International Journal of Early Years Education, Vol. 9, No.

2, 2001

Peer Culture and Friendship Relationships as Contexts

for the Development of Young Childrens Pro-social
Behaviour

La Culture de Groupe et les Rapports dAmitie en tant

que Contextes du Developpement du Comportement
Prosocial des Juenes Enfants

Relaciones Culturales y de Amistad Iguales como

Contextos para el Desarrollo de un Comportamiento
Prosocial de los Menores
SOFIA AVGITIDOU
Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece

ABSTRACT This article discusses the understanding and development of childrens pro-social
behaviour in the contexts of peer culture and friendship relationships. The research looks at
how the form and meaning of pro-social behaviour is constructed and negotiated by children
in the context of their shared beliefs, experience and interests. It also questions whether and
in what way children perceive and practice pro-social behaviour as a prerequisite for the
establishment and maintenance of friendship. Findings draw upon ethnographic observations
and interviews with children. Childrens friendships were observed and followed up for a
whole school year in two Greek kindergarten classrooms. Analysis of eld notes and
interviews are based on the researchers gradual and interpretative understanding of the
complex ways in which individual and friendship characteristics as well as the peer culture
values form contexts for the early display of advanced pro-social behaviour.

RESUME Cet article examine la comprehension et le de veloppement du comportement

prosocial des enfants dans les contextes de la culture de groupe et des rapports damitie. Les
recherches ont etudie comment la forme et la signi cation du comportement prosocial sont
construites et ne gociees par les enfants dans le contexte de leurs croyances, experiences et
interets partages. On pose aussi la question de savoir si et de quelle manie`re les enfants
percoivent et pratiquent le comportement prosocial en tant que condition prealable a` la
formation et la continuite des amities. Les conclusions sappuient sur des observations
ethnographiques et des entretiens avec des enfants. Les amities entre enfants ont ete observees
et suivies pendant une annee scolaire entie`re dans deux classes maternelles grecques.
Lanalyse des notes dobservation et des entretiens se base sur la comprehension graduelle

ISSN 0966-9760 print; 1469-5463 online/01/020145-08 2001 Taylor & Francis Ltd
DOI: 10.1080/0966976012005351 0
146 S. Avgitidou

et interpretative du chercheur des manie`res complexes dont les caracteristiques individuelles

et damitie, ainsi que les valeurs de la culture de groupe, forment des contextes de
manifestations precoces de comportement prosocial avance.

RESUMEN Este artculo discute el entendimiento y desarrollo del comportamiento prosocial

de los ninos en contextos de relaciones culturales y de amistad iguales. Esta investigacion
estudia la manera en la que la forma y el signi cado de comportamiento prosocial es
construida y negociada por ninos dentro del contexto de sus creencias, experiencia e intereses
compartidos. Tambien se cuestiona si los ninos perciben y practican el comportamiento
prosocial, y de que manera lo hacen, como un prerrequisito para el establecimiento y
mantenimiento de la amistad. Las conclusiones derivan de observaciones etnogra cas y
entrevistas con los ninos. Se observaron y siguieron las amistades de ninos durante todo el
ano academico en dos clases de un jardn de infancia de Grecia. El analisis de las notas de
campo y entrevistas se basan en el entendimiento gradual e interpretativo que la investigadora
interpreto de las formas complejas en las que las caractersticas individuales y de amistad, as
como los valores culturales iguales, forman contextos para una exteriorizacion temprana de
comportamiento prosocial avanzado.

