The Impact of Parent-Child Relationship on the Peer Sociometric Status of High School Students



The investigations of psychological problems of family relations and their impact on the child and adolescent peer relationship are especially important for high school students who are on the verge of adulthood. The article presents the overview of the Russian and foreign publications, and the results of the empirical study of parent-child relationship impact on the peer sociometric status of high school students. The empirical study involved 106 participants: 53 tenth grade students aged 15 to 16 (M=15,8), including 24 girls and 29 boys, and their mothers (N=53) aged 37 to 43 years old (M=40,4). Methods used: sociometric test (J. Moreno); “Adolescents about Parents Questionnaire” (ADOR/POR); questionnaire for parents “Analysis of family relationships” (AFR). The results obtained allow us to state that high school students with the high sociometric status are less likely to encounter manifestations of directiveness, hostility, and distancing from their parents. It is noted that the low sociometric status of students is largely associated with such disharmony of parenting styles as hypoprotection and abuse.

General Information

Keywords: sociometric status, status differentiation, child-parent relationships, types of family education, adolescent, early adolescence

Journal rubric: Developmental Psychology

Article type: scientific article


Received: 01.02.2022


For citation: Ekimova V.I., Vetzel A.N., Rozenova M.I. The Impact of Parent-Child Relationship on the Peer Sociometric Status of High School Students. Kul'turno-istoricheskaya psikhologiya = Cultural-Historical Psychology, 2022. Vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 113–123. DOI: 10.17759/chp.2022180111.

Full text


The psychological problems of family relations and their influence on formation of the child’s personality are not new to psychology and pedagogy. However, the modern social situation, which is characterized by changes in the value orientations of society, a decrease in the subjective value of the family, and changes in intra-family roles, requires further study of the family institution, as well as the impact of intra-family relations on the interactions of a growing child with others. This is especially important for high school students who are on the verge of adulthood.

Family relationships are important for personality at any age period, however, in adolescence (15—18 years old) they seem to be sidelined, which is due to a decrease in the reference status of the family and parents. At the same time, implicitly the family and parental position still play an essential role in the personal development of a high school student. Adolescence is sensitive to the formation of attitudes towards oneself, to the outside world and other people, which determines the basis of worldview and the core of motivation of the person in the future.

Analysis of Research and Publications on the Problem

The established system of relations in the family, first of all, parent-child relations, is extremely essential for successful socialization of a growing child. The special features of parental communication influence the psychological well-being of the child as a whole [1; 3; 15; 17], as well as its separate components: the attitude to the body, the level of social anxiety, propensity to depression, faith in the world, etc. According to O.A. Karabanova [5], the key role in the life activity of a family is played by the intrafamily interpersonal communication, which determines the efficiency of its functioning, resources of growth and development.

The family context, mediating a child’s “ingrowth into the culture”, has a profound effect on the formation of his or her personality [5]. “An essential factor in the psychological well-being of an adolescent is the nature of parent-child relationships, parenting style, parental competence, the presence of affection and empathy, in other words, everything that determines the relationship between family members” [3, p. 53]. Communicative and parental competence, openness in communication significantly increases psychological well-being of a high school student.

Despite the fact that initially the absolute influence of parents on the child weakens and loses its dominant role during ontogenesis, the parental attitudes, parenting styles, and attitudes towards a child usually remain critical during the stages of active personality formation [15; 21]. Interpersonal relations in the family are of a particular importance during adolescence because of the active formation of self-awareness and self- determination of a person in this period.

A number of studies are devoted to the analysis of parental relationships and attitudes, styles and strategies of family upbringing [1; 3; 9; 12; 15; 17; 19; 21], and focused on the parental position, while the reverse side — the adolescents’ strategies of interaction with parents — remains less studied, though actualized by many researchers [8; 9; 14; 16]. Acting as a subject of relations with parents, a high school student tries his or her own strategies of interpersonal relations, being forced by the age process of separation [8; 12; 14; 19].

A.I. Koshel understands the strategy of interaction of adolescents with parents as “a set of dominant qualities of his (her) behavior in relations with parents caused by the social situation of development (achieving emancipation in parent-child relations)” [8, p. 11]. The basic strategies of interaction of high school students with parents are cooperation, submission, and counteraction.

