Dr. Poonam Tiwari*,Dr.MadhuBala**
Peer group is
both a social
group and a primary
group of people who have similar interests, age,
background, or social status. The members of this group are likely to influence
the person’s beliefs and behavior. Peers are a pervasive aspect of people’s lives, but their role in
personality development has rarely been considered. We propose that a conjunct
consideration of peer group effects and peer relationship effects can advance
the general understanding of personality development. We discuss the present
research paper effect of peer group and peer relationship in personality
Because an early age, the peer group becomes an important part of
socialization and personality development.
Keywords: personality development, Peer groups and Peer
Socialization theory (Harris, 1995) is one of the few approaches that
explicitly consider the role of peers in Personality development. As outlined
before, it posits that with children’s advancing age, socialization in peer
group becomes an increasingly importantdeterminant of personality development
that accounts for example, in large ports for personality differences between siblings.
though siblings may as well experience environmental differences within the familybirth
order studies and studies that included children with and without siblings
suggest that intra familiar influences cannot fully account for the observed
non-genetic differences that make siblings differentGroup socialization Theory
proposes that different from each other not only because 50% of their genes
differ, but also because they belong to different peer groups.
Building on Harris (1995) and in view
of the previous review that sustained the importance of peers beyond
adolescence, we counted that peers account for a substantial share of variance
in life span personality development. In particular, we suggest that the
distinction between social group and dyadic relationship perspectives in
essential for understanding peer effects on personality development peer group
process of within group assimilation lead to peer group members personalities
becoming more members personalities becoming more similar over time, at the
same time, between group differences increase.
Nevertheless Peer group members also
differ in their personality development, which is driven by unique dyadic
relationship experience. In the following sections, we will first-address group
level effects and elaborate on how peer group processes account for between
group differences we will then turn to relationship-level effects and delineate
how specific dyadic relationship experience determine.
differences within peer groups we will conclude with examples that illustrate
future research prospects that capitalize on the integration of both research
Group-Level effects on personality
Group socialization theory explains
peer effects our personality development by the means of social group process
of assimilation and differentiation. Assimilation describes the process of
adopting the group’s rules standards and beliefs that guide behaviors thought
and feelings, which makes group members becoming more similar over time.
and colleagues (1994) Provided a classic examples of this process. They obscured
that formerly inhibited male children became on average less shy and fearful
from 6-16 years, whereas female children did not substantially change in those
characteristics. The researchers explained their results by pointing to the respective
peer group of adolescent’s girls but not of boys.
role of peer group norms for behavior has also been underlined by research on
social networks that for instance, found network effects on substance
consumption. Such group determined behaviors in turn are presumed to accumulate
in the long run and results in personality trait developmenthence the outline
group assimilation processes serve the explain developmental difference between
contrast group socialization theory remains rather vague regarding group
differentiation processes that make group members dissimilar or, in other
words, account for within-group differences I personality development.
Differences in group status and social comparisons within groups are presumed
to affect development, although some empirical evidence points to the long-term
implications of such differentiation processes. (7)More research is
needed to substantiate their role in lifespan personality development.
although differentiation provide some indications for the explanation of
differences within a peer group, group socialization theory in blind towards an
additional source of within group variance namely specific dyadic peer
Relationship-Level effects of
Social relationship theory such as
the social relationship model provided valuable perspective on peer
relationship level effects on personality development within peer0groups.
a recent of longitudinal study by reitz, Motti-stefanidi and asendorpf (2014)
should that individual differences in likability nominations by classmates predicted
adolescents’ self-esteem development and that this effect was medicated by the adolescents’
self-perceptions of their likability. Furthermore results revealed that being
liked by classmates of the same immigrant status had stronger effects than
being liked by classmates of a different immigrate status. This finding informs
our understandings of peer effect on personality in two ways. On the one hand,
it highlights the role of social relationship processes it provided evidence
for the role of specific dyadic relationship characteristic. On the other hand,
it corroborates social group perspectives on peer effects thus, this study
highlights exemplarily that dyadic relationship processes and group effects are
An integrated perspective on peer
effects on personality development
in conscientiousness reflects a normative pattern of maturation in young
adulthood that in, for example, driven by commitment to educational or
a recent-study substantiated increase in conscientiousness in the context of graduation
and at the same time, revealed substantial variance between trajectories that
was partly associated with students achievement behavior group-level perspectives
also offer some explanations for within-group differences in conscientiousness
development, such as for steeper increases for group leaders. These different
trajectories may be due to differences in in-group status that result from
social comparison between group members. However,future research in needed to
understand the concrete processes through which “status in the peer group may
leave permanent marks on personality.
review should that peers are a pervasive aspect of our social lives that impact
us from childhood to old age. Whereas individual peer characteristics vary
between life phases equality matching characterizes peer relationship across
the entire lifespan.
Peer groups can influence personality
development by defining peer-group norms that increase similarity among group
members and explain differences between peer groups. Dyadic peer relationship
influence personality development by dyad specific interaction patterns and
relationship characteristics that increase individual differences.
As such, they account for differences
in personality development within-peer groups. Future research may future
explore the dynamic interplay of group-level and relationship level
peereffects. To conclude, we propose that the integration of group-level
perspectives and relationship level perspectives provides a fruitful bans that
contributes to a better understanding of the role of peers in lifespan
personality development. Now we conclude that peer group and peer relationships
is most important part of personality development.
Back, M.D. Baumirt, A. Denissen, J.A. Hartung, F. Renke, L. schmukes. Sc.
&Wruzus C. (2011).PERSOC. A unified framework for understanding the dynamic
interplay of personality and social relationship Guropean.Journal of
Brown, B.B. (2011). Popularity in peer group Perspectime : The role of
status in adolescent peer systenses. In A.H.N. cillsen. D. Schwortz& L.
Mayeux (Eob). Popularity in the peer system (PP 165-192) new York. NX
Clark M.S. & Mills J. (1979) .Interpersonal attraction in exchange
and communal relationship. Journal of personality and social psychology, 37,
W.L. Gabriel, S & Lee A.Y. (1999). 9 Value freedom, but ‘we’ value
relationship: self-construal priming mirrors cultural differences in Judgement.
Psychology science. 10(4), 321-326
J. (1995).where is the child’s environment A group socialization theory of
development, Psychological Review, 102, 458-489.
Kerr, M. Lambert, W.W. stattin, H., &Klackenberf – Larsson. I.
(1994). Stability of Inhibition in Swidish Longitudinal Sample. Child
Development 05, 138-146.
Lang. FR. Stadinger, U.M &corstensen. L.L. (1998). Perspective on
sociomotionalSelectinnity in lote life: How personality and social contex do
(and do not) make a differences. The Journal of Geroulogy, Series B
Psychological Sciences and social science 53 B 1) 21-30
Reitz, A.K. Motte- Stenfauidi, F, S Asendorp, J. B. (2013). Mosturing
development transitious in immigrant adolesccouts. The longitudinal interplay
of family functioning development and acculratinetass. DevelopmentPsychology.
50 (3) 754-765.
Reitz, A.K. Motti-stefanidi F. &Asendorpf J.B. (2014). When do
immigrant adolescent feil personality dicriminalidagains? Longitudinal effects
of peer likability. Manuskaript for Rub.
J. &Neyarr, F-J- (2013). Do we become a different person when hitting the
road? Personality development of sojourners. Journal of personality and
social psychology- 105, 515-530.
Peer group. (n.d.). Dictionary.com. Retrieved