Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
addClaim

Gender Differences in Friendship Quality Across Adolescence

Gender Differences in Friendship Quality Across Adolescence

Abstract

It is often assumed that adolescent girls are more socially adept than their male counterparts. However, the question of whether adolescent girls’ and boys’ close friendships differ in quality is largely unexplored in the literature. The present study aims to address this question by characterizing the development of boys’ and girls’ friendship quality across seven years of adolescence, from the ages of 13 to 19. A community sample of 184 adolescents (53% female) and their closest friends participated, and observational and self-report measures of friendship quality were collected. Growth curve analyses revealed that girls’ friendship quality grew faster in early adolescence (ages 13-16), while boys’ friendship quality grew faster in later adolescence (ages 16-19), supporting the notion that boys lag in their social development. Boys’ self-reported friendship quality was lower than that of girls across all seven years of adolescence, with the strongest difference at the age of 16. Boys’ observed friendship quality was lower than that of girls only in the middle adolescent years of 14-16; this was followed by a rebound such that boys and girls were observed to demonstrate equivalent friendship quality in late adolescence. It is evident that teens’ perceptions of their friendships may not always align with their observed friendship behaviors. However, one intriguing similarity between the self-report and observational data is the finding that boys’ friendship quality appears to drop behind girls’ most robustly in the middle adolescent years. Possible reasons for this phenomenon are discussed.

Related Organizations
Keywords

social development, adolescence, friendship quality

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
0
Average
Average
Average
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!