Researchers emphasize the nonidentity of parental upbringing modes and teenagers’ perceptions of them, and this discrepancy increases with age. It is important that teenagers’ ideas about parenting form the basis of their attitude not only to their parents, but also to themselves and others [5]. High school students with the strategy of interaction with parents such as cooperation are characterized by striving for self-actualization, high-speed development of subjective personality qualities and formation of precise boundaries with parental figures [4; 16].

“The strategy of submission is characterized by the expressed need for support and guidance from parents. In their behavior high school students seek to avoid conflicts, and to take passive position in situations of vital choice, being guided by parental desires” [8, p. 11].

The strategy of counteraction is expressed in rebellion, when the actions of the adolescent are dictated by the desire to act in opposition to what is expected from it, and the choice of this strategy is also largely determined by the opinion of others [5; 12].

“Strategies of submission and opposition are destructive, they are based on the frustrated need for self-actualization, they differ in the behavioral reactions of adolescents to the educational position of parents. The formation mechanism of adolescentsꞌ interaction strategies has the ontogenetic aspect of the autonomy and closeness in relations balance” [8, p. 11]. This is confirmed by the results of empirical researches of adolescents with different strategies of child-parent relations, conducted by A.N. Koshel [8]. In the senior school age, the qualitative changes of peer relations of boys and girls occur, as the “values and senses” themes come to the foreground, their understanding of human behavior motivation increases, the anxiety in relations and the sharpness of interpersonal conflicts decreases, the repertoire of social roles expands, and the independence from authority is being actively formed. These special characteristics are discussed both in classical (O.A. Karabanova, J.L. Kolominsky, I.S. Kon) [5; 6; 7] and modern psychological studies (A.I. Koshel, N.N. Poskrebysheva, V.S. Sobkin, Y.O. Kolomiets, E.A. Kalashnikova) [8; 12; 14].

However, a number of authors [4; 5; 8] emphasize a certain disharmony in relations of high school students — conflicts, tensions and aggression, as well as their insufficient ability to constructively resolve disagreements and conflicts arising in interpersonal relationship, due to both external factors and subjective qualities of the personality.

The processes of interpersonal communication are particularly acute in groups of adolescents. A vivid example is a peer group acting as the reference environment in which an adolescent “trains”before entering the world of adult interpersonal relations. The majority of researches are devoted to the study of adolescentsꞌ personal status in social groups, and they are characterized by the bipolar approach aimed at revealing the causes of his (her) high or low status — the leader or the outsider.

High school students with a low-status position often act as potential victims of bullying — one of the most widespread types of violence at school, which manifests itself in verbal and physical forms of aggression. As V.I. Ekimova and A.M. Zalaldinova note, the victims of bullying are characterized by low self-esteem, sense of guilt, poorly developed communicative skills, and extremely limited circle of friends, as well as the fear of school and interpersonal communications. However, these characteristics may be both the causes and the consequences of bullying [2]. The psychology of leaders and outsiders has been investigated in a number of works [2; 3; 4; 6; 8], while the category of middle-status group members is less studied [4; 8; 13].

One of the directions in the study of interpersonal relations is the analysis of intragroup relations in terms of their significance for each of the participants. Within this framework A.V. Petrovsky has developed a “three-factor model of the significant other”, according to which each factor is a form of the personality meta-individual representation of the “significant other” [11]. The combination of three bases of interpersonal significance — authority (recognition of the right of the “significant other” to make responsible decisions significant for others), attraction (the ability of the “significant other” to attract or repel others, cause sympathy or antipathy) and power (the institutionalized role) — reflects the ways of the intragroup status-role relations determination [13].

The results of E.S. Mahlach researches are rather interesting, as they testify that a studentꞌs —”high sociometric status is provided by the combination of three factors: 1) the actual development of positive personality qualities valued by the group; 2) the concurrence of personal values with those of the group; 3) underestimation of especially valued by the group personality qualities” [10, p. 187]. J.L. Kolominsky [6] associates the last factor with the “paradox of awareness” of a high status in the group.

A special area of socio-psychological researches is the investigation of the interconnection between parent-child relationships and interpersonal relations with peers, as well as their joint influence on social and psychological adaptation in adolescence [3; 9; 14; 18;19; 21]. G. Ladd and Z. Parke present the theoretical approaches and empirical studies review of the influence of family processes on the child’s relationships with peers for thirty years. They analyze the direct and indirect effects of family relationships on interpersonal relations of children and adolescents, reverse impact of communication with peers on relationships with parents, they identify the problems for a special study and directions for further investigation [18].

