Affective associations with negativity: Why popular peers attract youths' visual attention.

Visual attention to high-status peers is well documented, but whether this attentional bias is due to high-status individuals' leadership and prosocial characteristics or due to their more agonistic behaviors has yet to be examined. To identify the affective associations that may underlie visual attention for high-status versus low-status peers, 122 early adolescents (67 girls; Mage=11.0years, SD=0.7) completed a primed attention paradigm. Visual attention was measured using eye tracking as participants looked simultaneously at photographs of two classmates: one nominated by peers as popular and one nominated by peers as unpopular. Prior to each trial, the early adolescents were presented with a positive prime, the word "nice"; a negative prime, the word "stupid"; or no prime. Primary analyses focused on first-gaze preference and total gaze time The results showed a stronger first gaze preference for popular peers than for unpopular peers in the no-prime and negative prime trials than in the positive prime trials. The visual preference for a popular peer, thus, was attenuated by the positive prime. These findings are consistent with the notion that youths may visually attend to high-status peers due to their association with more negative characteristics and the threat they may pose to youths' own social standing and ability to gain interpersonal resources.

[1]  Robin I. M. Dunbar.  Primate social systems , 1987 .

[2]  Geoffrey L. Cohen,et al.  Peer contagion of aggression and health risk behavior among adolescent males: an experimental investigation of effects on public conduct and private attitudes. , 2006, Child development.

[3]  D. Hermans,et al.  The affective priming effect: Automatic activation of evaluative information in memory. , 1994 .

[4]  Le Song,et al.  The ‘when’ and ‘where’ of perceiving signals of threat versus non-threat , 2006, NeuroImage.

[5]  M. Prinstein,et al.  High peer popularity longitudinally predicts adolescent health risk behavior, or does it?: an examination of linear and quadratic associations. , 2011, Journal of pediatric psychology.

[6]  B. Hallowell,et al.  Validity of eye movement methods and indices for capturing semantic (associative) priming effects. , 2009, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[7]  A. Cillessen,et al.  Popularity differentially predicts reactive and proactive aggression in early adolescence. , 2016, Aggressive behavior.

[8]  Johan C. Karremans,et al.  Implicit associations with popularity in early adolescence: an approach-avoidance analysis. , 2012, Developmental psychology.

[9]  Michael L. Platt,et al.  Monkeys Pay Per View: Adaptive Valuation of Social Images by Rhesus Macaques , 2005, Current Biology.

[10]  M. Vermande,et al.  Bullying as strategic behavior: relations with desired and acquired dominance in the peer group. , 2011, Journal of school psychology.

[11]  W. Charlesworth,et al.  Dominance, attention, and affiliation in a preschool group: a nine-month longitudinal study , 1983 .

[12]  G. Galfano,et al.  Social status gates social attention in humans , 2012, Biology Letters.

[13]  A. Cillessen,et al.  Is Being Popular a Risky Proposition , 2008 .

[14]  Kate Musgrove,et al.  Dimensions of Social Status in Preadolescent Peer Groups: Likability, Perceived Popularity, and Social Dominance , 2002 .

[15]  A. Pellegrini,et al.  Dominance in Early Adolescent Boys: Affiliative and Aggressive Dimensions and Possible Functions , 2001 .

[16]  K. Mogg,et al.  Effects of anxiety and awareness on colour-identification latencies for emotional words. , 1993, Behaviour research and therapy.

[17]  Nicole L. McNelis,et al.  Social monitoring in a primate group: the relationship between visual attention and hierarchical ranks , 1998, Animal Cognition.

[18]  D. Pepler,et al.  Observations of aggressive and nonaggressive children on the school playground. , 1998 .

[19]  Kai J. Jonas,et al.  Perception in a social context: attention for response-functional means , 2013 .

[20]  A. Cillessen,et al.  Developmental trajectories of adolescent popularity: a growth curve modelling analysis. , 2006, Journal of adolescence.