Introduction and Aims of the Research: theoretical and methodological foci

Pro-social behaviour usually refers to voluntary behaviour intended to bene t another (Miller
et al., 1991, p. 54). Altruism and empathy have often been presented as speci c types of
pro-social behaviour. Altruism means a disinterested concern for the welfare of others (Heal,
1991, p. 159). Empathy contributes to acts such as attempting to comfort and help and the
ability to take turns and cooperate through sharing (Hoffman, 1987). Within pre-school
children empathy has been described as being primitive, naive and reasonably universal, as
children only experience distress when another person is in distress without attempting to
intervene in the others emotional or physical state (Hoffman, 1987). On the other hand, more
recent research in the Greek context presents altruistic behaviour of 07-year-old children as
rich in its repertoire and advanced social understanding (Kakavoulis, 1999).
Most studies, to our knowledge, do not interrelate childrens perceptions of pro-social
behaviour with childrens actual behaviour in a natural context. Neither have they examined
the processes by which children give meaning to pro-social behaviour. Rather, they begin by
describing what pro-social behaviour is from an adults (or researchers) point of view and go
on to explore whether childrens behaviour conforms to this description. This perspective on
how we study children has been criticised in recent years by researchers who emphasise the
role of children as social actors and participants in shaping of the social world (James, 1993;
Corsaro, 1997; Christensen & James, 2000). The work of Corsaro and colleagues has shown
childrens gradual construction of their world (peer culture). Peer culture has been de ned as
a set of activities, values and shared understandings which are actively co-constructed by
children through their daily routines (Berentzen, 1984; Corsaro & Eder, 1990; Avgitidou,
1994a, b; Corsaro, 1997). Hannikainen et al. (1997) also showed how children create their own
culture in all types of activities in day care centres.
Understanding pro-social behaviour is founded not only on the ways the child interacts or
behaves but also on the circumstances that explain this behaviour and on the response that this
has caused. For example, a behaviour alone, like arguing, may be appropriate among friends
in a discursive peer culture context which is legalised by socio-cultural factors (Corsaro &
Rizzo, 1988) or inappropriate if it is displayed in a context where children are strongly
opposed to ghting. Perceiving arguing only as a negative behaviour without considering the
 Peer Culture, Friendship and Pro-social Behaviour 147

circumstances of its display, according to the commonly agreed classroom routines and values,
may lead someone to misinterpret it or assess a child as less competent than another in peer
interaction.
In addition, childrens friendships do not have the same qualities and characteristics. In an
ethnographic study of childrens friendships in Greek and English kindergartens the form,
meaning and development of friendship varied according to the different cultural and
educational contexts (Avgitidou, 1994a). In the previous study children used different criteria
to reason and talk about their friends. These criteria were: (1) the existence of friends; (2) the
frequency and the intensity of interactions and shared activities; (3) reciprocity of liking and
positive behaviour; (4) the roles that each child holds; and (5) the duration of relationships. In
addition, a special kind of friendship developed between children based on empathy in the
Greek kindergarten classrooms, due to the wide age range of classmates. Showing concern for
the younger and/or smaller in the class was acknowledged by children, teachers and mothers
as the main reason for the establishment of these relationships.
In this article I offer a contextual study of pro-social behaviour. Contextual studies consider
phenomena as being inherently situated in context (Packer & Scott, 1992, p. 108). This
perspective seeks to determine whether and how children construct and negotiate the meaning
of pro-social behaviour within context. Further, it explores in what way pro-social behaviour
forms a prerequisite for friendship development in the Greek kindergarten classroom context,
where a wide age range of children with different abilities is encountered. Lastly, examples are
provided to how friendships form contexts for the display of pro-social behaviour.

Research Methodology
An ethnographic approach has been selected in order to understand childrens own perspec-
tives and understandings of pro-social behaviour and its development in speci c contexts
(Hammersley & Atkinson, 1983; James, 1993; Corsaro, 1997). Methods included daily
observations of childrens life in the classroom, semi-structured interviews with children and
sociometric techniques with children at the beginning and end of the observation period.
Two kindergarten classrooms were selected in the same middle class area of Thessaloniki,
consisting of 20 children each with similar socio-economic status. The age range was between
3 years 9 months and 5 years 6 months (mean age 4 years 10 months). Cases of childrens
friendships were selected from each classroom to be followed up throughout the school year
over an 8 month period.