The study by M.V. Ermolaeva and O.V. Smirnova [3] has revealed the close connection between adolescentsꞌ subjective assessment of psychological well-being, happiness, and life satisfaction, their evaluation of communications with peers, and the perception of intrafamily relationships. They assume, that the adolescents’ high assessments of cooperation with parents and satisfaction with peer communications is associated with a high or, on the contrary, low level of the parentsꞌ sociability. At the average level of sociability of adults, the studentꞌs satisfaction with interactions in the family and in peer groups decreases appreciably [3].

The recent foreign researches testify that closeness and type of attachment in adolescentsꞌ family relations determines not only the high level of their emotional well-being, but also the successful social and psychological adaptation in peer groups, and peer preference [17; 18; 19; 20; 21].

The purpose of this empirical study is to evaluate the impact of intrafamily relationships on the sociometric status of a high school student.

Empirical tools are represented by the following methods: the sociometric test (J. Moreno); “Adolescents about Parents Questionnaire” (ADOR/ POR) — the modification by Z. Matejchik and P. Rzichan of “Childrenꞌs Report of Parental Behavior Inventory” (E. Shaefer); questionnaire for parents “Analysis of family relations” — AFR (E.G. Eidemiller, V.V. Justitskis).

Results and Discussion

A total of 53 tenth grade students aged 15 to 16 (M=15,8), including 24 girls and 29 boys, as well as their mothers (N=53) aged 37 to 43 years old (M=40,4) took part in the study with a total of 106 respondents.

The sociometric status of a high school student in the system of interpersonal relations in a study class was determined using the sociometric test. Depending on the number of choices received, the subject was attributed to one of five status categories: “stars”, “preferred”, “neglected”, “isolated “ or “rejected” (“outsiders”).

The status categories of “stars” (20,7%) and “preferred” (23,0%) included 43,7% of respondents; this position was especially favorable for adolescents, as it reflected peer acceptance. Among the unpopular high school students were “neglected”, “rejected” and “isolated” groups. Unfavorable sociometric status was revealed for 56,3% of students.

A significant part of adolescents belonged to “neglected” category (30,3%). This category was less favorable in comparison with the “stars” and “preferred”, as these students were considered not enough attractive and of no importance for their classmates.

According to the results of the study, 18,7% of high school students had the status of “isolated”, as they received the minimum number of choices. These adolescents were not in the peersꞌ register, neither at the level of feelings, nor at the level of relationships.

The rejected students received negative choices, which implicitly determined the level of their social rejection. In the study, 7,3% of high school students had the status of “outsiders”.

The assessment of parents’ attitudes, behaviors, and parenting methods from the perspective of high school students was conducted with “Adolescentsꞌ about Parents Questionnaire”. Due to the fact that 21,8% of the subjects had no answers related to fathers, we considered the results obtained as adolescents’ perception of their mothers’ parenting behaviors.

More than a half of high school students rated their mothers’ directiveness as high and medium (37,4% and 28,1%, respectively), that indicated strict adult control, aptitude for power, and lack of interest in the opinion of an adolescent.

From the point of view of a significant part of students (50,4%), the hostility of their mothers was expressed at the middle level. Probably, it was connected with the age characteristics of conflict-prone adolescents, and incomplete crisis manifestations. The hostility of the mother in relationships with her son was manifested in excessive severity, aggressiveness, self-focus, and self-assertion in communication. Girls perceived the mother’s behavior as hostile if she was distanced, cut off from the family, first of all from the children.

The majority of parents manifested the middle and low (respectively, 44,4% and 41,4%) level of autonomy, and a certain detachment from adolescents, with more freedom and autonomy than they might expect. At the same time, boys perceived their mothers’ autonomy as a dictate, a total suppression of their will and desires. As for girls, they considered the mother’s independence from her daughter, her well-being and her needs to be the manifestation of autonomy. Such mothers were assessed by girls as indulgent, undemanding.

From the point of view of both boys and girls, the inconsistency of parents in matters of upbringing was especially pronounced (a high level of parental inconsistency was noted by 62,7% of the respondents). This model of relations implied frequent changes in the style of parenting and interactions, from liberal to directive, and vice versa, as well as from emotional acceptance to coldness and rejection with interaction models changing with maximum amplitude.

