Study finds teasing may be more damaging than once thought (4/20/2008)

Children are more likely to interpret teasing -- even teasing intended to be harmless -- as negative rather than positive, according to a study at Kansas State University.

The study, which observed fifth- and sixth-grade students, found that when it was unclear whether teasing was friendly or unfriendly, kids tended to interpret the act as unfriendly. Previous research showed that fifth- and sixth-grade students were able to distinguish between antisocial and prosocial teases. However, this study, presented in February at a conference of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, demonstrates that the same children are not always able to distinguish the intent of teasing that is more ambiguous.

"To evaluate how teases are meant, we usually use contextual cues like the tone of the voice that the teaser uses, their body language and facial features while delivering the tease, and information about our relationship with the tease," said Jennifer Livengood, Wamego, a social psychology master's degree graduate student at K-State involved in the study. "By minimizing the contextual cues, we can assume that the teases are ambiguous in that some people may see them as intentionally hurtful while others may interpret them as being playful or affiliative in nature. The purpose of this study was to see if this interpretation was influenced by their previous experiences and their general attitudes toward teasing."

Researchers found that kids who had been the subject of negative teasing were more likely to interpret ambiguous teasing as negative and were more likely to retaliate. The findings could have implications for parents, teachers and other caretakers as they deal with interactions between children.

"We found that, in some children, negative experiences with antisocial teasing are associated with more negative retaliative responses, such as hitting or kicking the teaser," Livengood said. "This could cause the cycle to repeat itself, leading to more negative interpersonal interactions. Knowing this could aid those who work with children to pay attention to these cycles and do their best to interrupt this pattern."

Researchers observed 144 children -- 70 boys and 74 girls -- from four public elementary schools in northeast Kansas. The children filled out questionnaires about teasing, reporting how often they were teased prosocially and antisocially using a five-point scale that ranged from 1 (never) to 5 (very often). Then they responded to ambiguous teasing scenarios and rated how they would feel and in what way they would respond to the teasing.

The results also showed that boys and girls responded differently. Girls reported feeling more hurt, angry, sad, and embarrassed after being teased than did boys. Girls also reported being more likely than boys to stay away from the teaser. Boys who received fewer positive teases from peers said they anticipated feeling more anger and sadness in response to the ambiguous teases, and were more likely believe that the ambiguous teases were meant to be hostile. Girls, by contrast, showed no correlation between the frequency with which they received positive teases and their emotional and behavioral responses to ambiguous teases.

Livengood said that in further research on the subject, it would be useful to give children more options for responses, and to observe them in actual teasing situations.

"We gave the children limited options for the behaviors that they would engage in after being teased," she said. "This was done for time concerns as well as for the sake of simplicity, but it didn't give the children a chance to freely respond to the teases. This is definitely an issue that future research could address. We also relied on self-reports of the responsive behaviors and feelings, which could be biased. Natural observations of teasing interactions could address this issue."

Along with Livengood, professor of psychology Mark Barnett and graduate students Natalie Brown, Deborah Murphy, Katherine Brewton also contributed to the study, "Factors Associated with Children's Emotional and Behavioral Responses to Ambiguous Teases." They also performed a study in 2006, "Children as Recipients of Antisocial and Prosocial Teases: Experiences and Perceptions," which they presented at the 26th Annual Great Plains Psychological Convention in Warrensburg, Mo., and which was the foundation of the new research.

Note: This story has been adapted from a news release issued by Kansas State University

Post Comments: