Implicit Theories of Friendships: Examining the Roles of Growth and Destiny Beliefs in Children’s Friendships A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA BY Sara Gayle Kempner IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY W. Andrew Collins, Ph.D., Nicki R. Crick, Ph.D. August 2008
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Implicit Theories of Friendships:
Examining the Roles of Growth and Destiny Beliefs in Children’s Friendships
Gender and ethnic differences. In the present sample, gender differences were
inconsistent across the two time points and on the growth and destiny scales. In line with
predictions, girls scored higher on the growth scale than boys at both Time 1 and 2. Girls and
boys did not differ on their responses on the destiny scale, however they did differ on their
responses on the growth scale in Time one. Girls scored higher than boys (M = 3.93, SD = .57; M
= 3.75, SD = .55, respectively) on the growth scale, t(156) = ‐2.06, p < .05. At Time two boys and
girls differed on both the growth and the destiny scales. Girls scored higher than boys on the
growth scale (M = 3.81, SD = .60; M = 3.53, SD = .73, t(145) = ‐2.57, p < .05), whereas, boys
scored higher than girls on the destiny scale (M = 2.59, SD = .1.02; M = 2.29, SD = .84, t(149) =
2.00, p < .05). Results from an analysis of variance (ANOVA) revealed no significant differences
among ethnic groups on either growth or destiny scales at Time one. At Time two, a significant
difference between ethnic groups emerged on the destiny scale (F(3, 147) = 3.52, p < .05), such
25
that Asians (M = 2.97, SD = .90) were more likely to endorse destiny theory beliefs than
Caucasians (M = 2.27, SD = .82).
Convergent and discriminant validity. Further support for the validity of the implicit
theories of friendship measure comes from the correlations between growth and destiny scales
and measures of individual and relationship functioning. Several hypotheses (1a‐e) were
presented regarding the nature of these correlations, and the results are presented in Table 3.
As expected, the growth and destiny scales were not significantly correlated, r(157) = ‐.10, p
=.23.
Further validation for the Implicit Theories of Friendship measure comes from the
correlations between the growth scale and the measure of peer attachment. As expected, the
growth scale was positively correlated with overall peer attachment quality (r(138) = .22, p <
.01) as well as the communication (r(150) = .40, p < .001) and trust (r(151) = .15, p < .05)
subscales. Though statistically significant, these correlations were only moderate. The moderate
size indicates that, although the peer attachment and growth beliefs measure similar features,
the growth scale can be distinguished from measures of peer attachment. As expected the
destiny scale was not significantly correlated with peer attachment quality (r(139) = .06, p = .47),
nor was it correlated with any of the subscales (r(151) = .04, p = .65, communication; r(151) = ‐
.08, p = .34, alienation; r(153) = .02, p = .85, trust).
Hypotheses 1c and 1d concerned the distinctiveness of the Implicit Theories of Friendship
measure from other, more global assessments of children’s social functioning and competence.
Table 3 presents the results of these correlations. As expected, there was no association with
26
children’s reports of self‐esteem and growth and destiny beliefs (r(148) = .07, p = .41; r(150) =
.02, p = .80, respectively).
The correlation between teacher’s ratings of children’s emotional health and destiny
beliefs was not significant (r(157) = .01, p = .92), but there was a marginally significant
correlation between emotional health and growth beliefs (r(155) = .14, p < .10).
Hypothesis 1e held that the destiny scale should be positively correlated with teacher’s
reports of social helplessness. However, the social helplessness was not significantly correlated
with the destiny scale (r(152) = .06, p = .50) or the growth scale (r(150) = ‐.08, p = .32).
Table 4 presents the correlations between growth and destiny scales and children’s
reports of behavior with peers and goals when with peers. As was predicted in hypothesis 1f,
the growth scale was positively correlated with caring acts (r(155) = .39, p < .001) and
relationally inclusive behavior (r(149) = .31, p < .001) as rated on the Children’s Peer
Relationship Scale. Additionally, the growth scale was positively correlated with children’s
ratings of isolation (r(157) = .19, p < .05) and negatively correlated with relationally aggressive
acts (r(156) = ‐.18, p < .05). Growth beliefs were positively correlated with communal goals
(r(151) = .28, p < .001), but not submissive or separate goals (r(155) = .07, p = .37, r(151) = ‐.04, p
= .65). With the exception of relationship inclusivity, (r(152) = ‐.17, p < .05), destiny beliefs were
not significantly correlated with children’s peer behaviors or interpersonal goals (ps > .25).
Implicit theories of friendship stability. Hypothesis 1g argued that there should be
stability in growth and destiny beliefs across time. Correlations across the two time points, four
months apart, were analyzed to assess the stability in implicit theories. The correlation between
implicit theories of friendship from Time 1 to Time 2 was robust. Both the growth and destiny
27
scales were positively and significantly correlated (r (142) = .49, p < .001; r(146) = .43, p < .001,
respectively) across the two phases. Similar to the gender differences identified in mean
differences on the scales, boys and girls differed in stability, although the correlations for both
genders on both scales were significant. For girls, the correlation was stronger on the growth
scale (r(80) = .63, p < .001) than the destiny scale (r(83) = .40, p < .001). Boys’ correlation was
stronger for the destiny scale (r(63) = .46, p < .001) than the growth scale (r(.32) = .67, p < .01).
The reciprocal nature of children’s friendships, whether their best friend also identified
them as their best friend, may also be important to consider when looking at the stability of
growth and destiny beliefs over time. There were no mean differences on the growth and
destiny scales at either Time 1 or 2 based on the friendship being reciprocated or not (Growth
scale Time 1: M = 3.79, SD = .54; M = 3.86, SD = .57, t(156) = .606, p = .55; Growth scale Time 2:
M = 3.88, SD = .52; M = 3.66, SD = .69, t(145) = ‐1.48, p = .14; Destiny scale Time 1: M = 2.48, SD
= 1.04; M = 2.36, SD = .82, t(158) = ‐.65, p = .51; Destiny scale Time 2: M = 2.65, SD = .77; M =
2.37, SD = .95, t(149) = ‐1.39, p = .17). However, the reciprocal nature of the friendship could
impact the stability of growth and destiny beliefs over time. Having a close friendship dissolve or
developing a closer relationship with a friend would likely influence the implicit theories children
hold about friendships. In terms of the growth scale, stability was greater when the child’s
friendship was reciprocated1 at Time 1 (r(23) = .67, p < .001, reciprocated; r(119) = .49, p < .001,
not reciprocated) and Time 2 (r(43) = .63, p < .001, reciprocated; r(99) = .45, p < .001, not
reciprocated). For the destiny scale, stability was greater when children didn’t have a reciprocal
1 Children’s best friendship was considered reciprocal if the best friend listed the original child as their best friend as well. If children listed someone not participating in the study (whether other students at the school or not) it was not possible to see if the friendship was reciprocal and thus considered not reciprocated.
