Childrens Peer Culture - Corsaro

Children's Peer Cultures
Author(s): William A. Corsaro and Donna Eder

Source: Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 16 (1990), pp. 197-220
Published by: Annual Reviews
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2083268
Accessed: 11-05-2015 22:54 UTC
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Annual Reviews is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Annual Review of Sociology.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 143.107.244.76 on Mon, 11 May 2015 22:54:11 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Annu. Rev. Sociol. 1990. 16:197-220
Copyright ? 1990 by Annual Reviews Inc. All rights reserved
CHILDREN'S PEER CULTURES

WilliamA. Corsaro and Donna Eder
Departmentof Sociology, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 47405
KEY WORDS: children, socialization, peers, culture, adolescents
INTRODUCTION
The Importance of Peer Culture in Theories of Child

Development and Socialization
Despite its long history as an importantconcept in sociological theory, there
have been few studies of children's peer culture. By peer culture, we mean a
stable set of activities or routines, artifacts,values, and concernsthat children
produceand sharein interactionwith peers. Most researchon peer culturehas
focused on adolescent peer values, interests, and identities (Coleman 1961,
Cusick 1972, Simmons & Blyth 1987). Recently, however, detailed
ethnographicstudies have been made of interactiveprocesses within the peer
cultureof preschool and elementaryschool children(Berentzen1984, Corsaro
1985, Davies 1982, Fine 1987, Goodwin 1989, Mandell 1986, Rizzo 1989,
Thorne 1986), as well as of preadolescents and adolescents (Eder 1985,
Everhart 1983, Lesko 1988, Willis 1981, Wulff 1988). In this chapter we
examine these and other studies: (a) to describe activities, routines, values,
and concerns within the peer cultures of children from the preschool years
throughadolescence; (b) to identify specific themes and changes in children's
peer cultures and how these are relatedto demandsfrom the adult world; and
(c) to develop the theoreticalimplications of the researchfor an interpretive
theory of childhood socialization.
Before turning to these issues, we will first consider the place of peer
197
0360-0572/90/0815-0197$02.00
198 CORSARO & EDER
culture in various theories of child development and socialization. Our pur-

pose is to identify the individualisticbias of most theories and to stress the
importanceof peer culture for the development of an interpretivetheory of
childhood socialization.
BEHAVIORIST THEORIES Until the mid-1960s most theories of child de-

velopment were behaviorist, with an emphasis on modeling and reinforce-
ment as the key mechanisms in human learning. Given the power of adults
and their control over valued cultural resources, it is not surprising that
behaviorists stress the importanceof adult inputs to children. Children are
relegated to a passive role, and socialization is seen as a unilateralprocess
with childrenshapedand molded by adults. Thus, researchfrom this perspec-
tive often involves attemptsto discover and measureconsistencies and varia-
tions in adult socializationpractices. The peer groupplays a minorrole in the
socialization process initially; but with growing autonomy from adults in
adolescence, the peer group can become an importantsource of reinforce-
ment.
Overall, the behaviorist approachplaces little emphasis on social interac-
tion and culture. Its individualisticbasis and emphasison simplistic processes
(imitation and reinforcement) to explain complex phenomenon has come
undercriticism in recent years. In fact, some behaviorists(see Bandura1986)
have recently incorporatedcognitive elements into their theories of learning
and development. One result of the questioning of the narrowness of the
behaviorist position has been a definite trend toward the acceptance of a
constructivist approachin developmentalpsychology.
CONSTRUCTIVIST THEORIES Best represented in the cognitive devel-

opmental theory of Piaget (1950, 1968), the constructivistapproachstresses
the child's active role, arguing that children interpret, organize, and use
informationfrom the environmentand, in the process, acquireadultskills and
knowledge. Several importantdevelopments have accompaniedthe general
acceptance of the constructivistposition. First, numerousscholars have ex-
tended Piaget's work on intellectual development to the study of social
cognition, suggesting that children often interactwith others in response to
disequilibria (Damon 1977, Turiel 1983, Youniss 1980). The increasing
concern with children's social cognition has led to numerous studies of
children's social relations and friendships. In fact, some constructivisttheo-
rists (Youniss 1980) now argue that peers may be as importantas adults for
children's acquisition of social skills and knowledge.
Although these developments are clearly in the right direction, the con-
structivistapproachlike behaviorismstill relies on what Harre(1986) terms
"the doctrine of individualism." For example, understandingof children's
CHILDREN'S
PEERCULTURES 199
interactionsremains at an interpersonallevel. Interpersonalalignments (e.g.

adult-child versus peer) are compared and contrasted to show how they
differentiallyaffect individual development. But how interpersonalrelations
reflect culturalsystems, or how children, throughtheir participationin com-
municative events, become part of and in turn collectively reproducethese
cultural patterns is not seriously considered.
This adherenceto individualismis also seen in the overwhelmingconcern
with the endpoint of development. For example, work on social cognition
focuses on identifying stages in the abstractconception of friendship. Chil-
dren's conceptions are elicited through clinical interviews, and their un-
derdevelopedconceptions are comparedto those of competentadults (Damon
1977, Youniss 1980). Yet, constructivistsfail to study what it is like to be or
have a friend in children's social worlds or how developing conceptions of
friendship get embedded in peer culture.
INTERPRETIVE THEORIES One importantoutcome of the acceptanceof the

constructivist approach in developmental psychology has been the recent
translationand interpretationof the theoreticalwork of the Soviet psycholo-
gist, Vygotsky (Vygotsky 1978, Wertsch 1986). Vygotsky's views extend the
constructivist emphasis on children's activities beyond acknowledging that
they are interactive events to emphasizing that such events are basic to
producing and maintainingcultural systems. Although Vygotsky provided a
foundation for a more culturallyoriented view of socialization, much of his
research focused on individual development.
Vygotsky's views have, however, influenced a number of scholars who
argue that theories of socialization must break free from the individualistic
doctrine that sees social development solely as the private internalizationof
adult skills and knowledge (Bruner 1986, Cicourel 1974, Corsaro 1988,
Valsiner 1987, Wertsch 1989). These theoristsoffer an interpretiveapproach
which maintains that childhood socialization is a collective process that
occurs in a public ratherthan a privaterealm. In this view, it is "notjust that
the child must make his knowledge his own, but thathe must make it his own
in a community of those who share his sense of belonging to a culture"
(Bruner 1986:127). The approach is essentially interpretive, stressing that
childrendiscover a world endowed with meaningand help to shape and share
in their own developmentalexperiences throughtheir participationin every-
day cultural routines (Corsaro & Rizzo 1988, Schieffelin & Ochs 1986).
Although the degree of children's participationin such routinesis affected
by cultural values and increases with age and experience, the interpretive
view calls into question the linear model of socialization that sees childhood
-only as a period of apprenticeship that prepares children for competent
membershipin adult society. The interpretiveapproachviews developmentas
200 CORSARO& EDER
reproductiveratherthan linear. From this perspective, children enter into a