Proximity factor, as a derivative of the combination of beneficence and hostility, was expressed in parents at the middle and low level. More than a third of high school students (37,4%) perceived their mothers as aloof, emotionally rejecting, not showing warm feelings enough.

At its high values the factor of criticism (the derivative of directivity and autonomy) reflected considerable interest and total control on the part of parent, though the majority of adolescents assessed it as manifested in their parents at the middle and low level. A considerable part of students (44,4%) perceived the mothersꞌ attitude to them as lack of interest in their experience, relations and affairs.

It is possible to assume, that the results received are determined by the age-specific features of high school students. Being focused on themselves and on their own relations with others, adolescents tend to perceive the parents as insufficiently interested and attentive to their inner world and experience.

In addition, the adolescentsꞌ system of values and life goals is still being formed, often in opposition to the values inherent in the parental family. In some cases, this may be the cause of the student perception of parents as aloof, unconcerned, and critical.

To identify the interconnection between parent-child relationships and the sociometric status of high school students in the peer group, the statistical assessment of indicatorsꞌ differences between sociometric status groups has been conducted with the Mann-Whitney U-test. The results are presented in Table 1. The indicators of high school students’ perception of family upbringing are compared pairwise in groups with different sociometric status. To reduce the dimensionality of data, the sample has been divided into three groups: 1) “preferred” (“stars” and “accepted”); 2) “neglected”; and 3) “rejected” (“isolated” and “outsiders”). The validity of such recombination is confirmed by the results of the pairwise comparison of different status groups results, as none statistically significant differences has been revealed between “stars” and “accepted”, as well as between “outsiders” and “isolated” (ρ≤0,05).

The comparison of ADOR scales has revealed the significant differences between group indicators of ‘preferred’ and ‘neglected’ in a number of adolescents’ assessments of parental behaviors: directiveness (U = 14; p< 0,01), hostility (U = 28; p< 0,01) and autonomy (U = 35; p< 0,05). High school students with the high sociometric status in a peer group, in comparison with “neglected”, are less likely to face directiveness, hostility and indifference from their parents.

Boys and girls with a high sociometric status rate the benevolence of their parents higher, and the directiveness, hostility and inconsistency lower than “rejected”.

These results allow to conclude that adolescents with the high sociometric status in a peer group perceive their family relationships as harmonious and constructive, in contrast to “neglected” and “rejected” adolescents. At the same time, the respondents with the low sociometric status as usual highly estimate the directiveness, hostility, and inconsistency of parents.

On the results of “Adolescentsꞌ about Parents Questionnaire”, the characteristics of maternal behavior are identified, such as the degree of satisfaction of a child’s needs, the level of a childꞌs protection, the number of requirements.

According to the results obtained, the common parenting styles of adolescentsꞌ mothers are “dominant hyperprotection” (22,6%) and “indulgent hyperprotection” (17,0%). Hyperprotective parents devote a great deal of their attention and time to a child, and the childꞌs upbringing stands at the center point of their lives.

The style of “increased moral responsibility” has been revealed in 15,5% of mothers; this type of upbringing assumes high, and even excessive, requirements of parents to adolescents without taking into account individual and age characteristics.

“Emotional rejection” is true for 15,1% of mothers. In case of “maltreatment” (7,5%), the emotional rejection manifests itself in physical punishment of a child, ignoring his or her needs, and the prohibition of pleasure.

The parental style of “hypoprotection” has been detected in 11,3% of mothers. It is manifested in a lack of interest in and control over a child, when his or her needs, interests, actions, and even life are ignored by the parents.

11,3% of mothers show no predominance of any style, which may be due to either social desirability of their responses, or the adequacy of their upbringing methods, and the absence of pronounced manifestations of disharmonious styles.

Table 2 illustrates the relations of the sociometric status of high school students and the predominant type of parental upbringing.

As it is seen in Table 2, the types of parenting in families of adolescents from different sociometric groups differ markedly. Thus, “indulgent hyperprotection” is more pronounced in the families of students of “preferred” (29,4%) and “neglected” (35,8%) groups, and is rare in the parents of “rejected” teenagers (5,5%).

The level of protection in the upbringing process is estimated by the scales of “hyperprotection” and “hypoprotection”, and indicates the amount of attention and time (excessive or insufficient), which parents devote to their child.