28
friendship at Time 1 (r(25) = .30, p = .15, reciprocated; r(121) = .46, p < .001, not reciprocated) or
Time 2 (r(42) = .42, p < .01, reciprocated; r(104) = .43, p < .001, not reciprocated).
Growth and Destiny Theory Relations with Friendship Qualities: Hypothesis 2
Analyses presented here focused on exploring the associations between growth and
destiny scales and qualities of children’s friendships. Hypothesis 2 addressed how the
theoretical underpinnings of growth and destiny beliefs would translate into children’s actual
behavior in friendships as well as the relative importance children place on aspects of their
friendships. Correlations between growth and destiny scales with the FQM and the IFQM were
conducted to address this question and the results are presented in Table 5.
The qualities of children’s friendships were in line with the expected associations.
Growth beliefs were positively correlated with conflict resolution (r(152) = .17, p < .05), intimate
exchange, both to and from friends(r(149) = .27, p < .001; r(153) = .26, p < .001), and validation
and caring (r(153) = .35, p < .001). These correlations support the hypothesis that belief in
growth is associated with friendships that emphasize intimacy, compassion, and a dedication to
resolving conflict. In contrast, belief in destiny was not significantly correlated with any of the
friendship qualities (ps > .17).
Growth belief was positively associated with all of the subscales on the IFQM (r(153) =
.17, p < .10, conflict resolution; r(149) = .32, p < .001, intimate exchange; r(152) =.26, p < .001,
conflict; r(157) = .35, p < .001, validation and caring; r(156) =.24 p < .01, help and guidance),
representing the value that children who score highly on growth place on having a positive and
intimate friendship. In stark contrast, destiny belief was not significantly correlated with any of
the subscales on the IFQM (ps > .19). The largest correlation, although not significant, was on
29
the conflict subscale (r(154) = .11, p = .19), highlighting how upset children who scored highly on
destiny would be if there was any conflict in their friendship. Further analyses will examine the
more complex relation between implicit theories of friendship and friendship qualities.
Gender differences. The correlations, separated by gender, between growth and destiny
beliefs and friendship qualities are presented in Table 6. Overall, there were few differences
between girls and boys on the subscales of the FQM. Of note, boys and girls showed significant
correlations in opposite directions between growth beliefs and conflict towards friend (r(66) =
.25, p < .05, boys; r(152) = ‐.24, p < .05, girls). Interestingly, the significant correlations between
the subscales of the IFQM and growth beliefs seemed to be driven primarily by boys and not
girls.
The Mutual Influence of Growth and Destiny Theories on Friendship Qualities: Hypothesis 3
The independence of the growth and destiny scales allows for the effects of each scale
to interact with one another and required more stringent tests of the effects of implicit theories.
Thus, it was important to investigate whether growth and destiny beliefs interact in predicting
friendship qualities. A series of hierarchical multiple regressions were conducted with each of
the friendship qualities shown in Table 5 entered as the criterion and growth and destiny scales
entered at Step 1 and the interaction of the scales entered at Step 2. The results of these
analyses are presented in Table 7.
Similar to the raw correlations presented in Table 5, controlling for destiny beliefs had
little effect on the relation between growth beliefs and friendship qualities (β = .17, p < .05,
FQM Conflict Resolution; β = .27, p < .001, FQM Intimate Exchange I; β = .24, p < .01, FQM
Intimate Exchange II; β = .35, p < .001, FQM Validation and Caring; β = .16, p < .10, FQM
30
Companionship and Recreation; β = .15, p < .10, IFQM Conflict Resolution; β = .32 p < .001, IFQM
Intimate Exchange; β = .27, p < .001, IFQM Conflict; β = .36, p < .001, IFQM Validation and
Caring; β = .23, p < .01, IFQM Help and Guidance). To further test the association between
growth beliefs and friendship qualities additional variables were added in Step 1 to control for
features of the friendship. All associations between growth beliefs and friendship qualities
presented in Table 7 remained significant after controlling for the length of the relationship.
When controlling for gender all effects remained statistically significant with the exception of
conflict resolution on the FQM which dropped to marginally significant (β = .15, p < .10), and
companionship and recreation on the FQM (β = .14, p = .11) and conflict resolution on the IFQM
(β = .10, p < .21) which both dropped to nonsignificance. Similarly, when controlling for
friendship satisfaction, conflict resolution, both on the FQM and IFQM, dropped to marginally
significant (β = .13, p < .10; β = .14, p < .10, respectively) and companionship and recreation on
the FQM (β = .12, p = .13) was no longer significant, but all other associations remained
significant.
In examining the association between destiny beliefs and friendship qualities while
controlling for growth beliefs, no significant relations emerged. In line with theoretical
predictions, this finding suggests that the effect of destiny beliefs on friendship qualities is
indirect, such that outcomes of destiny beliefs are dependent on aspects of the friendship.
These associations will be examined in subsequent sections.
An interaction between growth and destiny beliefs emerged when predicting conflict
resolution on the IFQM, F(3, 147) = 5.83, p < .01, β = .15, p < .05, R2 = .11. This interaction
remained significant when controlling for friendship satisfaction (F(6, 143) = 3.25, p < .01, β =
31
.17, p < .05), but was only marginally significant when controlling for friendship length (F(6, 143)
= 4.12, p < .001, β = .14, p < .10) and gender (F(6, 144) = 6.64, p < .001, β = .14, p < .10). Figure 1
presents the regression derived from the interaction of growth and destiny beliefs at Step 2.
Overall, children high in growth beliefs showed more concern over conflict in their friendship
than children low in growth beliefs. Children low on destiny showed little variation in concern
over conflict based on growth belief. However, high endorsement of both growth and destiny
beliefs was associated with high levels of concern over conflict, whereas high endorsement of
destiny beliefs with low endorsement of growth beliefs was associated with little concern over
conflict in the friendship.
Interactions between Destiny and Growth Theories and Friendship Qualities: Hypothesis 4
While the associations between implicit theories of friendship and friendship qualities
illustrate how growth and destiny beliefs are related to values and behaviors in children’s
friendships, the relation between implicit theories and functioning is likely to be influenced by
other factors in the friendship. Given prior findings regarding implicit theories of romantic
relationships, the present research examined the moderating roles of relationship length,
relationship satisfaction, and children’s gender.
The moderating role of length. It has already been shown that growth beliefs are
positively correlated with valuing conflict resolution and validation in a friendship, but having a
friendship that has lasted longer should also be related to children’s valuing of these features.