social nexus and, by interactingand negotiating with others, establish un-
derstandingsthat become fundamentalsocial knowledge on which they con-
tinually build. Thus, the interpretivemodel refines the notion of stages by
viewing developmentas a productive-reproductive process of increasingden-
sity and a reorganizationof knowledge that changes with children's develop-
ing cognitive and language abilities and with changes in their social worlds.
A majorchange in children's worlds is their movement outside the family.
By interactingwith playmates in organizedplay groups and nurseryschools,
children produce the first in a series of peer cultures in which childhood
knowledge and practices are graduallytransformedinto the knowledge and
skills necessary to participatein the adult world. A major aim of the in-
terpretiveapproachis the documentationof peer culturesand the development
of a better understandingof their crucial role in childhood socialization.
Peer Cultures as Autonomousand Creative Social Systems
Children's participationin cultural routines is an essential element of the
socializationprocess. In adult-childinteraction,childrenare often exposed to
social knowledge they do not fully grasp. However, because of the predict-
able participantstructureof culturalroutines, interactionnormallycontinues
in an orderly fashion, and ambiguities are often left to be pursuedover the
course of children's interactive experiences. A frequent pattern involves
children's exposure to social knowledge and communicative demands in
everyday activities with adults which raise confusions, uncertainties, fears
and conflicts that are later reproducedand readdressedin the activities and
routines making up peer culture (Corsaro 1985).
However, the production of peer culture is a matter neither of simple
imitation nor of direct appropriationof the adult world. Childrencreatively
appropriateinformation from the adult world to produce their own unique
peer cultures. Such appropriationis creative in that it both extends or elabo-
rates peer culture (transformsinformationfrom the adult world to meet the
concerns of the peer world) and simultaneouslycontributesto the reproduc-
tion of the adultculture. Thus, children'speer cultureshave an autonomyand
irreducibility (Willis 1981) that make them worthy of documentation and
study in their own right.
We refer to this process of creative appropriationas interpretivereproduc-
tion in line with Giddens' notion of the duality of social structure. In his
theory of structurationGiddens arguesthat "the structuralpropertiesof social
systems are both medium and outcome of the practices they recursively
organize" (1984:25). It is in this sense that the interpretiveapproachdiffers
from other reproductivetheories of socialization and education (Bowles &
Gintis 1976, Bourdieu & Passeron 1977). These theories have focused pri-
CHILDREN'S PEER CULTURES 201
marily on access to culturalresources and differentialtreatmentby teachers

which leads to socialization and educationoutcomes in line with the prevail-
ing class system. In this deterministicview the "actuallyvaried, complex, and
creative field of humanconsciousness, culture, and capacity is reducedto the
dry abstractionof structuraldetermination"(Willis 1981:204).
In contrast, in the interpretiveview structureis seen as both constraining
and enabling. The process is interpretivein the sense that children do not
merely individually internalize the external adult culture. Rather children
become a partof adult cultureand contributeto its reproductionthroughtheir
negotiations with adults and their creative production of a series of peer
cultures with other children.
A major task for socialization theorists is the identificationof the central
elements of peer culturesthroughoutchildhoodand adolescence. Once identi-
fied these elements can then be analyzed in terms of their meaning, their
organizationalsignificance within peer culture, and for their contributionto
the reproductionof the adult world. We now turn to a review of studies that
have begun to address these issues.
PEER CULTURE IN EARLY CHILDHOOD

The Social Worlds of Young Children
Although children's sense of belonging to a peer culture is supported and
extended in a wide rangeof social-ecological settings, the direct study of peer
interactionis relatively recent, with most studies confined to a single setting
(usually the school classroom or playground).There have, however, been a
few studies in the home, neighborhood, and community.
Research on the sharing and transmissionof peer culturethroughinterac-
tion with siblings or playmates in the home setting is rare. The pioneering
researchby Dunn (1988, also see Schutze et al 1986) on the sibling relation-
ship provides some clues to how the wider peer cultureis first introducedto
young children by older siblings. Recent cross-culturalresearchon language
socialization is useful in estimating the role of siblings (Eisenberg 1986,
Miller 1986).
In addition to interaction with siblings, young children normally have
extended contact with same age peers in the home. Although such interactive
experiences vary across cultural, social class, and ethnic groups, for most
childrenthese interactionsinvolve fairly brief periodsof play with one or two
other children under close parental supervision. Mueller (1972) has
documentedhow object-centeredcontacts (cooperativeplay with toys) serve
as a basis for the emergence of social interchangeduring the second year.
With furtherlanguagedevelopmentthese interchangesare expandedto shared
routines among toddlers who have a history of interaction and may
202 CORSARO & EDER
serve as the beginnings of friendshipand a peer culture (Budwig et al 1986,

Vandell & Mueller 1980).
Studies of peer play and culture in the neighborhoodand community are
more numerous.While Heath's (1983) impressivestudyof language, life, and
work in communities and classrooms documents young children's introduc-
tion to peer culture in neighborhoods in small town and rural settings,
Goodwin's (1989) ethnographyof elementaryschool children sheds light on
children'sproductionof peer cultureon the streetsof Philadelphia.A growing
numberof studies look at peer interactionand culturein the neighborhoodand
playgroundoutside the United States. The classic descriptionsof children's
folklore by Opie & Opie (1959, 1969) and Gomme (1964) generatedinterest
in children's social worlds in Europe. Recently we have seen a movement
toward more analytic work on children's cultureswith importantresearchby
Berentzen (1989) on Norwegian children's peer culture in the home and
neighborhood, and Katriel's (1985; 1987) studies of peer routines in the
everyday life of Israeli children.
With a majority of young children now attending child care and early
education programsin most industrialsocieties, there is increasing concern
aboutthe effects of such experiences on children'slives. As a result, we have
seen several studies of children's play and culture in preschool settings
(Berentzen 1984, Corsaro 1985, 1988, Corsaro & Rizzo 1988, Mandell
1986). Finally, there have been additional studies of elementary school
children's peer culture in the classroom and playground(Best 1983, Davies
1982, Hanna 1988, Rizzo 1989, Sluckin 1981, Thorne 1986).
Overall, recent research has identified specific processes, routines, con-
cerns, and values in children's cultures. The studies suggest that peer culture
emerges, develops, and is maintainedand refined across the various social
settings making up children's worlds. We now turn to a review of these
findings and an interpretationof their importancefor peer culture.
Social Relations and Peer Concerns