Observations
During the daily observations I attempted to stay at the periphery of the childrens activities
and develop a gradual understanding of their peer culture concerns as well as the process of
initiating, maintaining and terminating a friendship. I observed childrens peer interactions
during different classroom routines (coming in, circle time, free play, lunch time) but focused
on their free play interactions. Initially I recorded the sequence of events in free play episodes
noting down: (a) a description of the interaction setting (where and when); (b) a judgement of
the childs intention based on context; (c) a description of the ways of interaction (verbal and
non-verbal behaviour); (d) the duration of episodes, placing special emphasis on continuities
and discontinuities in the process of play; (e) an evaluation of the outcome of interaction
according to the others response and long-term effects on the relationship (successful or not);
and (f) a description of the processes of interaction at different stages (initiation, course and
termination). Gradual immersion in the classroom during the 8 month period and continuous
148 S. Avgitidou

analysis of eld notes and other relevant information led to an understanding of the ways
children gave meaning to pro-social behaviour and negotiated that meaning in different
contexts.

Interviews and Sociometric Techniques

Interviews with children were semi-structured in that they had speci c foci of interest but they
were also exible in questioning speci c matters emerging from my eld notes. Interviews
with children were presented as a game, Lets talk about your friends in the classroom.
Children were asked to talk about and explain: (a) who were their friends and why; (b) the
initiation of speci c friendships but also the ways they would choose to start a friendship
(common and script knowledge); (c) the content of their shared activities with their friends;
(d) ghts or discontinuities in the relationship; and (e) reasons for and ways of possible
termination of the relationship. Interviews took place twice: at the beginning ( rst interview)
and at the end (second interview) of the observation period, to trace any changes in their
perceptions. In the second interview especially questions were more context speci c and based
on my observations, which provided me with childrens explanations of speci c incidents in
the classroom.
Sociometric techniques aimed at exploring which children were preferred more as a friend,
a playmate or workmate or were liked most. These preferences were related to any pro-social
behaviour that these children had in their relationships with others. In addition, the social status
of children was explored not only as an outcome of their pro-social behaviour, but also as a
variable affecting childrens positive predispositions towards or acceptance of children with
established status in the classroom.

Prosocial Behaviour as a Prerequisite for Friendship Development

Both in my own observations and in interviews with the children I encountered certain
identi able concerns and values characteristic of childrens peer culture. These were: (a)
participation in play; (b) nice behaviour; (c) extension of interactions in out-of-school settings;
(d) empathy, looking after younger children; (e) friends of friends, belonging to a social
network; and (f) friendship. I will show how pro-social behaviour is related to some of these
peer culture concerns.
In both the rst and second interviews one of the basic reasons for friendship and best
friendship choices was shared play either in or out of school.
1st interview, Thanasis:
(Why is Chris your friend?) We play together and we play chase.
(Why is Marios your friend?) Because we go to his house and we play. Sometimes we play
with Marios toys and sometimes with mine.
2nd interview, Despina:
(Why is Katerina your friend?) Because she is nice (Why is she nice?) Because we play
together in the classroom and in the playground.
Acceptance in play is understood by children as nice behaviour towards them: She is nice
because she gave me a present. Sometimes nice refers to someones external appearance:
Because she wears nice clothes. This nice behaviour also had another meaning in the peer
culture context, as explained below.
As the study was carried out in Greek kindergarten classrooms it included children aged
from 3 years 9 months to 5 years 6 months. Children re ected a certain concern for their
 Peer Culture, Friendship and Pro-social Behaviour 149

younger peers in their interviews when giving the attribution of nice to them. Nice was also
attributed to children being smaller in size and therefore looking younger. This attribution had
an implicit connection to the attitudes of the younger or smaller children, these being not
ghting and being quiet in the class. The following examples of such references in the
childrens interviews will enlighten this connection between being nice and being young/small
in size.
1st interview, Dimitris:
(Why is Chris your friend?) Because he is nice, because he is very small.
2nd interview, Dimitris:
(Why do you like Antigone most?) Because she is nice and does not make any noise
(Antigone is the youngest in the class).