To examine the relation between friendship length and implicit theories hierarchical multiple
regressions were run with friendship qualities as the criterion. At Step 1 the growth scale,
destiny scale, and friendship length were entered. At Step 2, the two‐way interactions between
32
growth, destiny, and length were entered. Finally, in Step 3, the three‐way product term was
entered. The length of the friendship had few main effects on friendship qualities at Step 1. Only
conflict resolution, β = .21, p < .01, and validation and caring, β = .17, p < .05, were associated
with friendship length. There were no direct associations between length of the friendship and
the subscales of the IFQM.
Interactions between growth beliefs and friendship length predicted both the conflict
resolution, F (6, 143) = 1.77, p = .11, β = ‐.17, p < .05, R2 = .07, and validation and caring, F (6,
147) = 4.95, p < .001, β = ‐.15, p < .05, R2 = .17, subscales on the IFQM. Figures 2 and 3,
respectively, show the breakdown of these interactions. Both interactions highlight the
importance of growth beliefs in predicting what children value in a friendship. For both conflict
resolution and validation and caring, being higher on the growth scale was associated with
greater importance of these friendship qualities, regardless of length. When friendships were
shorter in length, children demonstrated less valuing of these friendship qualities when they
were low on the growth scale. Children who were low on the growth scale, but had more long‐
term friendships evidenced higher levels of valuing these friendship qualities.
The length of the friendship interacted with both growth and destiny beliefs to predict
the intimate exchanges in friendships, F (7, 139) = 4.17, p < .001, β = ‐.238, p < .01, R2 = .17. The
breakdown of this interaction is presented in Figure 4. High destiny, low growth children with
short‐term friendships exhibit the lowest levels of intimate exchange in their friendships. In
contrast, high destiny, low growth children who have been in long‐term friendships exhibit high
levels of intimate exchange in the friendship. Children who are low on the destiny scale do not
exhibit many intimate behaviors with their friend unless they are also high on the growth scale.
33
These findings highlight the importance of considering both the length of time children have
been involved in a friendship as well as their implicit theories of friendships.
The moderating role of satisfaction. Much research on implicit theories of romantic
relationships has pointed to initial relationship satisfaction as an important moderator in
understanding the effects of destiny beliefs on relationship longevity and coping strategies
(Franiuk et al., 2002, 2004; Knee, 1998). For the current study, we did not assess children’s initial
level of satisfaction with their best friendship, but we did ask about their current level
satisfaction (“how well is this friendship going,” and “how happy are you with this friendship?”).
Given this limitation, associations with destiny beliefs, in particular, are still expected because
destiny theorists should be evaluating their friendships continuously, not just at the beginning.
A series of hierarchical multiple regressions were performed with friendship qualities as
the criterion. At Step 1 the growth scale, destiny scale, and friendship satisfaction were entered.
At Step 2, the two‐way interactions between growth, destiny, and friendship satisfaction were
entered. The three‐way product term was entered in Step 3. Several friendship qualities were
predicted directly by friendship satisfaction in Step 1. These included: overt aggression, β = ‐.27,
p < .001, relational aggression, β = ‐.52, p < .001, conflict resolution, β = .38, p < .001, intimate
exchange, β = .38, p < .001, conflict, β = ‐.33, p < .001, and validation and caring, β =.43, p < .001.
Satisfaction was not directly related to the subscales of the IFQM.
Analyses confirmed a significant effect of destiny beliefs and satisfaction on relational
aggression, F (6, 144) = 10.88, p < .001, β = .22, p < .01, R2 = .31. The interaction is presented in
Figure 5. An important caveat is that this scale is assessing the relational aggressive behavior
directed toward the child from the friend, and not the relationally aggressive behavior of the
34
child. Overall, relationally aggressive behaviors are lower when children report greater
satisfaction. Satisfaction appears to be more strongly related to relationally aggressive behaviors
in the friendship when children were lower on the destiny scale than high on the destiny scale.
The levels of conflict in the friendship, both directed toward the friend and from the
friend, were moderated by an interaction between destiny beliefs and level of satisfaction (F (6,
143) = 5.48, p < .001, β = .31, p < .001; F (6, 146) = 7.65, p < .001, β = .21, p < .05, respectively).
Graphs decomposing both of these interactions are presented in Figure 6. Children high on the
destiny scale reported similar levels of conflict regardless of their satisfaction with their
friendship. A similar picture emerged in conflict from the friend, although there was a decrease
in conflict behavior for high destiny children as satisfaction increased.
A three way interaction between growth theories, destiny theories, and satisfaction was
significantly related to children’s valuing of conflict resolution in the friendship, F (7, 143) = 2.35,
p < .05, β = ‐.24, p < .05, R2 = .10. Overall, when children’s belief in growth was low there was
little variation in their valuing of conflict resolution. Differences emerged when children were
high on the growth scale. As would be expected these children who were also low in destiny and
highly satisfied in their friendship exhibited a high valuing of conflict resolution. However, when
children were high on growth, low on destiny, and not satisfied, they exhibited low levels of
valuing of conflict resolution. This does not seem to fit with what would be expected for children
high on the growth scale. Children who were high on the destiny scale and high on the growth
scale exhibit more valuing of conflict resolution when they were less satisfied with the
friendship than when they were highly satisfied.
35
The moderating role of gender. Given the gender differences present in the correlations
between implicit theories and friendship qualities, it was important to consider the moderating
role they may play in predicting friendship outcomes. To address this, hierarchical multiple
regressions were conducted with friendship qualities as the criterion. At Step 1 the growth scale,
destiny scale, and gender were entered. At Step 2, the two‐way interactions between growth,
destiny, and gender were entered. Finally, in Step 3, the three‐way product term was entered.
Several expected main effects of gender were identified at Step 1. For example, boys engaged in
more overt aggression than girls, F (3, 148) = 2.40, p < .10, β = ‐.18, girls were more intimate in
their friendships than boys, F (3, 144) = 8.69, p < .001, β = .280, and girls showed more concern
on all subscales of the IFQM, (Fs > 8.6, ps < .001).
Several significant interactions between growth, destiny, and gender emerged. Growth
and destiny beliefs interacted with gender to predict relational aggression in the friendship, F (7,
144) = 1.91, p < .10, β = .19, p < .05, R2 = .09. Decomposing this interaction (see Figure 8) shows
that children low on growth exhibited about the same level of relational aggression, regardless
of destiny beliefs and gender. However, when children were high on growth, girls exhibited
more relational aggression when they were high on destiny as opposed to lower on destiny
beliefs, but boys exhibited a different pattern. Boys substantially decreased levels of relational
aggression when low on destiny.