Although a wide range of featuresof the peer cultureof young childrenhave
been identified, two central themes consistently appear:children make per-
sistent attemptsto gain control of their lives and to share that control with
each other. In the preschool years there is an overridingconcern with social
participationand with challenging and gaining control over adult authority.
Once childrenmove into elementaryschool such challenging of adult author-
ity persists, but there is also a gradualmovementtowardsocial differentiation
within the peer group. This differentiationis marked by negotiations and
conflicts as childrenattemptto gain controlover the attitudesand behaviorsof
peers.
PEERCULTURES
CHILDREN'S 203
SHARING AND FRIENDSHIP A consistent finding in studies of young chil-

dren's peer interactionis that solitary play is rare and that children expend
considerable time and energy in establishing and maintainingpeer contacts
(Corsaro1985, Rizzo 1989, Rubinet al 1976). Gainingaccess to play groups,
maintainingjoint action, and makingfriends are complex processes for young
children. Gaining access is particularlydifficult in preschool settings since
young children tend to protect sharedspace, objects, and ongoing play itself
from the intrusions of others. Corsaro (1985) argues that this tendency is
directlyrelatedto the fragilityof peer interaction,the multiplepossibilities of
disruptionin most preschool settings, and the children's desire to maintain
control over shared activities. Several studies (Corsaro 1979, Dodge et al
1983, Forbes et al 1982) have documentedthe complex "access strategies"
children develop in their persistentattemptsto overcome resistance to entry
bids. These strategies reflect children's acquisition of essential social skills
for entry into and participationin peer culture.
Having gained access to play groups, children discover that it is in the
course of shared play that the meaning of the concepts of friend and peer
arise. For example, Corsaro (1981) found that nursery school children use
their developing conception of friendshipto build solidarityand mutualtrust,
often marking the importance of shared activity with the phrase "We're
friends, right?" On the other hand, while friendship serves these specific
integrativefunctionsfor nurseryschool children, Corsaronoted few examples
of enduringfriendshipsbased on the recognitionof personalcharacteristicsof
playmates. However, this finding does not deny that such friendships may
exist among preschool children in the home and neighborhood.Clearly there
is a need for studies of children's friendships in such settings.
Rizzo (1989) reports that first grade children appeared to have an in-
ternalized concept of friendship which served multiple functions in peer
relations. Specifically, Rizzo found that first grade children "attemptedto
determinethe existence of friendshipby comparingthe internalconcept with
specific featuresof interactionswith frequentplaymates, to act in accordance
with this concept when with their friends, and to object when their friends
failed to live up to their expectations"(Rizzo 1989:105). Rizzo arguesfurther
that disputesresultingfrom such objects not only helped the childrenobtain a
betterunderstandingof what they could expect from each otheras friends, but
also broughtaboutintrapersonalreflectionresultingin the children'sdevelop-
ment of unique insight into their own actions and roles as friends (see Davies
1982 and Goodwin 1982a for similar findings regardingdisputes and friend-
ship).
Several studies have identified routines that stress communal sharing in
peer culture: Goodwin's (1985) study of negotiations during the game of
"jumprope";Mishler (1979) on "tradingand bargaining"of six year olds at
204 CORSARO& EDER
lunchtime in elementary school; and Katriel's (1987) analysis of ritualized

sharingamong Israelichildren. Althoughthe identificationof such routinesis
central in studies of peer culture, we only have space to discuss Katriel's
study in some detail.
The sharing routine Katriel identified (xibudim) usually occurred on the
way home from school:
A group of five children approachesthe falafel [snack or treat] stand. One exclaims "I'm
buying." Another counters, "Bexibadim!Bexibadim!" in a melodious chant. He gets a
falafel portion, holds it in his hands, and all take a bite in turn, with a gay clamor. After the
thirdone has eaten, the buyer mutters, "Hey, beraxmanut"(with pity) and offers it to the
last child. He then eats his falafel, walking along with his friends. (Katriel 1987:309)
As the example illustrates,the routinehas a definite structure:(a) opening or

announcement of an intention to buy a treat by a particular child; (b)
acknowledgmentby other children usually involving the exclamation "Be-
xibuidim!bexibudim!"uttered in a melodious chant; (c) the purchase of the
treat by the proposer; (d) the offering and sharing of the treat, with each
accompanyingchild taking a small bite; and (e) the optional recycling of a
second roundof sharing. As we can see from the example, the sharingroutine
involves delicate negotiationin that, as Katrielhas noted, the bite size has to
be regulatedso that everybody gets a sharewith abouthalf of the treatleft for
the owner (e.g. the owner's requestfor pity before offering the last bite, in the
example). This and other aspects of the routine supportKatriel's insightful
interpretationof the routine as a "symbolic sacrifice in which one's self-
interest and primordialgreed are controlled and subordinatedto an idea of
sociality shapedby particularculturalvalues, such as equalityand generalized
reciprocity"(1987:318).
CONTROLAND AUTONOMY Children's attemptsto challenge adult author-

ity and gain controlover their lives are a majoraspect of peer culturefrom the
earliest years. For example, Dunn (1988) reportsa major increase in amuse-
ment at forbiddenacts between 14 and 24 months in children she studied in
home settings. Laughing at such misdeeds was also often shared with older
siblings as a challenge to parentalauthority. Once children enter child care
and educationsettings, they quickly develop a strong group identity (Corsaro
1985, Rubin 1980) that is strengthenedby challenging and even mocking
teachers and other adult caretakers(Best 1983, Corsaro 1985, Davies 1982).
Additionally, childrenproducea wide set of innovativeroutinesand practices
that indirectly challenge and circumvent adult authority (Berentzen 1989,
Corsaro 1990, Davies 1982, Hanna 1988, Nasaw 1985).
Corsaro(1985, 1990), in line with Goffman (1961), has referredto such
routinesas secondaryadjustments.A frequentsecondaryadjustmentinvolves
PEERCULTURES
CHILDREN'S 205
the use of subterfuge. For example in both the United States and Italy there
was a rule thatprohibited(or severely restricted)the bringingof toys or other
personalobjects from home to nurseryschool. Such objects were attractiveto
other childrenbecause they were differentfrom the everydaymaterialsin the
school. As a result, the teachers were constantly settling disputes about
sharing the personal objects. Therefore, the rule specified that such objects
should not be broughtto school, and if they were, they must be storedin one's
locker until the end of the day. In both the Americanand Italianschools that
Corsaro studied, the children attemptedto evade this rule by bringing small
personal objects that they could easily conceal in their pockets. Particular
favorites were toy animals, Matchboxcars, sweets, and chewing gum. Sweets
were a preferredchoice because the child and peers could sharethe forbidden
objects and then go on to consume the evidence, often with teachers close at
hand.
The teachers often overlook these violations because the nature of the
secondaryadjustmentsoften eliminates the organizationalneed to enforce the
rule. The children share and play with smuggled personal objects sur-
reptitiouslyto avoid detection by the teachers. If the children always played
with personalobjects in this fashion, there would be no conflict and hence no
need for the rule. Thus, "in an indirect way the secondary adjustmenten-
dorses the organizationalneed for the rule" (Corsaro 1990:23).
Finally, children attempt to gain control over fears, confusions, and
curiosities from the adult world throughtheir participationin numerousplay
routines, rituals, and games (Corsaro 1985, Garvey 1984, Goodwin 1985,
1988, Gottman 1986). Corsaro(1988, Corsaro& Heise 1989) has identified
the structureand meaning of one such play routine in the peer culture of
American and Italian children. The routine ("approach-avoidance") involves
the identificationof a threateningagent or monster, the careful approach,and
the escape from the monster after an attack ensues.
The routinehas two key features. First, the threatenedchildrenhave a great
deal of control because they initiate and recycle the routine through their
approach, and they have a reliable means of escape (home base) in the
avoidance phase. Second, in the productionof the routinethe children share
in the building tension, excitement of the threat, and relief and joy of the
escape. Overall, approach-avoidancedemonstrateshow children cope with
real fears by incorporatingthem into peer routinesthey produce and control.
Several cross-culturalstudies of children's play (Schwartzman1978, Barlow
1985) report variantsof the approach-avoidanceroutine, suggesting that the
routine may be a universal feature of peer culture.
CONFLICT AND SOCIAL DIFFERENTIATION While social participationand