Parents with “dominant hyperprotection” style subordinate their family life to the interests of a child, being ready to satisfy any of his or her needs and desires. This type of upbringing promotes the development of demonstrative and hyperthymic characteristics of the personality, which usually causes activity, predominantly heightened mood, and desire to attract the attention of others. All this allows a high school student to take the high sociometric position in a peer group.

Adolescents from families with “dominant hyperprotection” parenting style often belong to the “preferred” category (33,0%). In the groups of “neglected” and “rejected” adolescents, this type of upbringing is quite rare (14,3% and 11,1%, respectively). The “dominant hyperprotective” parents seek to direct the life of adolescents in all spheres, and deprive them of autonomy by numerous restrictions and prohibitions. The results of this are apparently bipolar. Some of high school students show independence and autonomy in the areas available to them (for example, in peer groups), they tend to take responsibility for their actions and for joint actions, by which provide themselves the high sociometric status in a group. On the contrary, some adolescents, become weak-willed, with a lack of initiative, and consequently, they are accorded low status.

The parenting style of “increased moral responsibility” may determine the low sociometric status of adolescents, as they more often belong to the categories of “neglected” (21,4%) and “rejected” (16,8%), than to “preferred” (4,6%). This upbringing type, associated with excessive demands to a child, is not contributing to his or her development, on the contrary, it is unfavorable and traumatic. In some cases, the parental obligations (housekeeping, care for younger siblings, aged relatives, etc.) are transferred to the adolescent not capable to cope with them. In other cases, the success in different activities (sports, study, creative work, etc.) is expected from a child regardless of his or her abilities and capabilities. Usually, parents are not aware of excessiveness of their requirements, and are convinced that they create the necessary conditions for the development of independence and vitality of a child.

The style of “emotional rejection” occurs more often among the mothers of students in “preferred” (19,2%) and “rejected” (22,2%) groups. This disharmonious type of parenting is caused by the parents’ conscious or unconscious identification of a child with some negative factors of their own lives. In such a situation, the child may feel that he or she is a nuisance in the life of the parents, who have established a great distance in their relationships. In this case, some adolescents may be aspired to compensate their need for acceptance and love by the group of peers, which causes their sociability, orientation to the group, and the desire to achieve a high-status position. At the same time, “emotional rejection” by parents may provoke in a child the formation of such character traits as unmotivated aggression, explosiveness, considerable part of adolescents.

The “maltreatment” style is inherent to mothers of high school students with a low sociometric status in the study class (16,8%), and to less extent of those with the middle status (7,1%). It hasn’t been also revealed in the group of “preferred” (0,0%). The abusive treatment implies excessive severity of sanctions applied by parents in case of a child violates the requirements and rules, and the harsh response even to minor behavioral disturbances. Probably, the inadequately strict sanctions from parents lead to emotional deprivation of adolescents [4], which determines their outsider position in the peer group.

The “hypoprotection” style implies insufficiently low attention to a child from parents. It has been revealed on a fifth of “rejected” students (22,2%), in 14,3% of “neglected”, and in 4,6% of “preferred” ones. In other words, being on the periphery of parents’ attention, the adolescent often has a low sociometric status in the peer group.

Some parents (11,3%) donꞌt report of disharmonious types of parenting, which may be related both to the adequacy of parenting styles and to the social desirability of their answers given in questionnaire. Probably, the first option is characteristic for families of adolescents with the high sociometric status (9,2% of “preferred”); the second option is characteristic for those “rejected” (5,5%).

The correlation analysis of empirical data was carried out to reveal the linkage between the types of parenting styles and the sociometric status of high school students. The results are presented in table 3.

The multivariate statistical analysis has revealed stable correlations between the certain types of family upbringing. Thus, “indulgent hyperprotection”’ has negative correlations with all other types of disharmonious upbringing: “dominant hyperprotection”, “increased moral responsibility”, “emotional rejection”, “maltreatment” and “hypoprotection” (ρ ≤ 0,01).

At the same time, “dominant hyperprotection” is directly related to “increased moral responsibility” and has inverse correlations with “emotional rejection”. Thus, “emotional rejection” is directly correlated with “hypoprotection” (ρ ≤ 0,01).