The awareness of someones age and the sense of attitude towards younger children is
expanded on to highlight childrens empathy in their classroom. Empathy is understood here
as showing concern and interest for someone by being able to understand not only the others
point of view but also their abilities and competencies according to certain criteria, such as
age. In that sense, empathy is closely related to pro-social behaviour. Older children
recognised that their younger peers were not able to do certain things and they helped them.
At the same time younger children recognised that they were helped.
2nd interview, Akis:
(What do you like most about your best friend?) Because Marios showed me how to climb
here (on a window base), thats why he is my best friend.
(Why did Marios show you that?) Because I dont know how to get up here (on the window
base).
(Do you think Marios likes you?) Yes, because he showed me how to get up here.

Akis was one of the younger children in the class while Marios was the oldest. Akis
comment about Marios helping him to climb on the window was connected with a new game
at that time which was children climbing up the window base when chasing each other in order
not to be caught.
2nd interview, Marios:
(What do you do together with Thanasis, your best friend?) We play, we sit next to each other,
we go out to the playground with Chris being in the middle (between us).
(Why do you do that?) Thanasis wants him to be there.
(Why do you think he wants to have Chris in the middle?) Because he is his friend.

Marios comment referred to Thanasis concern for Chris (who was smaller in size than
them), which was also evident in daily observations. Thanasis tried not to leave Chris alone,
but additionally Chris followed him everywhere.
Empathy is presented at this point as a characteristic of speci c developing friendships.
Thus, apart from the recognition of others abilities and needs, children showed concern,
affection and helping behaviour and even had a protective attitude towards younger children.
Empathy seems to form a friendship criterion further to shared play and nice behaviour. This
implies that relationships may develop in terms other than evaluation and experience, such as
childrens early recognition of, understanding and sensitivity to individual and social character-
istics. However, this point will be discussed further below.
150 S. Avgitidou

Friendships as Contexts for the Development of Pro-social Behaviour

When empathy formed a characteristic of friendships (either as a friendship criterion or a
determinant of behaviour towards the other) there were differences in the role each child
played in the relationship. In my observations older or same age but bigger in physical size
children were more responsible for the course of shared play and younger or smaller in size
children tended to follow them around, rarely initiating any activities. Differences in the role
each child played in the relationship did not necessarily imply differences in their status and
therefore inequality between friends. This claim is based on the continuity of shared play
observed among them, the lack of purposeful assertion of dominance in the initiation of shared
play on the part of the older child and the fact that younger children did not perceive
themselves as being of a lower status in the relationship.
The absence of dominance in reciprocated friendships based on empathy allows us to
understand how friendships form learning contexts for the advancement of pro-social behav-
iour. In the rst example below I show how friendship with younger (or smaller) children
forms a motive for the exhibition of caring and protective behaviour by older children.
Younger children who experience such relationships usually tend to exhibit pro-social
behaviour in that context. In the second example the close tie between the friends and the
desire to maintain the friendship form motives for the display of advanced social understanding
and unsel sh declarations of love.
In the rst example Chris (5 years 1 month old) and Thanasis (5 years 2 months old) were
best friends. Thanasis was very caring and nurturing towards Chris and Chris followed
Thanasis around, perceiving him as his reciprocal best friend. I had dif culties interviewing
Chris in that he did not want to follow me outside the classroom, into the school hall, where
I interviewed all the other children. I had purposefully left Chris to one of the last interviewees
because I understood from the distance he kept from me that he was not feeling as comfortable
with me as the other children in the class. Here follows a description of how the interview was
achieved by accepting a peer culture ritual and being exible with respect to the childrens
initiatives.
I was in the classroom in front of Chris with my knees bent and asking him why he did not
want to come with me and play the same game as the other children. He stared at the oor and
would not answer me. Because I had already interviewed all the other children I explained: I
have played this game with all the children. It is really an easy game and all I want you to do
is talk about your friends in the classroom. While I was talking to Chris, Thanasis, his best
friend, came and stood next to him and leaning his face towards him in order to look him in
the eyes he said Go Chris, I did that (the interview). Chris became distressed and ready to
cry and then Thanasis held his hand and said Would you like me to come with you?. Chris
nodded. Instantly I realised that this had not happened in the other interviews but I assumed
that if I did not accept Thanasis proposal to come with Chris I would fail to have Chris
perspective on his peer relationships. So I said Thats ne, Thanasis will come along. I
obtained two chairs while Thanasis kept hold of Chris hand and looked at his face. They sat
next to each other and I asked Thanasis not to interfere in our conversation, to which he agreed.
Chris talked to me about his friendships and his best friendship with Thanasis without being
concerned that Thanasis was there.
Thanasis concern and attitude towards Chris in this episode is characteristic of his
affectionate and protective relationship with Chris. On the other hand, the trust Chris had in
Thanasis and the security he felt next to him were obvious. In this episode it is the nature of
the relationship itself that provides a context both for the display and the learning of pro-social
behaviour. Concerning Chris, his relationship with Thanasis, a socially competent child with
advanced social understanding, forms a context full of opportunities to advance his pro-social
behaviour.
 Peer Culture, Friendship and Pro-social Behaviour 151

