Peer aggression among children and youth: Defining constructs and identifying programming
Frye-Cox, N., Farnsworth, M., O’Neal, C. W., Lucier-Greer, M. (2020). Peer aggression among children and youth: Defining constructs and identifying programming. Auburn, AL: Military REACH
Abstract Created by REACH
The Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) Family Advocacy Program (FAP) requested a
comprehensive literature review to be conducted on peer aggression with specific emphasis placed on clearly
defining the topic while also identifying contemporary research on primary and secondary prevention strategies,
as well as clinical interventions that are promising at mitigating peer aggression.
Peer aggression can be defined as any behavior that is intended to harm another person (e.g., David-Ferdon et
al., 2016; DeWall et al., 2012; Dodge et al., 2006). To help distinguish peer aggression from other constructs,
specific attention is paid to differentiating between motives, modes, and types of peer aggression. In addition,
peer aggression is distinguished from similar constructs of peer control, juvenile delinquency, and child abuse
and neglect.
The substantial efforts to clarify the construct of peer aggression have been matched by researchers attempting
to prevent and reduce peer aggression and to mitigate immediate and long-term consequences stemming
from peer aggression. Many of these efforts utilize either primary prevention strategies, secondary prevention
strategies, or clinical interventions. Primary prevention programs may help change general attitudes about
peer aggression and promote positive relationships within a given community. Secondary strategies may be
most effective at managing peer aggression when parents, teachers, and others in a community are supported
in their efforts to identify students at-risk for peer aggression and peer victimization. Clinical interventions are
directed specifically at youth who have engaged in peer aggression with attention devoted toward improving
relationships with parents and enhancing youth’s cognitive and socioemotional skills. Although each level of
intervention can yield positive outcomes (e.g., reduction in aggressive behaviors, improved relationships with
peers and adults), the best outcomes typically result from a coordinated effort between all three strategies
(e.g., David-Ferdon et al., 2016; Espelage & Swearer, 2008). Importantly, it is necessary to match the strategy
employed with the needs of the situation, as consideration must be given to age of youth, the level of
implementation (i.e., prevention or intervention), as well as the organizational resources available.
Research summaries convey terminology used by the scientists who authored the original research article; some terminology may not align with the federal government's mandated language for certain constructs.
Cookie Preferences
We use cookies to enhance your browsing experience. Please review our Privacy Statement for more information.
Necessary cookies: Essential for the website to function properly.
Analytics cookies: Help us understand how visitors interact with our website.