friendship are central elements of peer culture, there is a clear pattern of
206 CORSARO & EDER
increased differentiationand conflict in peer relationsthroughoutchildhood.

The first sign of social differentiationis increasinggender separation.Gender
segregationbegins in preschool (Berentzen1984) and becomes so dramaticin
elementaryschool that "it is meaningfulto speak of separategirls' and boys'
worlds" (Thorne 1986:167). Studies of these separateworlds show that boys
interactin larger groups (Lever 1976), engage in more aggressive and com-
petitive play (Best 1983, Goodwin 1980ab), and frequently organize their
activities and relations around organized sports (Fine 1987, Lever 1976,
Thorne & Luria 1986).
Thorne, however, argues that much of the research tends to exaggerate
difference, and that the studies "ignore similarities, with little theoretical
effort to integratefindings of both similarityand difference:(1986:170). She
(1986, 1989; Thorne & Luria 1986) offers a social contextual approachthat
stresses variationin cross-gendercontacts or "borderwork,"travelling in the
world of the other sex (e.g. "tomboys"), and situations of easeful cross-
gender interaction. Thorne's work along with recent research by Goodwin
(1980ab, 1985, 1989) and Hughes (1988) challenges many earlier findings
regardingthe lack of conflict and competition in girls' interactionsand the
simple structureof girls' peer play.
This recent researchon conflict in girls' peer interactionreflects a growing
interest in the role of conflict in children's friendships and peer culture
(Shantz 1987, Shantz & Hobart 1989). Studies of conflict in peer culture
challenge the assumption that such behavior is inherently disruptive and
disorderly, demonstratingthat conflicts and disputes provide childrenwith a
rich arenafor the developmentof language, interpersonaland social organiza-
tion skills and knowledge (Goodwin & Goodwin 1988).
Although preschool children frequently quarrel over possession of play
materialsand entry into play groups, they are also capable of highly complex
argumentsand debates regarding the nature of fantasy play and claims or
opinions abouttheir social and physical worlds (Corsaro& Rizzo 1988, 1990,
Eisenberg& Garvey 1981, Genishi & Di Paolo 1982, Pontecorvo& Orsolini
1989). Research on peer conflict among elementaryschool children clearly
shows how disputes are a basic means for constructingsocial order, cultivat-
ing, testing, and maintaining friendships, and developing and displaying
social identity (Boggs 1978, Davies 1982, Fine 1987, Goodwin 1980ab,
1982a, Goodwin & Goodwin 1988, Katriel 1985, Maynard 1985, Rizzo
1989).
An especially impressive example of research on children's dispute
routinesis Goodwin's (1980a) analysis of gossip disputesamongblack female
preadolescents. Unlike the direct competitive disputes of males (Goodwin
1982a, Labov 1972), black females frequently engage in gossip disputes
during which absent parties are evaluated. The airing of such grievances
frequentlyculminates in he-said-she-saidconfrontionsin which one girl (A)

challenges another girl (B) about what B told a third girl (C) about A.
Goodwin's analysis specifies the complex linguistic embedding structures
thatthe childrenuse in such confrontationsto ordera field of events, negotiate
identities, and to construct social order. The gossip routine is important
because it is inappropriateto insult, command, or accuse others openly in the
girls' peer culture. Thus, the he-said-she-said routine provides "an event
through which complaints about others may be aired and charactermay be
generated"(Goodwin 1980a:688).
Overall, this review indicates the existence of a rich peer culture among
young children. From the first years of life, children collectively produce
innovative peer cultures that play a central role in the socialization process.
The review also demonstratesthe importanceof studyingsocializationexperi-
ences from the children's perspective by directly entering their everyday
worlds.
PEER CULTURE IN ADOLESCENCE

Peer Relations
Studies of adolescent culture in school settings consistently reportthat being
with friends is the most salient aspect of school life for most students(Cusick
1972, Everhart1983, Willis 1981). This is largely because friendshipgroups
provide studentswith the opportunitiesto engage in interactionsthat provide
the basis of their culture. Throughthese interactionsyouth develop their own
interpretationsof significant meanings while they produce humorous and
other playful routines which become central to their microcultures(Everhart
1983, Willis 1981, Fine 1987, Wulff 1988).
During adolescence, best friendships are also increasingly valued as a
source of mutualintimacy. Many adolescentsreportthat theirbest friendships
are characterizedby acceptance, understanding,self-disclosure, and mutual
advice. Close friendshipsprovide adolescents with an importantopportunity
for developing greaterself-knowledge througha process of mutualreflection.
In contrast, parentsare perceived as being less accepting and more likely to
act as experts or authorities. Since these factors are likely to impede the
process of mutual reflection, adolescents tend to discuss their problems,
feelings, fears, and doubts with best friends ratherthan parents (Youniss &
Smollar 1985).
The importanceof mutual intimacy and openness in friendship increases
during adolescence, often replacing the importance of friendship choices
based on popularity(Youniss & Smollar 1985). Loyalty and commitmentalso
become more salient in later adolescence, often replacing the importanceof
sharedactivities (Bigelow & LaGaipa 1980). Finally, older adolescents tend
208 CORSARO & EDER
to be more similar in terms of attitudes toward school, college plans, and

