluded and insulted them. Comparing these groups revealed that Pacifists endorsed relationship-maintaining goals and emotion regulation goals more highly than Revenge-Seekers. Revenge-Seekers reported more anger and endorsed beliefs about negative reciprocity and aggression being legitimate more highly than Pacifists. Additionally, Revenge-Seekers were more disrespect sensitive than were Pacifists, based on a measure of vigilance for signs of disrespect and expectations that others would disrespect them. Together these findings point to social-cognitive and emotion-related processes that may inhibit revenge-seeking in unambiguous provocation situations, even when children interpret the peer’s behavior quite negatively.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The pattern of results for the ANOVAs examining acceptance and popularity, as well as the MANOVA for the behavioral nominations, were the same when nominations and acceptance ratings were standardized within gender and team.

References

Download references

Acknowledgements

This article is based on an unpublished doctoral dissertation submitted to Duke University by the first author. The authors wish to thank dissertation committee members Philip Costanzo, Rick Hoyle, Mark Leary, Martha Putallaz, and Neil Vidmar for their contributions. The authors also would like to thank the children who participated in the study, the schools and teachers who helped to facilitate data collection, William Frye who helped with data collection, and Molly Stroud Weeks and Dan Blalock who helped with data entry.

Authors' Contributions

KM and SA conceived of the study and designed the study. KM collected the data and performed the statistical analyses. KM and SA collaborated on the interpretation of the findings and jointly wrote the manuscript. Both authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Funding

The research reported in this manuscript was supported in part by: 1) a dissertation fellowship to the first author funded by a National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Training Grant (T32 HD007376 19) to the Center for Developmental Science at the University of North Carolina; and 2) a dissertation fellowship to the first author from the Kenan Institute for Ethics at Duke University.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kristina L. McDonald.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Consistent with Federal Regulation 45.46.116, and with approval by the Duke University Institutional Review Board, parents were informed about the study and were asked to contact the researchers or the school if they had any questions or did not want their child to participate. Children also gave their assent before every data collection session.

Additional information

Data Sharing Declaration

The datasets generated and analyzed during the current study are not publicly available, but are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Electronic supplementary material

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

McDonald, K.L., Asher, S.R. Pacifists and Revenge-Seekers in Response to Unambiguous Peer Provocation. J Youth Adolescence 47, 1907–1925 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-017-0767-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-017-0767-4

Keywords

Navigation