| Conceptual and empirical ambiguities have occurred with the proliferation of subcategories by which to study children's aggression. Little, Jones, et al. (2003) offered a new framework for understanding children's self-reported aggressive behavior in which four subtypes of aggression (proactive versus reactive, overt versus relational) were reconceptualized as forms or functions of behavior. The form of an aggressive behavior described what the behavior looked like, either relational or overt, and the function described why the behavior was enacted, either reactive or proactive. The present research offered a replication and extension of Little et al. using self- and peer-reported measures of aggression from 216 children (107 boys, 109 girls) from the United States in grades 3 through 6. Results replicated that Little's form and function model was the best fit for the self-reported aggression and that this model evidenced good external validity. The model fit equally well for both boys and girls and across two different age groups. Criterion validity was also established with the inclusion in the model of a sociability construct and a social standing construct. For peer-report aggression and when both self- and peer-reports of aggression were combined, a form model of aggression evidenced the best model fit. Thus, it appeared that the individual considered both the form and the function of their aggressive behavior whereas the peer group focused first on the form of the aggressive behavior and less on the function of the aggression. |