achievementthan are younger adolescents (Epstein 1983). This greatersim-
ilarity is assumedto be the result both of more selectivity in choosing friends
and of peer influence.
There is also considerablediversity in the experience and basis of friend-
ship for females and males. As in early childhood, female friendshipgroups
tend to be closely knit and egalitarian,while male friendshipgroupstend to be
loosely knit with clear status hierarchies (Karweit & Hansell 1983). For
example, Youniss & Smollar(1985) found that female friendsare more likely
to engage in intimate disclosure, sharingtheir problems, feelings, fears, and
doubts with their close friends. However, while males are less likely to
engage in intimatedisclosure, 40% of the close male friendshipsin their study
did involve a high degree of mutual intimacy. For other males, shared
activities continue to be an importantbasis for friendshipthroughoutadoles-
cence. These findings indicate that while gender and developmental differ-
ences are importantin the experience of friendship,there is also considerable
diversity within gender groups as well as within groups of adolescents of the
same age.
Finally, there are importantdifferences in the experience of friendshipby
social class. In an ethnographicstudy of high school students, Eckert(1988)
found that studentsfrom middle-classbackgrounds,and especially those who
were membersof elite groups, were more likely to base their friendshipson
interests and activities, often switching their friendships as their interests
change. In contrast, students from working-class backgroundsplaced more
emphasis on loyalty and stability, with friendshipsdeterminingtheir involve-
ment in activities instead of vice versa. Lesko (1988) reportssimilar findings
from her ethnographic study of a Catholic high school. Girls who were
members of the elite group tended to value social and academic competition
and were less loyal to their friends than were girls in other groups.
These findings point to the importanceof peer status in adolescence. As
students move into middle or junior high schools, they are suddenly con-
fronted with a much larger group of same age peers. This allows for the
possibility of more cliques forming as well as for a hierarchyof cliques to be
established. If certain studentshave more positive visibility they are likely to
form the core of the elite group since in this type of environment, status is
often based on "being known" by your peers (Eder 1985).
Adolescents are most likely to gain positive visibility throughparticipation
in extracurricularactivities, especially those like male athletics that draw
large groups of spectators (Gordon 1957, Coleman 1961, Cusick 1973,
Karweit 1983, Eder & Parker1987). These activities also tend to give positive
visibility to female cheerleaders (Eder 1985, Eder & Parker 1987). Status
hierarchiesare often unidimensionalin early adolescence, with limited ave-
nues for peer statusfor both males and females. This may be due in partto the
fact that middle school and junior high schools tend to offer fewer ex-
tracurricularactivities but may also reflect a greaterconcernwith school-wide
popularityat this age. In high school, several elite groups may be based on
different types of activities (Larkin 1979), with participationin multiple
activities often leading to higher status (Karweit 1983).
On the otherend of the continuum,several studieshave focused on rejected
children; these studies find that children who are disliked by their peers in
early childhood continue to be disliked in adolescence (Coie & Dodge 1983,
Coie et al 1988). These psychologists attributesuch persistent rejection to
poor social skills and aggressive behavioron the partof the rejectedchildren.
However, another study, focused on "bullies"and "whippingboys," found
that bullies tended to initiate the most fights and that "whippingboys," who
tended to be disliked by peers, were more often the targets of aggression
(Olweus 1978). Olweus believes that a variety of social processes contribute
to the persistenceof these patterns,includingsocial contagionor the tendency
for other peers to imitate the aggressive "bullies." Using an ethnographic
approach,Evans & Eder (1989) also found that isolates in middle school tend
to be the targetsof aggressionand thatthe persistenceof the rejectionis due in
part to attempts by other students to distinguish themselves from those
students they perceive to be deviant. The processes which contributeto low
peer statusand peer rejectionneed furtherinvestigationsince rejectedstudents
are often not members of peer groups and thus are not exposed to important
aspects of peer culture.
Peer Concerns
While the main concerns of the peer culture of students from middle-class
backgroundsare closely tied to visible school activities and to the dynamics
for obtaining peer status, peer concerns of working-class students often
representa rejection of academic concerns and the social values of the elite
group. Also, to the extent that concern with peer status decreases in later
adolescence, it is often accompanied by increased diversity in peer sub-
cultures.
One of the early studies of adolescent culture found white middle-class
males to be primarilyconcernedwith athletic skills, dating, sexual prowess,
and drinkingprowess (Schwartz& Merton 1966). More recent studies report
a continued interest in athletic and other extracurricularactivities through
which middle-class males receive status from peers as well as some control
over school resources including use of space and time (Eckert 1988). Some
athletic events, such as football, continue to promote a concern with tough-
ness and aggression even among middle and uppermiddle class males (Kess-
ler et al 1985, Eder & Parker1987). Otherrecent studies have found a trend
210 CORSARO& EDER
toward greater diversity within white middle-class males, leading to the

developmentof numerousmicrocultureswith distinct interests and concerns
(Kinney 1989).
The avenues for peer status for white middle-class girls are based less on
achievement. In early adolescence, middle-class females gain status through
activities such as cheerleading and through friendships with popular girls
(Eder 1985). This contributesto a greaterfocus on social skills and a greater
concernwith being well liked (Rosenberg& Simmons 1975). By high school,
there is again more diversity among white middle-class girls. Girls in more
elite groups are concernedwith being "in everything,"and they see the ideal
student as someone with lots of involvements (Lesko 1988). Other middle-
class girls, described as "mellows" or "normals,"place a strongeremphasis
on friendship and are often more concerned with family and nonschool
activities (Lesko 1988, Kinney 1989).
Working-classmales tend to have much less controlover school resources,
thus a major concern within their subculturesis seeking more control over
their lives through defiance of rules, authority, and academic work (Willis
1981, Everhart 1983). Their peer cultures also focus on fighting, insult
exchanges, and other forms of humor since these are activities over which
they have more control and which are viewed as masculine (Kessler et al
1985, Willis 1981). Other studies have examined working-class students in
the "burnout"subculture(Eckert 1988, Lesko 1988) where there is an open
pursuit of pleasure through drinking, smoking, and "bumming"around.
Studies of black working-classand lower-class males have reportedsimilar
findings. The main concerns of the street peer groups in inner-cityneighbor-
hoods were toughness, trouble, excitement, autonomy, and cleverness. Status
among these males was determinedprimarilyby courage and skill in physical
fighting, experience in deviantbehavior, and skills in variousverbalactivities
such as ritualinsulting, story-telling, andjoke-telling (Labov 1972). A study
of working-class blacks in a junior high school found that they perceived
themselves and were perceived by others to be tough, aggressive rule break-
ers, unconcernedwith school (Schofield 1982). MacLeod (1987), however,
found that while white lower-class males were concernedwith fighting abil-
ity, quick wit, and group solidarity, black males were more concerned with
athletic ability and male-female interaction. He also found that black males
were more involved in school activities, especially athletic activities, and had
higher career aspirationsthan did white males.
White working-class females are also often likely to view themselves as
"non-conformists"and "trouble-makers"within the school environment.
However, they are more likely than males to engage in less visible forms of
deviance during class such as reading magazines, passing notes, and day-
dreaming(Griffin 1985; Wulff 1988). Those who join "burnout"peer cultures
openly pursue pleasure and are explicit about their sexuality, with some
females emphasizing sensuality in their appearance(Lesko 1988). At the
same time, in these groups there is less concern with "being nice" and more
directness in interaction styles than is found among many middle-class
females (Goodwin 1982, Lesko 1988).
Some studies have found considerableethnic diversity in the concerns of
working-class females. While white females are often concerned with ro-
mance and marriageas a source of status, black and Asian females are more
critical of romance myths and less concerned with getting a boyfriend
(McRobbie 1978, Griffin 1985). However, a study of an interracialgroup of
working-classfemales in Britain(Wulff 1988) found thatthese girls had many
similarconcerns and were primarilyinterestedin "growingup," which meant
having more responsibility as well as having romantic and sexual rela-
tionships. They were also concernedwith excitementand heightenedpleasure
as well as with ethnicity and expressionsof ethnicity. Because these girls had
frequentopportunitiesto interactthroughthe youth club, they were develop-
ing perspectiveson ethnicitythatdifferedfrom those of theirparentsand were
also developing concerns and perspectives that crossed ethnic boundaries.
Interactive Processes and Language Activities