The following example furthers our understanding of how the speci c nature of the
relationship forms a motive for children to express highly advanced pro-social behaviour by
taking in the others perspective and making efforts to sustain the relationship. The relationship
between Tania (5 years 5 months) and Theodora (4 years 10 months) was reciprocal in the rst
two school terms, as both Tania and Theodora not only nominated each other as best friends
but continuously followed each other around and were friendly to one another. During the third
school term Tanias interest in Theodoras friendship was not always reciprocated. In both the
examples from interviews and eld notes that follow Tanias love and unsel sh declaration of
her friendship with Theodora become evident.
2nd interview, Tania:
(Why is Theodora your friend?) Because I love her very much.
(Why do you love her very much?) Because she sometimes gives me her toys, she gives me
her toys, her dolls, thats why .
(Does Theodora invite you to her house?) No.
(Do you go down, to the street, to play?) I do, I call her (to come) but she says no.
(Why does she say no?) Because she may not love me, not have me as her friend.
On the other hand, Theodora commented on their relationship as follows.
2nd interview, Theodora:
(Do you ever ght with Tania?) We ght at home but not at school, (we ght) as soon as we
go down (to play).
(Are you back to friends after that?) No.
(Why is that?) I dont know.
(Would Tania want to be friends again?) Yes, because Tania wants us to be friends.
(How do you know that?) She doesnt tell me, I understand, because sometimes I listen to her
crying at her home, moaning because I leave her, my mother calls me (to go home) and she
cries.
(Arent you upset that she cries?) No.
(Why is that?) Well, Tania sometimes when I want to go to my home, she comes as well,
when her mother tells her you cant go, she still comes.
Unsel sh declarations of love and friendship were evident in the case of Tania in her
everyday interactions with Theodora. Childrens representation of unsel sh declarations of
love towards the friend is very interesting because it questions the notion of reciprocity in
childrens friendships. The following incident, where Tania and Theodora play with another
of their friends, Fenia, illustrates this situation.
Tania, Theodora and Fenia are playing a game with card numbers. Fenia calls Theodora
stupid because she turned a card to see its number.
Theodora says: She called me stupid.
Tania asks Fenia: Why did you call her stupid?.
Fenia: Because she is a bad girl.
Tania: Fenia, you are not my friend if you call Theodora stupid. We are all a group of friends
(parea).
Fenia tells Tania: You are stupid as well, stupid!.
Tania turns her face to the side and says: I am not getting sad (in an upset voice), why should
I be sad?.
Fenia looks at her and says: Oh, you stupid, do you see what you have done?.
152 S. Avgitidou

Tania gets up and leaves the table standing next to Theodora.

