Relational Aggression, Physical Aggression and Deception During Early Childhood: A Multimethod, Multi-informant Short-Term Longitudinal Study

Abstract

A short-term longitudinal study examined relational and physical aggression and deceptive behavior among 120 preschool-aged children (M = 44.36 months old, SD = 11.07). Multiple informants and methods (i.e., observational, teacher reports) were used. Evidence for discriminant validity of the observations of aggression subtypes was found. For example, observations of relational aggression were more highly associated with teacher reports of relational aggression than teacher reports of physical aggression. Observed relational aggression was significantly associated with concurrent and prospective increases in deceptive behavior, even after controlling for gender and observed physical aggression. In addition, observed relational aggression was a unique significant predictor of concurrent deception, above and beyond teacher reports of aggression subtypes, which provides important support for the utility of the observational methods.

Portions of this study were presented at the 2007 biennial meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Boston; 2006 world meeting of the International Society for Research on Aggression, Minneapolis, MN; 2005 meeting of the International Society for Research on Impulsivity, Washington, DC; and the 8th National Head Start Research Conference, Washington, DC. The contribution of the entire Early Childhood PLAY Project staff is greatly appreciated. Special recognition is given to Jamie L. Guzzo for her contributions and assistance with the coordination of this project. We thank the families, teachers, and directors of participating schools.

Notes

¹A detailed coding manual is available for research purposes from the first author.

Note: Ragg = relational aggression; Pagg = physical aggression; Obs = observations; TR = teacher report; T1 = Time 1; T2 = Time 2.

∗p < .05. ∗∗p < .01. ∗∗∗p < .001.

Note: Ragg = relational aggression; Pagg = physical aggression; Obs = observations; TR = teacher report.

∗p < .05. ∗∗p < .01. ∗∗∗p < .001.

²The models were run controlling for age and the findings were identical, and thus, for ease of communication, the more parsimonious model is shown.

³Consistent with findings reported in Model 1, deception (β = .22, p < .001) was significantly associated with concurrent observed physical aggression, above and beyond observed relational aggression and gender, ΔF(1, 104) = 5.14, p < .025, ΔR ² = .04 (R ² = .12). Also consistent with Model 1, deception (β = .22, p = .03) was significantly associated with concurrent observed relational aggression, above and beyond observed physical aggression and gender, ΔF(1, 104) = 4.86, p = .03, ΔR ² = .04 (R ² = .07).

⁴The study was designed to test if observations of aggression predicted concurrent and future deception when controlling for teacher reports of aggression. The unique predictive utility of teacher reports were not central given the shared method variance concerns with teacher reports of both aggression and deception. However, as a follow-up, two regression models were conducted to test if teacher reports of aggression predicted deception above and beyond observational reports. It is not surprising that teacher-reported physical (β = .40, p < .001) and relational (β = .49, p < .001) aggression both uniquely predicted concurrent deception above and beyond observations, ΔF(2, 92) = 83.35, p < .001, ΔR ² = .49. Teacher reports of physical (β = .16, p = .23) and relational (β = .01, p = .97) aggression did not predict increases in deception when accounting for observations of aggression and gender, ΔF(2, 67) = .73, p = .49, ΔR ² = .01.