Ethnographersand sociolinguists have recentlybegun to pay more attentionto
the processes by which adolescentpeer culturesare created.Willis (1981), for
example, found that informal group interaction and humor are essential
elements for creating and maintaininga counter-culture.His work demon-
strateshow everyday activities are criticalfor establishinga sharedinterpreta-
tion on what it means to be working-class males.
Wulff (1988) has arguedthatmicroculturesoften have considerablediversi-
ty, including individualswith differentideas, interests, and perspectives. She
views culture as something distributed among people in a group, with some
individualsreflectingcertainmeaningsmore stronglythroughtheirpersonalit-
ies than do others. For example, the most populargirl in the club embodied
the shared value of maturity.
As long as Doreen remaineda memberof the club, she was its most popularmember, the
girl whom the greatestnumberof the others would describe as a friend. She was more of a
young woman than the others: tall, beautiful, often with a sophisticatedhair style. She
could also tell stories aboutlove dramasat partiesfor older teenagers.At the same time, her
maturity distanced her slightly from the rest of the girls, but this only increased their
admirationfor her. (Wulff 1988, p. 75)
Certainlocalities and events can also manifestthe meaningsof the subculture.

Thus, a subcultureis created through shared significant events, recurrentor
212 CORSARO & EDER
unique experiences in certainlocalities, and the appearanceand behaviorsof

certain individuals.
Another approachto understandingthe creationof subculturesis to exam-
ine the languageactivities thatprovidethe basis for informalgrouplife. As in
research on younger children, the concern is to identify the resources and
skills needed to build the interaction.Such constructionoften involves adoles-
cents incorporating their own unique contributions and modifications to
aspects of adultculture. Languageactivities are crucial for cultureproduction
since it is throughlanguage that sharedinterpretationsdevelop. Some of the
activities in which adolescents routinely engage include insulting, teasing,
story-telling, and gossip.
Although most researchon insulting has involved black male adolescents
(Labov 1972, Kochman 1983, Goodwin 1982a), recent studieshave looked at
such speech events among white males and black and white working-class
females (Everhart1983, Goodwin 1982a). Studies of ritual insulting among
males have shown how being able to interpretinsults as playful and respond-
ing with more clever or elaborate insults are essential skills for successful
participationin certainmale subcultures.Males who lack these skills are more
likely to become targetsof serious ridicule or physical attacksas the conflict
escalates (Labov 1972, Everhart 1983). On the other hand, by responding
playfully to insults, a sense of solidarity based on shared interpretationis
developed (Everhart 1983). At the same time, since this activity is often
competitive in nature it also provides males with a way to establish and
reinforce status hierarchies (Labov 1972, Goodwin 1982a).
Another form of group humor that has been studied recently is playful
teasing. Here again, interpretingteasing remarksas playful and respondingin
a playful manner are essential skills (Fine 1984, Eder 1990). If someone
failed to respond in a playful mannerwhen being teased, other group mem-
bers might encourage them to not take the teasing comments seriously as in
this example from a group of seventh grade girls:
Nancy was theretoday and they were teasing her aboutputtingcatsupon her food and also
abouthow shorther pantswere. (They are her mother'spantsand are two inches too short.)
Also, when she was gone, Betty wrote in Nancy's book and Nancy was really angry with
her when she came back. Most of the girls in the group were looking at Nancy and
laughing;they kept saying, "Laugh."They wantedher to laugh andnot be angry, or be able
to be kidded. (Eder 1990, p. 8)
On the other hand, some adolescents were able to turn a potentially serious
insult into a teasing remarkby responding playfully, as in this example:
They were kidding Sylvia for awhile abouther name and variousthings. Then at one point
Rita said, "Sylvia's showing off her bra with her white tee-shirt,"referringto the fact that
you could see her brathroughher tee shirt. Sylvia wasn't insultedor hurt. Insteadshe lifted
up her shirt and said, "WhenI show off my bra, I'll do it like this!" (Eder 1990, p. 24).
Finally, teasing is more loosely structuredthan ritual insulting, allowing for