A gender by growth, by destiny interaction also emerged for predicting intimate
exchange in friendships, F (7, 140) = 5.60, p < .001, β = ‐.24, p < .01, R2 = .22. A graphical
presentation of this interaction is presented in Figure 9. Girls, almost consistently, exhibited
more intimate exchange in their friendships than boys. When high on growth beliefs, girls
36
demonstrated more intimate exchange than boys regardless of destiny beliefs. When children
were low on growth beliefs, boys exhibited more intimate exchange when they were low on
destiny than when they were high on destiny. In contrast, girls exhibited more intimate
exchange when they were high on destiny than when they were low on destiny.
Lastly, an interaction between growth beliefs, destiny beliefs, and gender emerged
when predicting satisfaction in the friendship, F (7, 148) = 2.27, p < .05, β = ‐.23, p < .01, R2 = .10.
Decomposing this interaction revealed a complex relation between implicit theories and gender
in friendship satisfaction (see Figure 10). Both boys and girls who were low in destiny beliefs
were similar in satisfaction when they were also low in growth. This satisfaction level changed
little for girls that were high in destiny. However, satisfaction dropped significantly for boys that
were low in destiny beliefs and high in growth beliefs. Overall, the highest levels of satisfaction
were when children scored high on growth, but only for boys that were also high in destiny and
girls that were low in destiny. For boys, they seem most satisfied when they were either high on
both implicit theories or low on both.
Discussion
The goal of the present research was to examine the associations between implicit
theories of friendships and friendships, drawing on the theoretical framework laid out in implicit
theories research and previous work on friendships.
Nature of the variables
Measurement. The primary objective of the current research was to develop and
validate a measure of Implicit Theories of Friendship. One area of controversy in the implicit
37
theories research has been how to best measure implicit theories. While Dweck and colleagues
(Dweck, 2000) have measured implicit theories of intelligence on a bipolar continuum (entity
theories representing one end and incremental theories on the opposite end), studies of implicit
theories in romantic relationships suggest that these theories are better conceptualized as
independent dimensions (Franiuk et al., 2002). In line with the results of implicit theories of
romantic relationships research, factor analyses supported a two‐factor structure for implicit
theories of friendship, representing a growth and destiny scale. Measuring each dimension on
an independent continuum allows each implicit theory of relationships to contribute uniquely to
the prediction of behavior (Knee et al., 2003). The independence of growth and destiny scales
were further supported by the lack of significant correlation between the two scales.
Validation. Hypotheses regarding the association between similar measures of
representation and friendship and implicit theories were generally supported. Growth beliefs
were significantly correlated with peer attachment quality in the expected direction; however,
the moderate size of the correlation indicated that, while the constructs share similar features,
they are unique. The lack of significant correlations between growth and destiny beliefs and
measures of self‐worth demonstrated that implicit theories are not just a measure of general
self‐perception. It could also be argued that children who score highly on the growth scale are
more socially competent or accepted with their peers and that children who score highly on the
destiny scale are less socially competent, however the results do not completely support this
argument. Teacher’s ratings of children’s emotional health and popularity/acceptance were not
significantly correlated with the destiny scale, but the growth scale was positively correlated
with the measure of emotional health. This marginal correlation could be related to how
children navigate the social world of the classroom. Children who score highly on the growth
38
scale may be better suited to resolve conflicts that arise in the peer setting and may be more
accepting of peers and less quick to judge them. This may not be the case for children who score
highly on the destiny scale. Teacher’s observations of this behavior in the classroom could be
implicated in the marginal correlation between the emotional health and growth scales.
A significant correlation between teacher’s ratings of social helplessness and the destiny
scale would be positively correlated, however, this was not found. The lack of correlation
between the two scales may be due to the fact that teachers are completing the social
helplessness scale and children are completing the destiny scale. Teacher’s observations of
children are limited to the classroom and playground, thus most of the interactions they
observe are with peers and not children’s friendships. The destiny scale asks children to think
specifically about friendship. Children may be drawing on information and experiences that
teachers do not have access to.
While implicit theories of friendship assess children’s beliefs about friendships, there
should be overlap in their behavior with peers. Many of the skills required for acceptance by the
peer group are also required for successful involvement in friendships (Asher, Parker, & Walker,
1996). The positive correlation between the growth scale and isolated behavior is somewhat
surprising. It is possible that children who score highly on the growth scale are focused on
developing close friendships and may be more removed in social contexts with peers or lack the
appropriate strategies to negotiate peer experiences. Rose and Asher (1999) found that
children’s friendship quality was predicted by the goals and strategies children use in response
to conflict, irrespective of their standing within their peer group. Thus, some children may be
39
much better at establishing and maintaining close friendships, but unaccepted by their peers
because of the goals they select.
The destiny scale was uncorrelated with peer behaviors with the exception of
relationship inclusivity. In reviewing the items that compose this scale they focus on intervening
when another peer is being excluded or picked on. It could be that children who score highly on
the destiny scale prefer to avoid disagreements in both friendships and peer relationships, thus
they may be more reluctant to step in when a peer is being victimized because they might then
be involved in a disagreement. The correlations with interpersonal goals are in line with the
original hypothesis. The positive correlation between communal goals and growth beliefs is in
line with growth theory in that relationships are valued and children believe that they can
develop friendships with peers. The lack of correlations with destiny beliefs fits as well. In
particular, children scoring highly on the destiny scale may be reluctant to endorse communal
goals with peers because they are not focused on developing relationships with peers when
they do not know if they would be good friends.
Stability. Studies of implicit theories across domains tend to support their stability.
Franiuk and colleagues (2002) found that across their eight month study, implicit theories of
romantic relationships remained relatively stable, even across different relationship partners.
Bukowski, Newcomb, and Hoza (1987) found stability in children’s conceptions of friendship, or
their beliefs about what characteristics were most central to friendships, across a one year
period from sixth to seventh grade. While the results of this study do support stability of implicit
theories of friendship over a four month period, results did vary depending on whether it was a
growth or destiny theory and whether or not children had reciprocated friendships. The stability
40
of growth beliefs was related to children having a reciprocated best friend. Being in a
reciprocated friendship is important for growth theorists and experiencing this likely reinforces
their growth beliefs. Destiny beliefs, in contrast, were slightly more stable when they did not
have a reciprocated friendship. Given the theoretical nature of destiny beliefs, they are less
dependent on a stable, reciprocated friendship to reinforce their beliefs. In fact, their beliefs are
more likely to be reinforced if they experience unreciprocated friendships. This finding supports
the theoretical differences between growth and destiny implicit theories of friendship.
One limitation of the study was that identifying the reciprocity of children’s friendships
was not exact because children were allowed to identify friends that were not in the classroom,
thus making it impossible to assess reciprocity if the identified best friend was not participating
in the study. Additionally, children often have multiple friends and best friends (Furman, 1993).