Fenia gets up as well and standing opposite them says to Tania: Stupid, I dont love you.
Tania and Theodora stand opposite Fenia looking at her.
Tania embraces Theodoras shoulder and says to Fenia: Love her and dont love me. Love her
and dont love me and if you want love us all.
In the last case study we described, friendship formed a context only for Tanias highly
developed pro-social behaviour, due to her desire to maintain the relationship. It is interesting
that at such an early age love and an unsel sh declaration of friendship have been observed
in young children.

Discussion of the Findings

The results of this research are closely related to the research methodology, which accounts
for a contextual understanding of social phenomena and in that way gives children the chance
to highlight their early abilities and social understanding. Children develop shared beliefs and
values which they practice in the establishment and maintenance of their peer relationships. In
a context such as that of the Greek kindergarten classroom one of the commonly accepted peer
culture concerns is pro-social behaviour in the form of empathy, i.e. looking after the younger
or smaller children. Research ndings therefore support the early display of complex pro-social
behaviour.
It is evident that when children have the opportunity to have same and mixed age
friendships they engage in both. Empathy forms either a friendship criterion, a fact which
questions the issue of reciprocity in young childrens friendships, or a friendship characteristic,
showing how behaviour can only be understood within the context of the speci c nature of the
relationship.

References
AVGITIDOU, S. (1994a) Childrens friendships in early schooling: cross cultural and educational case studies,
unpublished DPhil thesis, University of Sussex, Brighton, UK.
AVGITIDOU, S. (1994b) Children learning about friendship in the context of an English reception classroom, in: H.
FOOT, C.J. HOWE, A. ANDERSON, A.K. TOLMIE & D.A. WARDEN (Eds) Group and Interactive Learning,
pp. 263269 (Southamtpon, Computational Mechanics).
BERENTZEN , S. (1984) Children Constructing Their Social World. Bergen Studies in Social Anthropolog y, Bergen
Occasional Papers in Social Anthropology no. 36, University of Bergen, Bergen.
CHRISTENSEN, P. & JAMES A. (Eds) (2000) Research with Children. Perspectives and practices (London, Falmer
Press).
CORSARO, W.A. (1997) The Sociology of Childhood, (Thousand Oaks, Pine Forge Press).
CORSARO, W.A. & EDER, D. (1990) Childrens peer cultures. Annual Review of Sociology, 16, pp. 197220
CORSARO, W.A. & RIZZO , T.A. (1988) Discussion and friendships: socialisation processes in the peer culture of Italian
nursery school children. American Sociologica l Review, 53, pp. 879894
HAMMERSLEY, M. & ATKINSON, P. (1983) Ethnography. Principles in practice (London, Tavistock Publications).
HANNIKAINEN, M., DE JONG, M. & RUBINSTEIN REICH, L. (1997) Our Heads are the Same Size: a study of quality
of the childs life in Nordic day care centres, Educational Information and Debate 107 (Lund, Malmo School
of Education, Lund University).
HEAL , J. (1991) Altruism, in: R.A. HINDE & J. GROEBEL (Eds) Cooperation and Prosocial Behaviour (Cambridge,
Cambridge University Press).
HOFFMAN, M. (1987) The contribution of empathy to justice and moral judgement, in: N. EISENBERG & J. STRAYER
(Eds) Empathy and its Development (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press).
JAMES, A. (1993) Childhood Identities. Self and social relationships in the experience of the child (Edinburgh,
Edinburgh University Press).
KAKAVOULIS, A. (1999) Paidikos altrouismospos ta paidia ekdilonoun tin agapi tous [Childhood Altruismhow do
children express their love] (Athens).
MILLER, P.A., BERNZWELG , J., EISENBERG, N. & FABER, R.A. (1991) The development of socialization of prosocial
behaviour , in: R.A. HINDE & J. GROEBEL (Eds) Cooperation and Prosocial Behaviour (Cambridge, Cambridge
University Press).
PACKER, M.J. & SCOTT , B. (1992) The hermeneuti c investigation of peer relations, in: L.T. WINEGAR & J. VALSINER
(Eds) Childrens Development within Social Context. Research and Methodology (Hillsdale, NJ, Lawrence
Erlbaum).