collaborativeparticipationwhich can build solidarityamong the "teasers"as
well as the targets. While there is a loose structureand familiarityto teasing
routines, they also allow novel responses given their playful, humorous
nature.
Storytellingis also a common activity among adolescents, taking a variety
of forms including fight stories and collaborativenarratives.Since stories are
based on past experiences, full participationdepends on shared experiences
among group members. In fact, the greaterthe prior sharedknowledge, the
more likely group members will be able to interpretthe story accurately.
Shuman (1986) found that the females who had the most knowledge about a
fight were entitled to tell fight stories, and only those who were close friends
were allowed to hear certain fight stories such as those involving family
disputes. Other studies have found that storytelling is used among males to
demonstratecleverness and the importanceof certain events (Labov 1972,
Goodwin 1982a). Finally, storytelling in peer culture is often collaborative
(Goodwin 1982b, Eder 1988) with collaborationserving both to strengthen
group ties and to allow for the development of shared perceptions and
orientations.
Although gossip is a common activity among adolescents, it has not been
adequatelystudied. In a study of younger adolescents, Eder & Enke (1988)
found that gossip was an importantmeans for transmittinggender concerns
regardingappearanceand conceited behavior.Male gossip, on the otherhand,
occurredless frequently and focused primarilyon the athletic achievements
and physical abilities of other males. There was a strong emphasis on con-
sensus within groups making it difficult for members to express counter
viewpoints unless they spoke up immediately. However, on certain topics
such as romancethere was less consensus, since here gossip was a means for
developing new group norms. Parker & Gottman (1989) also found that
gossip was primarilyused for groupsolidarityin early adolescence, but that in
later adolescence, gossip providedan entry into the psychological exploration
of the self. In anotherstudy of older adolescent females, Fine (1986) found
that gossip was used primarily to clarify moral concerns and values. The
females Fine studied were concerned with reaching consensus, and they
minimizedpotentialconflict by expressingcounterviews in ways thatallowed
their views to be easily modified.
These studies of speech activities suggest that some activities are more
predominantin some subculturesthan are others, and that the functions that
certain speech activities serve within a given subculturemay change over
214 CORSARO& EDER
time. Many of the studies show how speech activities serve to make meanings
and interpretationsvisible to others, thus making sharedmeanings possible.
Throughdetailed study of activities such as these, we can better understand
the role which adolescents play in defining and shaping their own peer
cultures.
CENTRAL THEMES IN PEER CULTURE FROM EARLY

CHILDHOODTHROUGH ADOLESCENCE
A major feature of the socialization process is children's productionof and
participationin a series of peer cultures in which childhood knowledge and
practicesare graduallytransformedinto the knowledge and skills necessaryto
participate in the adult world. Although there have been no longitudinal
studies documenting children's transitionfrom one peer culture to another,
the previous review of recent studies allows us to identify specific patterns
and themes of peer cultures throughoutchildhood and adolescence.
One central theme in peer culture is the importanceof sharing and social
participation. In the preschool and early elementary school years children
immensely enjoy simply doing things together (Corsaro 1985, Parker &
Gottman 1989). However, generatingsharedmeaning and coordinatingplay
are difficult tasks for young children. Thus, children spend a great deal of
time creating and protectingbasic activities and routines in their peer culture
(Corsaro 1985). Although these routines reflect a range of concerns in the
peer culture, they most importantlyprovide young children with a sense of
excitement and emotional security.
In preadolescence and adolescence, children easily generate and sustain
peer activities. However, they have now collectively produced a set of
stratifiedgroups, and issues of acceptance, popularity, and group solidarity
become paramount.The primarilynonverbalplay routinesof early childhood
are graduallyreplacedby verbal activities (Labov 1972, Goodwin 1982, Fine
1987). Gossip is a central activity since it reaffirmspeer group membership
and reveals basic values and beliefs of group members (Eder & Enke 1988,
Parker& Gottman 1989).
A second centraltheme of peer cultureinvolves children's attemptsto deal
with confusions, concerns,fears, and conflicts in their daily lives. Although
some of these disturbancesare generatedwithin the peer culture itself, they
often arise from children'sexperiencesin the adultworld. Young childrenare
frequentlywarnedof dangersby caretakersand more indirectlythroughtheir
exposuresto movies and fairy tales. Children,in turn, frequentlyincorporate
a wide range of fears and dangers (from threateningagents such as monsters
and witches to dangerous events like fires, floods, and becoming lost) into
their peer culture. By engaging in shared fantasy play (Corsaro 1985, Gott-
man 1986) and producing games, routines, and rituals (Corsaro 1988,
Schwartzman 1978) children more firmly grasp and deal with social repre-
sentations of evil and the unknown in the security of the peer culture.
For older children, the peer group (especially same-sex friendshipgroups)
provides a secure base for making sense of and dealing with new demands
regardingpersonalrelations, sexuality, and identity development(Fine 1981,
Parker& Gottman1989). Everydayactivities in preadolescentand adolescent
cultureenable peers to negotiateand explore a wide rangeof normsregarding:
personalappearanceand the presentationof self, friendshipprocesses, hetero-
sexual relations, and personalaspirationsand achievement.Throughactivities
like gossip, teasing and insult routines, collaborativestory-telling, and humor
(Eder 1988, 1989, Eder & Enke 1988, Fine 1984, 1987, Goodwin 1982a,b,
Labov 1972, Lesko 1988, Wulff 1988), adolescents indirectly explore de-
veloping norms and expectationswithout the risk of direct confrontationand
embarrassment.
A final theme in peer cultureis children's resistance to and challenging of
adult rules and authority. Childrenchallenge adult rules in the family from
the first years of life (Dunn 1988, Miller 1986). Such activity becomes more
widespreadand sophisticatedwhen children discover their common interests
in day care settings and nurseryschools. In such settings childrencooperative-
ly produce a wide set of practices in which they both mock and evade adult
authority.In fact, many of these "secondaryadjustments"to adult rules are
more complex (structurallyand interactively)than the rules themselves (Cor-
saro 1985, 1989).
Although older children continue to resist adult authority,early childhood
and preadolescent cultures are characterizedby a focus on interpersonal
relations and differences among peers. However, with greaterfreedom and
autonomyon the one hand and lack of full adultstatuson the other, resistance
of adultauthorityreemergesas an importantfeatureof adolescentpeer culture
(Griffin 1985, Wulff 1988). In fact, several studies of working-class males
have documentedthe existence and significance of well-developed "counter
cultures"for adolescent socialization and education (Everhart 1983, Willis
1981). Overall, it is clear that the resistance of adult rules and authority
provides children with a sense of control and autonomy, and for this reason
such resistance may be a universal feature of peer culture.
While recent studies have allowed us to identify the above patterns,there
are still substantialgaps in our knowledge of children's peer cultures. First,
although the number of studies of routines and language activities in peer
culture has increased, a clear need exists for more research of this type.
Routines and language activities are of crucial importance because it is
throughsuch activities that peer cultureis producedand maintained.Second,
most of the studies to date have identified featuresof peer culture in educa-
216 CORSARO & EDER
tional settings or otherformalorganizationslike clubs or athleticteams. More