Some significant correlations have been found between the parenting types and the sociometric status of high school students. “Indulgent hyperprotection” and “dominant hyperprotection” directly correlates with sociometric status, though a linkage is less stable (ρ ≤ 0,05), than the correlations between different types of parental upbringing. It may be assumed that the high sociometric status of the “hyperprotected” adolescents is caused in this case by their habit to be the center of the family, which may be to a certain extend transferred to interpersonal relations with peers.

When simultaneous manifestation of “hyperprotection” and excessive requirements-prohibitions (domination) occur, the parents tend to control all spheres of the adolescent’s life, and deprive him or her of independence and autonomy. The consequence of this may be both a pronounced reaction of emancipation and a low social activity. Apparently, the adolescents with aspiration to autonomy tend to occupy high sociometric positions in a peer group.

The low sociometric status of a student is consistently associated with such disharmonious types of parenting as “emotional rejection” (ρ ≤ 0,05), “hypoprotection” (ρ ≤ 0,01), and “maltreatment” (ρ ≤ 0,01). Obviously, the lower the sociometric status of the adolescent is, the more these two parenting styles are manifested in the family.

“Emotional rejection” combined with the insufficient support (“hypoprotection”) often associates with “maltreatment” such as punishment, first of all physical, pleasure deprivation, and ignoring of a childꞌs needs. This upbringing type leads to the formation of the unstable, explosive character, inadequate self-esteem, and enhances the possibility of neurotic disorders. These characteristics, apparently, explain the low status of such adolescents in a peer group.

In case of “hypoprotection”, a high school student is left to himself, his parents are not interested in him or her, and the parental control function implementation. If adolescents do not receive necessary attention and emotional acceptance in the family, they either try to compensate this in a peer group or become insecure, suspicious, which negatively affects their relations with classmates and causes a low sociometric status.

Findings and Conclusions

Family upbringing is a determining condition of personal growth and efficacy of interpersonal relations in adolescence. High school students, being grown up in a disharmonious family, may experience significant difficulties in establishing informal interpersonal relations, or may seek to compensate lack of emotional closeness in the family by full immersion in peer relationships, while seeking in them support and acceptance.

The family models, forms and mechanisms of relationships are applied by adolescents in peer relations and determine the efficiency of solving the problem of emancipation in the system of parent-child relations. Strategies of submission and counteraction used by adolescents have a destructive impact on their personal development, the formation of subjective position, psychological sovereignty, and interpersonal relationships with peers.

The sociometric status of a high school student in the peer group is determined by a number of factors: emotional and personal qualities, visual appeal, the level of intellectual development, commitment and activity, success in peer relations, ability to take responsibility, ability to organize joint activities etc.

Characteristics and the type of parents-child relations decisively determine the character of the adolescentꞌs peer relations, a level of authority and attractiveness, and the status-role position. It was revealed that high school students with a high sociometric status not so often face directiveness, hostility and distancing on the part of their parents, as the low-status ones. They more often perceive their family situation as harmonious, favorable and constructive.

Adolescents with a high sociometric status evaluate the benevolence of their parents higher, than their school-mates from “neglected” and “rejected” groups. On the contrary, the parents of students with a low sociometric status are more often directive, hostile, and inconsistent in their parental position.

The “dominant hyperprotection” parenting style is typical for parents of a high and middle-status students (“preferred” and “neglected”), but itꞌs rarely observed in parents of “rejected” adolescents. High school students whose mothers show “dominant hyperprotection” toward them are most often in the “preferred” status group, but they may also appear in the middle- and the low-status positions.

Similarly, mothers of both the high-status and the low-status students may exhibit “emotionally rejective” style of parenting. The perhaps reason for the polarity of studentsꞌ statuses is that adolescents react differently to inadequate types of family upbringing, which, in turn, determines the nature of their interaction with peers and their sociometric status in the study group.

A low sociometric status of the adolescent is relative to the family upbringing disharmonies such as “hypoprotection”, “neglect of needs”, “increased moral responsibility” and “maltreatment”.

Thus, we may resume that psychological acceptance on the part of the parents, moderate control over social connections, and a sufficient level of support have a positive effect on the sociometric status of high school students, whereas hostility, directivity, “inconsistency in educational positions”, as well as “emotional rejection”, “maltreatment”, and “hypoprotection” result in the low sociometric status of students in the peer group.

