| Title |
Disentangling the Relations between Social Identity and Prosocial and Antisocial Behavior in Competitive Youth Sport
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Youth and Adolescence, October 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10964-017-0769-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mark W. Bruner, Ian D. Boardley, Alex J. Benson, Kathleen S. Wilson, Zachary Root, Jennifer Turnnidge, Jordan Sutcliffe, Jean Côté |
| Abstract |
The social identities formed through membership on extracurricular activity groups may contribute to the frequency with which youth engage in prosocial and antisocial behavior. However, researchers have yet to disentangle the individual- and group-level processes social identification effects operate through; sex and perceived norms may also moderate such effects. Thus, we investigated the hierarchical and conditional relations between three dimensions of social identity (i.e., ingroup ties, cognitive centrality, ingroup affect) and prosocial and antisocial behavior in youth ice hockey players (N = 376; 33% female). Multilevel analyses demonstrated antisocial teammate and opponent behavior were predicted by cognitive centrality at the team level. Further, prosocial teammate behavior was predicted by cognitive centrality and ingroup ties at the individual-level. Also, perceived norms for prosocial teammate behavior moderated the relations between ingroup ties, cognitive centrality, and ingroup affect and prosocial teammate behaviour. Finally, sex moderated the relations between cognitive centrality/ingroup affect and antisocial opponent behavior. This work demonstrates the multilevel and conditional nature of how social identity dimensions relate to youth prosocial and antisocial behavior. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 43% |
| Canada | 1 | 14% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 2 | 29% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 43% |
| Scientists | 3 | 43% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 123 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 123 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 23 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 18 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 7% |
| Researcher | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 19 | 15% |
| Unknown | 35 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 29 | 24% |
| Sports and Recreations | 22 | 18% |
| Social Sciences | 11 | 9% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 5 | 4% |
| Arts and Humanities | 4 | 3% |
| Other | 11 | 9% |
| Unknown | 41 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 November 2017.
All research outputs
#7,344,673
of 23,906,448 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Youth and Adolescence
#801
of 1,813 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#115,872
of 331,256 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Youth and Adolescence
#15
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,906,448 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,813 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 331,256 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.