Choosing which friend to identify as the best friend was often difficult for children. In many
instances, a triad of friends was identified such that friend A would chose friend B, friend B
would chose friend C and friend C would chose friend A. Note here that none of these children
would be identified as having a reciprocated friendship, but when looking across the three
children, there is some reciprocity amongst the friends.
Previous research has shown that implicit theories are subject to manipulation under
experimental conditions, suggesting that, while stable, implicit theories are malleable (Dweck &
Leggett, 1988; Franiuk et al., 2004). Knee and colleagues (2003) suggest the likelihood of
relationship experiences modifying an individual’s implicit theory. This modification of
representations based on experience is supported by attachment theory and research (Collins &
Sroufe, 1999; Sroufe, 1997; Sroufe & Waters, 1977) If an adolescent has a close friendship that
41
abruptly ends, they may reevaluate their growth theory beliefs and may adopt more of a destiny
theory, believing that there is little they can do to maintain a relationship that is destined to
end. While this study was able to look at reciprocity amongst friends in examining stability,
future studies may want to consider more specific relationship experiences that may influence
the stability and change of implicit theories.
Associations with Behavior
Further support for the theoretical differences between growth and destiny theories
comes in the relations between implicit beliefs and behavior. Growth beliefs were positively
correlated with intimate exchanges in friendships, conflict resolution, and validation and caring.
Furthermore, growth beliefs were associated with greater valuing of conflict resolution, intimate
exchange, avoiding conflict, validation and caring, and help and guidance. These associations
remain when destiny beliefs are controlled for and additional qualities of the friendship,
including length, satisfaction and gender, are controlled for, indicating the strength of these
associations. Destiny beliefs, however, do not show any direct associations with qualities of
children’s friendships. This finding highlights how context dependent destiny theorists are in
their friendships. Growth theorists value intimacy and conflict resolution regardless of
satisfaction or length; however, destiny theorists place more emphasis on the features of the
friendship. They are more likely to show intimacy when the friendship has lasted longer, possibly
using that as validation that this friendship is meant to be and thus warrants their investment.
The interaction between growth and destiny beliefs in predicting the importance of
avoiding conflict is consistent with predictions. Children who highly endorse both growth and
destiny beliefs not only value their friendships, but also fear conflict as sign of trouble. Thus,
42
they would be concerned if conflict was present in their friendship because it would suggest
problems in the friendship, which they value, and might signal dissolution of the friendship.
Findings across studies of implicit theories imply that there is a complex relation, between not
only implicit theories, but also the role of friendship qualities is important when predicting
relationship outcomes.
Friendship length. Results of the present research supported the moderating role of
length in predicting friendship outcomes. Growth beliefs interacted with friendship length to
predict conflict resolution and validation and caring. In line with the theoretical predictions of
implicit theories higher growth theories predicted higher levels of conflict resolution and
validation and caring regardless of friendship length. The role of friendship length came in when
children were low on the growth scale. Longer friendships, compared to shorter friendships,
demonstrated greater conflict resolution and validation and caring. This finding suggests that
even if children do not endorse growth beliefs, their friendships can demonstrate just as much
caring and conflict resolution if they are longer in length. Without growth beliefs, children need
time to develop these features in their friendships.
Intimate exchange to the friend was predicted by a three‐way interaction between
growth beliefs, destiny beliefs, and friendship length. High destiny, low growth children with
short‐term friendships exhibited the lowest levels of intimate exchange in their friendships. This
is likely because they are still attempting to diagnose the viability of the friendship. In contrast,
high destiny, low growth children who have been in long‐term friendships exhibited high levels
of intimate exchange in the friendship. Given the length of the friendship, they have had time to
diagnose the viability of the friendship and thus, despite being low in growth beliefs, they share
43
intimate behaviors with their friend. Children who were low on the destiny scale exhibited more
intimate behaviors with their friend when they were also high on the growth scale. These
findings highlight the importance of considering both the length of time children have been
involved in a friendship as well as their implicit theories of friendships.
Satisfaction. Previous research has also highlighted the importance of satisfaction in
combination with implicit theories. The current research also showed the importance of
satisfaction, particularly in relation to destiny beliefs, in predicting negative qualities in the
friendship, as well as the importance of resolving conflict. Interactions between destiny beliefs
and satisfaction predicted relationally aggressive behaviors as well as conflict in the friendship.
Satisfaction appears to be more strongly associated with relationally aggressive
behaviors in the friendship for children low on the destiny scale more than children high on the
destiny scale. There is a marked decline in relationally aggressive behaviors as satisfaction
increases for children low in destiny beliefs, but little change in relationally aggressive behaviors
for children high on the destiny scale. While this finding seems counterintuitive, thinking about
the possible functions of relationally aggressive behavior may explain the finding. Relationally
aggressive behaviors are used by one person to control or manipulate their relationship with
another person. Children who are high on the destiny scale may view the relationally aggressive
behaviors of their friends as an attempt to prevent conflict and keep the behaviors of friends in
line with what is expected. Thus, they may not be as dissatisfied when their friend is being
relationally aggressive towards them as a child who is low in destiny beliefs.
Given the theoretical underpinnings of destiny theory, conflict should signal problems in
the friendship and thus, lead to dissolution of the friendship. Significant interactions between
44
destiny beliefs and satisfaction predicted both conflict to and from the friend. High destiny
children showed little variation in their conflict levels based on satisfaction. This finding was
surprising, but high destiny theorists may not show much variation in their levels of conflict
because they dissolve the friendship before conflict escalates too high. They may not be as
satisfied with their friendship, but conflict should be a deal breaker for destiny theorists. The
association between low destiny beliefs and satisfaction illustrates that children scoring low on
the destiny scale are exhibiting more conflict when they are unsatisfied in a relationship, but
very little when they are satisfied. A similar picture emerges in the conflict from the friend,
although there is a decrease in conflict behavior for high destiny children as satisfaction
increases. This steeper decrease in conflict may be due to the fact that children cannot
necessarily control the conflict they are receiving from their friend, whereas they have more
control over their own use of conflict behaviors toward the friend. The conflict they are
receiving may be a warning for them that the friendship won’t last and thus they are less
satisfied.
The significant interaction between growth beliefs, destiny beliefs, and satisfaction
predicting the importance conflict resolution highlights the likely mutual influence of growth
and destiny beliefs. The children scoring highly on the growth scale showed the greatest
variability in their valuing of conflict resolution. As was expected, the children that valued
conflict resolution the most were high on growth, low on destiny, and highly satisfied.
Somewhat surprising was the finding that the children who rated highly on the importance of
conflict resolution were high on both growth and destiny, but low on satisfaction. This is likely
due to the competing beliefs of high growth and destiny endorsement. Their growth beliefs
suggest they should maintain and develop this relationship, but their destiny beliefs suggest that
45
if they are unsatisfied they should dissolve the friendship. They may value conflict resolution as
an attempt to salvage the friendship. Children high on destiny and highly satisfied probably
display little valuing for conflict resolution because they probably are not experiencing much
conflict if they are highly satisfied. It was unanticipated that children that are low on destiny and
unsatisfied also display little value of conflict resolution because their high growth belief should
heighten their value of conflict resolution despite their satisfaction level. The lack of satisfaction
may be influencing the lower value of conflict resolution.
Gender. The results of the analyses looking at the moderating role of gender revealed a
complex relation between gender and implicit theories in predicting friendship qualities. The
interaction between growth and destiny beliefs and gender predicted relational aggression in
children’s friendship. Interesting patterns emerged for boys and girls. Boys experienced the
most relational aggression in their friendships when they were high on growth beliefs and low
on destiny beliefs, but less when they had higher destiny beliefs. Girls, however, experienced
more relational aggression when they were high on growth beliefs and high on destiny beliefs,
but less when they were higher on destiny beliefs. Boys, unlike girls, seem to be involved in
friendships with more relational aggression when they have higher growth beliefs and lower
destiny beliefs. These results contradict previous findings that there is more relational
aggression in girls’ friendships than boys’ (Grotpeter & Crick, 1996), but point to the importance
of social cognitive processes in understanding behavior in friendships. The different effects of
destiny beliefs for boys and girls also suggest that the implicit theories may function differently
for boys and girls in certain contexts. This is an important question that should be addressed in
future research.
46
The three‐way interaction between growth beliefs, destiny beliefs, and gender also
predicted intimate exchange by children. Girls clearly display more intimate exchanges in their
friendships than boys do, a finding consistent in the literature (Furman & Buhrmester, 1985;
Maccoby, 1998; Rose, 2002; Zarbatany et al., 2000). Variation in intimate exchange occurred
when children were low on the growth scale. Both boys and girls exhibited similar levels of
intimate exchange when low on both growth and destiny scales. However, when low on growth
beliefs, boys exhibit less intimate exchange when they are high on destiny beliefs, but girls
exhibit more intimate exchange when they are high on destiny beliefs. Maybe as part of
diagnosing the validity of their friendships boys with high destiny beliefs are more guarded in
disclosing to friendships, but girls display more of themselves to their friends.
Satisfaction in children’s friendships was also predicted by the three‐way interaction
between growth beliefs, destiny beliefs, and gender. Similar to the previous findings, opposite
patterns emerge for boys and girls in examining satisfaction. Children are most satisfied when
they are high on growth, but this is only when boys are high on destiny and girls are low on
destiny. Satisfaction for these boys and girls does decline as their growth beliefs decrease, but
the decline is steeper for boys. The steeper patterns of change for boys may indicate that they
are more sensitive to the effects of implicit theories when evaluating their satisfaction in
friendships. Many studies of gender differences have examined mean level differences between
boys and girls, but very few studies have looked at the moderating role of gender (Rose, 2007;
Schmidt & Bagwell, 2007). The findings here suggest that gender differences represent more
than girls and boys being higher or lower on measures, but that there are different effects for
boys and girls. Decomposing the roles of gender and implicit theories in predicting friendship
qualities is complex and needs to be addressed in future studies.
47
Developmental Considerations
The transition from middle childhood to adolescence is marked by biological
maturation, but many cognitive and social changes are also occurring that have important
implications for interactions friends. As children make this transition, they begin spending more
time outside of the family and more time with peers and friends. In fact, when Furman and
Buhrmester (1992) asked children and adolescents who they turn to for support, they found
that by the tenth grade, same‐sex friends had surpassed parents as the most frequent source of
support for adolescents. By this time friendships are also characterized by greater intimacy,
reciprocity, and trustworthiness than friendships during childhood (Buhrmester, 1990; Furman
& Bierman, 1984; Newcomb & Bagwell, 1995). The cognitive abilities that emerge in early
adolescence support and allow for more in‐depth processing of friendships (Keating, 2004).
Greater abstraction in thought and hypothetical and multidimensional thinking all contribute to
adolescents’ ability to process their social world. This maturity in cognition likely plays a major
role in the greater complexity and closeness seen in friendships. These cognitive changes are
also likely to influence adolescents’ understanding and expectations of friendships (Bigelow,
Tesson, & Lewko, 1996).
The children in the present study were in sixth grade, right in the middle of this shift
from middle childhood to adolescence. This timing may have many implications for the
conclusions that can be drawn from this study. As the basis of children’s friendships shift from
proximity and similarity to intimacy and reciprocity, it is likely that their implicit theories of
friendship are being revised as well. Thus, the modest stability seen in growth and destiny
theories may be partly due to the changing features children are experiencing in their
48
friendships. Additionally, their cognitive growth during this time period may also be influencing
how they think about friendships. If this study were to be replicated in a sample of older
adolescents it is likely that some of the findings would be different.
Future Directions
Several future directions have been mentioned already, but additional future directions
merit noting here. One important area of future relationship research would be investigating
the concordance of friends’ implicit theories about friendship. Does the agreement between
friends’ theories matter for relationship outcomes? Research looking at both self and friend
perceptions of the friendship suggests that it might. Burk and Laursen (2005) found that friends
who held discrepant perceptions of the negative aspects of their friendship had more negative
friendships than friends who had concordant perceptions of their friendship. Investigating both
friends’ implicit theories of friendship and their concordance could provide more information
about their friendship and its quality than just examining the implicit theory of one friend.
The current study asked children to rate growth and destiny items based on their
general beliefs about friendships, and not specifically about one friendship. There are conflicting
views about whether one should examine general or specific relationship beliefs. Fletcher &
Kininmonth (1992) argue for the importance of studying general relationship beliefs. They
acknowledge that cognitions about specific relationships will be different from general
relationship cognitions, but that specific relationship cognitions are often clouded by other
relationship factors. Others have argued that a better picture of relationships is obtained by
measuring cognitions about specific relationships (Reis, Collins, & Berscheid, 2000). Furman
(2001) argues for a hierarchy of relationship representations. Here, individuals hold general
49
relationship representations, broad representations of specific relationship types, and specific
relationship representations. While studies examining the cognitions related to a specific
friendship should provide important information about children’s functioning, the present study
examined how more generalized implicit theories interact with aspects of a friendship in
predicting behavior. Investigating the representations individuals hold about specific friendships
and how general and specific implicit theories of friendship influence each other and behavior is
an important direction for future research.