“Emotional rejection” together with “insufficient support” is often combined with abusive parental behavior (“maltreatment”), which manifests itself in the form of punishments, especially physical, pleasure deprivation and ignoring of a child’s needs. Such parenting type leads to the development in adolescents the unstable, explosive character, inadequate self-esteem and possible neurotic disorders. These characteristics, apparently, explain the low status of some students in a peer group.

In case of “hypoprotection” adolescents are left to themselves, as the parents are not interested in them and do not control their behaviors. If high school students do not receive the necessary attention and emotional acceptance in the family, they either try to compensate for it in a peer group or become aloof, insecure, suspicious, which negatively affects their relations with classmates and leads to a low sociometric status.

Table 1

The Empirical Values of the Mann-Whitney U-test



ADOR scales

Groups of high school students with different sociometric status

1 and 2

1 and 3

2 and 3





















Note: empirical U values pointing statistically significant differences at p ≤0,01 are in bold; empirical U values pointing statistically significant differences at p ≤0,05 are in italic; 1 — preferred, 2 — neglected, 3 — rejected.

Table 2

The Relations of the Sociometric Status of High School Students and Parenting Styles (in %)


Type of parenting




Indulgent hyperprotection




Dominant hyperprotection




Increased moral responsibility




Emotional rejection












Disharmonious types of parenting are not identified




Table 3

Results of the Correlation Analysis of Parenting Styles and the Sociometric Status of Adolescents

Sociometric status

Type of parenting

Indulgent hyperprotection

Dominant hyperprotection

Increased moral

Emotional rejection



Sociometric status

Indulgent hyperprotection



Dominant hyperprotection




Increased moral responsibility





Emotional rejection





















Sociometric status








Note: empirical U values prevailing the critical ones at statistically significant level at p ≤0,01 are in bold; at p ≤0,05 – in italic.