[21]  P. Hawley.  Prosocial and Coercive Configurations of Resource Control in Early Adolescence: A Case for the Well-Adapted Machiavellian , 2003 .

[22]  Kathryn M. LaFontana,et al.  Children's perceptions of popular and unpopular peers: a multimethod assessment. , 2002, Developmental psychology.

[23]  Jeff T. Larsen,et al.  May I have your attention, please: Electrocortical responses to positive and negative stimuli , 2003, Neuropsychologia.

[24]  E. Waters,et al.  Attention structure, sociometric status, and dominance: Interrelations, behavioral correlates, and relationships to social competence. , 1981 .

[25]  C. H. Hansen,et al.  Finding the face in the crowd : An anger superiority effect , 1988 .

[26]  C. Nathan DeWall,et al.  Selective Attention to Signs of Success: Social Dominance and Early Stage Interpersonal Perception , 2008, Personality & social psychology bulletin.

[27]  M. Prinstein,et al.  Forms and Functions of Adolescent Peer Aggression Associated With High Levels of Peer Status , 2003 .

[28]  J. de Houwer,et al.  On the malleability of automatic attentional biases: Effects of feature-specific attention allocation , 2013, Cognition & emotion.

[29]  A. Ohman,et al.  The face in the crowd revisited: a threat advantage with schematic stimuli. , 2001, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[30]  A. Cillessen,et al.  From censure to reinforcement: developmental changes in the association between aggression and social status. , 2004, Child development.

[31]  Patricia H. Hawley,et al.  The Ontogenesis of Social Dominance: A Strategy-Based Evolutionary Perspective , 1999 .

[32]  Kathryn M. LaFontana,et al.  Developmental Changes in the Priority of Perceived Status in Childhood and Adolescence. , 2010 .

[33]  A. Cillessen,et al.  Likeable versus popular: Distinct implications for adolescent adjustment , 2006 .

[34]  D. Nagin,et al.  Developmental trajectories of physical aggression from school entry to late adolescence. , 2001, Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, and allied disciplines.

[35]  R. McNally,et al.  Cognitive processing of emotional information in panic disorder. , 1992, Behaviour research and therapy.

[36]  J. Yiend.  The effects of emotion on attention: A review of attentional processing of emotional information , 2010 .

[37]  I. Olson,et al.  Understanding social hierarchies: The neural and psychological foundations of status perception , 2015, Social neuroscience.

[38]  Tom Foulsham,et al.  Gaze allocation in a dynamic situation: Effects of social status and speaking , 2010, Cognition.

[39]  Johan C. Karremans,et al.  Adolescents' selective visual attention for high-status peers: the role of perceiver status and gender. , 2014, Child development.

[40]  K. Vohs,et al.  Case Western Reserve University , 1990 .

[41]  S. Chaiken,et al.  The generality of the automatic attitude activation effect. , 1992, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[42]  A. Cillessen,et al.  Conceptualizing and measuring popularity , 2011 .

[43]  A. Pellegrini.  The roles of aggressive and affiliative behaviors in resource control: A behavioral ecological perspective , 2008 .

[44]  Frits A. Goossens,et al.  Peer Group Affiliation of Children: The Role of Perceived Popularity, Likeability, and Behavioral Similarity in Bullying , 2010 .

[45]  Inge B. Wissink,et al.  Associations of Peer Acceptance and Perceived Popularity With Bullying and Victimization in Early Adolescence , 2010 .

[46]  M. Prinstein,et al.  Peer status and victimization as possible reinforcements of adolescent girls' and boys' weight-related behaviors and cognitions. , 2010, Journal of pediatric psychology.

[47]  Amanda J. Rose,et al.  Overt and relational aggression and perceived popularity: developmental differences in concurrent and prospective relations. , 2004, Developmental psychology.

[48]  L. Nummenmaa,et al.  Automatic activation of adolescents' peer-relational schemas: evidence from priming with facial identity. , 2008, Child development.