While the present study provided important information regarding the association
between implicit theories of friendship and qualities of children’s friendship, little is known
about the specific behaviors that children use in their friendship. Research on implicit theories
of romantic relationships has shown that destiny theorists use more negative (Knee, 1998) and
passive (Franiuk et al., 2002) coping strategies compared to growth theorists. The present study
did not allow for the study of explicit behaviors within friendships, but rather general qualities of
the friendship. Investigating specific behaviors and strategies that children use in their
friendships based on their implicit theories of friendships would be an interesting avenue of
future study.
Conclusions
The present research highlights the importance of considering the implicit theories
children hold about friendships in understanding their behavior in friendships and the qualities
that they value in these friendships. As expected, endorsement of growth beliefs was associated
directly with greater intimacy and valuing of friendships. Effects of destiny beliefs were indirect
and depended on children’s satisfaction in their friendship. Complex interactions between
50
implicit theories of friendship and gender as well as friendship qualities also emerged. These
findings suggest interesting effects of holding different combinations of growth and destiny
beliefs when combined with certain features of friendships. The findings here lead to many
more questions regarding the role of implicit theories of friendship in understanding children’s
behavior and the qualities of their friendships. Many important avenues of future research have
been suggested. Continuing the study of implicit theories of friendships promises a greater
understanding of the role of social cognition in friendships.
51
References
Armsden, G. C. & Greenberg, M. T. (1987). The inventory of parent and peer attachment:
Individual differences and their relationship to psychological well‐being in adolescence.
Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 16, 427‐454.
Asher, S. R., Parker, J. G., & Walker, D. L. (1996). Distinguishing friendship from acceptance:
Implications for intervention and assessment. In W. M. Bukowski, A. F. Newcomb, & W.
W. Hartup (Eds.), The company they keep: Friendships in childhood and adolescence (pp.
366‐403). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Baldwin, M. W. (1992). Relational schemas and the processing of social information.
Psychological Bulletin, 112, 461‐484.
Bigelow, B. J. (1977). Children’s friendship expectations: A cognitive‐developmental study. Child
Development, 48, 246‐253.
Bigelow, B. J., Tesson, G., & Lewko, J. H. (1996). Learning the rules: The anatomy of children's
relationships. New York: Guilford Press.
Bowlby, J. (1973). Attachment and loss: Vol. 2. Separation. New York: Basic.
Buhrmester, D. (1990). Intimacy of friendship, interpersonal competence, and adjustment
during preadolescence and adolescence. Child Development, 61, 1101‐1111.
Buhrmester, D. (1996). Need fulfillment, interpersonal competence, and the developmental
contexts of early adolescent friendship. In W. M. Bukowski, A. F. Newcomb, & W. W.
Hartup (Eds.), The company they keep: Friendship during childhood and adolescence (pp.
158‐185). New York: Cambridge University Press.
52
Buhrmester, D. & Furman, W. (1986). The changing functions of children’s friendships: A neo‐
Sullivan perspective. In V. Derlega & B. Winstead (Eds.), Friendships and social
interaction (pp.41‐62). New York: Springer.
Bukowski, W. M., Newcomb, A. F., & Hoza, B. (1987). Friendship conceptions among early
adolescents: A longitudinal study of stability and change. Journal of Early Adolescence, 7,
143‐152.
Burk, W. J. & Laursen, B. (2005). Adolescent perceptions of friendship and their associations
with individual adjustment. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 29,156‐
164.
Burks, V. S., Dodge, K. A., Price, J. M., & Laird, R. D. (1999). Internal representational models of
peers: Implications for the development of problematic behavior. Developmental
Psychology, 35, 802‐810.
Carlson, E. A., Sroufe, L. A., & Egeland, B. (2004). The construction of experience: A longitudinal
study of representation and behavior. Child Development, 75, 66‐83.
Chung, T. & Asher, S. R. (1996). Children’s goals and strategies in peer conflict situations. Merrill‐
Palmer Quarterly, 42, 125‐147.
Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation
analysis for the behavioral sciences. (3rd ed.). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Collins, W. A. (1997). Relationships and development during adolescence: Interpersonal
adaptation to individual change. Personal Relationships, 4(1), 1‐14.
Collins, W. A., & Laursen, B. (2004). Changing relationships, changing youth: Interpersonal
contexts of adolescent development. Journal of Early Adolescence, 24(1), 55‐62.
53
Collins, W. A. & Sroufe, L. A. (1999). Capacity for intimate relationships: A developmental
construction. In W. Furman, C. Feiring, & B. Brown (Eds.), Contemporary perspectives on
adolescent romantic relationships (pp. 125‐147). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Collins, W. A., & Steinberg, L. (2006). Adolescent development in interpersonal context. In W.
Damon & N. Eisenberg (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 4, Socioemotional
processes (pp. 1003‐1067). New York: Wiley.
Crick, N. R. & Dodge, K. A. (1994). A review and reformulation of social information processing
mechanisms in children’s social adjustment. Psychological Bulletin, 115, 74‐101.
Crick, N. R. & Zahn‐Waxler, C. (2003). The development of psychopathology in females and
males: Current progress and future challenges. Development and Psychopathology, 15,
719–742
Dweck, C. S. (2000). Self‐theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development.
Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.
Dweck, C. S., Chiu, C., & Hong, Y. (1995). Implicit theories and their role in judgments and
reactions: A world from two perspectives. Psychological Inquiry, 6, 267‐285.
Dweck, C. S. & Leggett, E. L. (1988). A social‐cognitive approach to motivation and personality.
Psychological Review, 95, 256‐273.
Elicker, J., Englund, M., & Sroufe, L. A. (1992). Predicting peer competence and peer
relationships in childhood from early parent‐child relationships. In R. Parke & G. Ladd
IFQMd Conflict Resolution 154 2.92 0.76 Intimate Exchange 152 2.54 0.97 Conflict 155 2.61 0.65 Validation and Caring 160 2.65 1.01 Help and Guidance 159 2.38 0.84
Emotional Health e 162 4.04 0.87 Popular/Acceptance e 162 3.83 0.92 Social Helplessness e 157 1.48 0.64 a Implicit Theories of Friendship Questionnaire, b Children’s Peer Relationship Scale, c Friendship Qualities Measure, d Importance of Friendship Qualities Measure, e Teacher reported measures
61
Table 2. Factor loadings for Implicit Theories of Friendship Measure.
Destiny Factor
Growth Factor
g Arguments are an opportunity to improve friendships. ‐.36 .45 Friends either get along or they don’t. .43 .01 g With enough effort, any friendship can work. ‐.07 .46 I like friendships that just click. .30 .31 Friendships often fail because people do not try hard
enough. .35 .27
d Friendships that don’t work out were never meant to be. .67 .01 d If a friendship is not meant to be there is no point in trying
to make it work. .65 .04
g Problems in a friendship can bring friends closer together. ‐.43 .43 g It is important to me that my friends and I agree. .11 .58 g It is important to me to work on improving the quality of
my friendships. .11 .76
g The best kind of friendship develops slowly over time. .05 .50 d Problems at the beginning of a friendship are a sign that
the friendship won’t last. .70 ‐.10
g I like friendships where I can learn new things about myself and my friend.