  1. Dubrovina I. V. Psihologicheskaya gotovnost’ k semejnoj zhizni kak aspekt samoopredeleniya [Psychological readiness for family life as an aspect of self-determination] Sem’ya, brak i roditel’stvo v sovremennoj Rossii [Family, marriage and parenthood in modern Russia]. Second issue, Moscow, Russian Academy of Science, 2015, pp. 86—95. Available at: (Accessed 17.02.2022). (In Russ.).
  2. Ekimova V.I., Zalaldinova A.M. Victims and offenders in a situation of bulling: who are they? Sovremennaya zarubezhnaya psihologiya = Journal of Modern Foreign Psychology, 2015. Vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 5—10. Available at: periodica/SZP_4_2015/SZP—0052.htm#n0d (Accessed 17.02.2022). (In Russ.).
  3. Ermolaeva M.V., Smirnova O.V. Characteristics of parental communication as a factor of adolescents’ psychological well—being. Psihologicheskaya nauka i obrazovanie = Psychological Sience and Education, 2020. Vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 51—62. DOI:10.17759/pse.2020250105 (In Russ.).
  4. Ibadullaeva G.M. Psychological aspects of the study of sociometric status in adolescents. Vostochno-evropejskij nauchnyj zhurnal [East-European Journal of Science] , 2021. Vol. 67, no. 3—4, pp. 41—52. Available at:: (Accessed 17.02.2022). (In Russ.).
  5. Karabanova O.A., Poskrebysheva N.N. The development of the personality autonomy in adolescence in the child—parent and adolescent-peer relations. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriya 14. Psihologiya [Moscow University Psychology Bulletin] , 2011, no. 2, pp. 35—46. Available at: https:// (Accessed 17.02.2022). (In Russ.).
  6. Kolominskij Ya.L. Social’naya psihologiya vzaimootnoshenij v malyh gruppah [Social psychology of relationship in small groups]. Moscow, AST, Prime-Evroznak, 2010. 446 pp. Available at: (data obrashcheniya: 17.02.2022).
  7. Kon I.S. Psihologiya starsheklassnika [Psychology of a high school student]. Moscow, Pedagogic, 1982. 207 pp. Available at: (Accessed 17.02.2022). (In Russ.).
  8. Koshel’ A.I. Osobennosti otnoshenij so sverstnikami starsheklassnikov s raznymi strategiyami vzaimodejstviya s roditelyami [Specialties of peer relations of high school students with different strategies of interaction with parents]. Dissertation Abstract, Rostov-on-Don, 2015, 24 pp. Available at: (Accessed 17.02.2022). (In Russ.).
  9. Makarova A.V. Psihologicheskie osobennosti obshcheniya i mezhlichnostnyh otnoshenij v mladshem yunosheskom vozraste [Psychological characteristics of communication and interpersonal relationships in younger adolescence]. Psihologiya lichnosti [Psychology of Personality, Magnitogorsk], 2019, pp. 234—241. Available at: (Accessed 17.02.2022). (In Russ.).
  10. Mahlah E.S., Ginzburg M.R., Lebedev R.L. K harakteristike svyazi mezhdu sociometricheskim statusom uchashchihsya i ih lichnymi kachestvami [To evaluate the relationship between the sociometric status of students and their personal qualities]. Materialy Chetvertogo s”ezda obshchestva psihologov [Materials of the Forth Congress of Psychologists], Tbilisi, 1971, pp. 187—188.
  11. Petrovskij A.V. Three factor model of «significant other». Voprosy psihologii, 1991, no. 1, pp. 7—17. (In Russ.).
  12. Poskrebysheva H.H., Babkina A.Yu. Family factors of autonomy development and separation processes in adolescence. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriya 15. Psihologiya [Moscow University Psychology Bulletin], 2020, no. 3, pp. 120—146. (In Russ.).
  13. Sachkova M.E. Psihologiya srednestatusnogo uchashchegosya: monografiya [Psychology of students with average sociometric status]. Moscow: Yurajt, 2022, 202 pp. (In Russ.).
  14. Sobkin V.S., Kolomiec Yu. O., Kalashnikova E.A. Causes of conflict between adolescent and teacher, parent, classmates and the social situation of development. Voprosy psihologii, 2020. Vol.66, no. 5, pp. 13—25.
  15. Ejdemiller E.G., Yustickis V.V. Psihologiya i psihoterapiya sem’i [Psychology and psychotherapy of family]. Saint-Petersburg: Piter, 2015, 672 pp. (In Russ.).
  16. Chow C.M., Hart E., Ellis L., Tan C.C. Interdependence of attachment styles and relationship quality in parent—adolescent dyads. Journal of Adolescence, 2017. Vol. 61, pp. 77—86. DOI:10.1016/j.adolescence.2017.09.009
  17. Fletcher A.C., Sayler K., Zhang X., Steinberg L. & Belsky J. Parenting style as a moderator of associations between maternal disciplinary strategies and child well—being. Journal of Family Issues, 2012. Vol. 29, no. 12, pp. 1724—1744. DOI: 10.1177/0192513X08322933
  18. Ladd G. W., Parke R. D. Themes and theories revisited: perspectives on processes in family—peer relationships. Children, 2021. Vol. 8, no. 6, pp. 507. DOI:10.3390/children8060507
  19. Lisha L., Xiaoli H., Chaoqun L, Liangyuan X., Yanfang L. Linking parent-child relationship to peer relationship based on the parent-peer relationship spillover theory: Evidence from China. Children and Youth Services Review, 2020. Vol. 116, pp. 105200. DOI:10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105200
  20. Sánchez—Sandoval Y, Verdugo L. School adjustment and socio—family risk as predictors of adolescents\’ peer preference. Frontiers in Psychology, 2021. Vol. 12, pp. 645712. P. 1—10. DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2021.645712
  21. Sayler K., Zhang X., Steinberg L., Belsky J. Parenting, Peers and Psychosocial Adjustment: Are the Same-or Different-Children Affected by Each? Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 2022, pp. 1—15. DOI:10.1007/s10964-022-01574-9

Information About the Authors

Valentina I. Ekimova, Doctor of Psychology, professor of the department of scientific bases of extremal psychology, Moscow State University of Psychology & Education, Moscow, Russia, ORCID:, e-mail:

Alisa N. Vetzel, Master in Psychology, Graduate of Extreme Psychology Faculty, Moscow State University of Psychology & Education, Moscow, Russia, ORCID:, e-mail:

Marina I. Rozenova, Doctor of Psychology, Professor, Professor of the Department of Scientific Foundations of Extreme Psychology, Moscow State University of Psychology & Education, Moscow, Russia, ORCID:, e-mail:



Total: 1425
Previous month: 52
Current month: 21


Total: 531
Previous month: 7
Current month: 6