.03 .59
d To last, a friendship must seem right from the start. .69 .11 g Indicates items retained for the growth scale. d Indicates items retained for the destiny scale.
62
Table 3. Correlations between growth and destiny theories for validation purposes.
Table 5. Correlations between growth and destiny theories and friendship qualities.
Growth Destiny FQM a
Overt Aggression ‐.096 ‐.048 Relational Aggression ‐.011 .044 Conflict Resolution .168* ‐.008 Intimate Exchange I .271*** ‐.106 Intimate Exchange II .260*** ‐.112 Subject Desire for Exclusivity .004 .000 Friend Desire for Exclusivity ‐.033 ‐.012 Conflict I ‐.034 .020 Conflict II .045 ‐.065 Validation and Caring .353*** ‐.067 Companionship and Recreation .149† .100 Satisfaction .132† ‐.030
IFQM b Conflict Resolution .154† ‐.071 Intimate Exchange .323*** ‐.030 Conflict .258*** .106 Validation and Caring .354*** ‐.048 Help and Guidance .238** ‐.033
a Friendship Qualities Measure, b Importance of Friendship Qualities Measure
† p < .10, * p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001
65
Table 6. Correlations between implicit theories and friendship qualities by gender.
Growth Destiny Girls Boys Girls Boys
FQM a Overt Aggression ‐.021 ‐.117 ‐.057 ‐.068 Relational Aggression ‐.105 .140 .185† ‐.165 Conflict Resolution .079 .226† .039 ‐.041 Intimate Exchange I .270* .202 ‐.023 ‐.187 Intimate Exchange II .218* .229† .109 ‐.295* Subject Desire for Exclusivity ‐.082 .097 .115 ‐.191 Friend Desire for Exclusivity ‐.069 .012 .094 ‐.171 Conflict I ‐.239* .253* .039 ‐.038 Conflict II .033 .133 .003 ‐.191 Validation and Caring .278** .379** ‐.078 ‐.024 Companionship and Recreation .244* ‐.019 .131 .069 Satisfaction .118 .107 ‐.130 .097
IFQM b Conflict Resolution .037 .172 ‐.071 .006 Intimate Exchange .253* .350** ‐.032 .039 Conflict .072 .429*** .033 .296* Validation and Caring .197† .471*** .030 ‐.099 Help and Guidance .146 .270* .097 ‐.173
a Friendship Qualities Measure, b Importance of Friendship Qualities Measure
† p < .10, * p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001
66
Table 7. Effects of Destiny and Growth scales on Friendship Qualities.
Friendship Quality Growth β Destiny β Growth x Destiny β
FQMa Conflict Resolution .170*
Intimate Exchange I .267***
Intimate Exchange II .244**
Validation and Caring .348***
Companionship and Recreation .158†
IFQMb Conflict Resolution .151†
Intimate Exchange .323***
Conflict .273*** .154*
Validation and Caring .358***
Help and Guidance .234**
Note. Friendship Qualities not reported did not reach significance. In each analysis destiny and growth theories were entered and interpreted at Step 1, the two‐way interactions were entered and interpreted at the Step 2. Only significant results are presented here.
a Friendship Qualities Measure, b Importance of Friendship Qualities Measure
† p < .10, * p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
5.5
6
Low Destiny High Destiny
IFQ
M: C
onfli
ct
Low Growth
High Growth
Figure 1. The interaction between destiny and growth beliefs predicting children’s ratings of how upset they would be if there was conflict in their friendship with their best friend.
67
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
5.5
6
Low Length High Length
IFQ
M C
onfli
ct R
esol
utio
n
Low Growth
High Growth
Figure 2. The two‐way interaction between friendship length and growth beliefs predicting the value of conflict resolution in the friendship.
68
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
5.5
6
Low Length High Length
IFQ
M V
alid
atio
n an
d ca
ring
Low Growth
High Growth
Figure 3. The two‐way interaction between friendship length and growth beliefs predicting the value of validation and caring behaviors in the friendship.
69
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
Low Growth High Growth
Intim
ate
Exc
hang
e
(1) High Destiny, High Length
(2) High Destiny, Low Length
(3) Low Destiny, High Length
(4) Low Destiny, Low Length
Figure 4. The three‐way interaction between friendship length and growth and destiny beliefs predicting intimate exchange in the friendship.
70
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
5.5
6
Low Satisfaction High Satisfaction
Rel
atio
nal A
ggre
ssio
n
Low Destiny
High Destiny
Figure 5. The two‐way interaction between friendship satisfaction and destiny beliefs predicting relational aggression in the friendship.
71
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
5.5
6
Low Satisfaction High Satisfaction
Con
flict
Tow
ard
Frie
nd
Low Destiny
High Destiny
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
5.5
6
Low Satisfaction High Satisfaction
Con
flict
Fro
m F
rien
d
Low Destiny
High Destiny
Figure 6. The two‐way interaction between friendship satisfaction and destiny beliefs predicting levels of conflict, both to and from the best friend.
72
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
Low Growth High Growth
IFQ
M C
onfli
ct R
esol
utio
n
(1) High Destiny, High Satisfaction
(2) High Destiny, Low Satisfaction
(3) Low Destiny, High Satisfaction
(4) Low Destiny, Low Satisfaction
Figure 7. The three‐way interaction between friendship satisfaction and growth and destiny beliefs predicting the importance of conflict resolution in the friendship.
73
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
Low Growth High Growth
Rel
atio
nal A
ggre
ssio
n (1) High Destiny, Girls
(2) High Destiny, Boys
(3) Low Destiny, Girls
(4) Low Destiny, Boys
Figure 8. The 3‐way interaction between Growth, Destiny, and Gender predicting relational aggression in the friendship.
74
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
Low Growth High Growth
Intim
ate
Exc
hang
e (1) High Destiny, Girls
(2) High Destiny, Boys
(3) Low Destiny, Girls
(4) Low Destiny, Boys
Figure 9. The 3‐way interaction between Growth, Destiny, and Gender predicting intimate exchange in the friendship.
75
76
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
4.8
4.9
5
Low Growth High Growth
Satis
fact
ion (1) High Destiny, Girls
(2) High Destiny, Boys
(3) Low Destiny, Girls
(4) Low Destiny, Boys
Figure 10. The 3‐way interaction between Growth, Destiny, and Gender predicting satisfaction with the friendship.