work is needed in informal settings like the home, neighborhood, and play-
ground as well as in businesses that cater to youth (fast food restaurants,
shoppingmalls, cinemas, video game salons, etc). In some of these environ-
ments such as neighborhoodsettings, adolescents are less likely to be segre-
gated by gender, and they tend to engage in a wider variety of activities.
Thus, peer interactionin these settings is importantfor exposing adolescents
to a greaterdiversity of peer cultures and interactivestyles (Goodwin 1989).
We also need to know much more aboutchildren's peer relationsin the work
place. Some of the best work on peer culturein work settings is the historical
analysis by Nasaw (1985) on American urban children at the turn of the
century and by Berggreen (1988) on Norwegian children. Both of these
studies show how children's work and play often coexisted and how peer
culture was tied to the requirementsand the economic rewards of labor.
Recent studies by Solberg (1988) on Norwegianchildren's work in the home,
by Gullestad (1988) on young girls' interactionswhile "walking"and caring
for infants in Oslo, and by Hundeide (1988) comparingthe social worlds of
Norwegian and Asian children nicely demonstratethe importanceof work in
the peer cultureof young children. Studies such as these not only increaseour
knowledge of features of peer culture, they also provide the kind of com-
parative data necessary to document cultural diffusion (Fine 1987).
Although there have been several ethnographicstudies of particularpeer
groups over several months or even years, no longitudinal studies chart
children'stransitionsfrom one peer cultureto another.A clear need exists for
such studies of children as they move from preschool settings to elementary
school, from elementary school to junior high, from junior high to high
school, and finally from high school to college or full-time employment.
Finally, historical and cross-cultural work on children's peer cultures is
lacking. Such studies are necessary for discovering universalfeaturesof peer
cultureand for documentinghow elements of the world of childrenand adults
interact over time and across diverse cultural groups.
A great deal of theoreticaldevelopmentand researchon peer relations and
friendships has occurred recently in developmental psychology (Berndt &
Ladd 1989, Gottman& Parker1986, Mueller & Cooper 1986). Most of this
work is in line with what we earlierreferredto as the constructivistapproach
to socialization. Overall, this researchhas greatly increasedour knowledge of
children's peer relations and social development. In fact, some studies have
reportedfindings and interpretationsvery much in line with the generaltrends
in peer culture we outlined above (Gottman & Mettetal 1986, Parker &
Gottman1989). However, the focus of these studies is on individualdevelop-
ment. Social structureand culture are seen as "social-ecological niches" that
embody demandsto which individualchildrenmust adapt(Parker& Gottman

1989).
As we argued earlier, sociological approachesto socialization must break
free from this individualistic emphasis. Social structureand culture are not
merely static niches or environments,they are public and collective processes
of negotiation and interpretativeapprehension(Cicourel 1974, Geertz 1973,
Rosaldo 1984). From this interpretiveperspective, socialization is not only a
matterof adaptationand internalization,but also a process of appropriation,
reinvention, and reproduction. Central to this view of socialization is the
appreciationof the importanceof communalactivity-children's negotiating,
sharing, and joint culture creating with adults and peers (Bruner 1986,
Vygotsky 1978). Although recent work on both adult-childand peer interac-
tion from this interpretiveperspectivehas greatlyincreasedour understanding
in this area, much work remains to be done.
Literature Cited
Asher, S. R., Gottman, J., eds. 1981. The Boggs, S. 1978. The development of verbal
Developmrent of Children's Friendships. disputing in part-Hawaiianchildren. Lang.
New York: CambridgeUniv. Press Soc. 7:325-44
Bandura, 1986. Social Foundations of Bourdieu, P., Passeron, J. 1977. Reproduc-
Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive tion. Beverly Hills, Calif: Sage
Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice- Bowles, S., Gintis, H. 1976. Schooling in
Hall Capitalist America. New York: Basic
Barlow, K. 1985. Play and learning in a Sepik Bruner, J. 1986. Actual Minds, Possible
society. Presented at Ann. Meet. Am. An- Worlds. Cambridge, Mass: HarvardUniv.
thropol. Assoc. 84th, Washington, DC Press
Berentzen, S. 1984. Children Constructing Budwig, N., Strage, A., Bamberg, M. 1986.
Their Social World. Bergen Stud. Soc. An- The constructionof joint activities with an
thropol. No. 36. Bergen, Norway: Univ. age-mate: The transition from caregiver-
Bergen child to peer play. See Cook-Gumperzet al
Berentzen, S. ed. 1989. Ethnographic 1986, pp. 83-108
Approaches to Children's Worldsand Peer Cicourel, A. V. 1974. Cognitive Sociology.
Cultures. Trondheim Norway: Norwegian New York: Free
Ctr. Child Res. Coie, J. D., Dodge, K. A., Kupersmidt, J.
Berentzen, S. 1989. The interactionalcontexts 1988. Peer groupbehaviorand social status.
of children's peer group activities. See Be- In The Rejected Child, ed. S. Asher, J.
rentzen 1989, pp. 9-43 Coie, 1988. New York: CambridgeUniv.
Berggreen, B. 1988. Infantilizationof children Press
as an historical process. In Proc. Conf. Coie, J. D., Dodge, K. A. 1983. Continuities
Growing Into a Modern World, vol. 2, ed. and changes in children's social status: A
K. Ekberg,P. Mjaavatn,pp. 829-42. Trond- five-year longitudinal study. Merrill-Pal.
heim, Norway: NorwegianCtr. Child Res. 29:261-82
Berndt, T., Ladd, G. eds. 1989. Peer Rela- Coleman, J. 1961. The Adolescent Society.
tionships in Child Development. New York: New York: Free
Wiley Cook-Gumperz,J., Corsaro, W. A., Streeck,
Best, R. 1983. We've All Got Scars. J. eds. 1986. Children's Worlds and Chil-
Bloomington: Ind. Univ. Press dren's Language. Berlin: Mouton
Bigelow, B. J., LaGaipa, J. 1980. The de- Corsaro,W. A. 1979. "We'refriends, right?":
velopment of friendshipvalues and choice. Children'suse of access ritualsin a nursery
In Friendship and Social Relations in Chil- school. Lang. Soc. 8:315-36
dren, ed. H. C. Foot, A. J. Chapman, J. Corsaro, W. A. 1981. Friendshipin the nurs-
Smith, pp. 15-44. New York: Wiley ery school: Social organization in a peer
218 CORSARO & EDER
environment. See Asher & Gottman 1981, two Mexicano homes. See Schieffelin &
pp. 207-41 Ochs 1986, pp. 182-97
Corsaro, W. A. 1985. Friendship and Peer Eisenberg, A., Garvey, C. 1981. Children's
Culture in the Early Years. Norwood, NJ: use of verbal strategies in resolving con-
Ablex flicts. Discourse Processes 4:149-70
Corsaro, W. A. 1988. Routines in the peer Ekberg, K., Mjaavatn,P. E., eds. 1988. Proc.
culture of American and Italian nursery Conf. GrowingInto a Modern World, Vols.
school children. Social Educ. 61:1-14 1, 2, & 3, Trondheim, Norway, 1987
Corsaro, W. A. 1990. The underlife of the Trondheim:Norwegian Centre
nurseryschool: Young children's social rep- Epstein, J. 1983. Examining theories of
resentationsof adult rules. In Social Repre- adolescent friendships. See Epstein & Kar-
sentations and the Development of Knowl- weit 1983, pp. 39-62
edge, ed. B. Lloyd, G. Duveen, pp. 11-26. Epstein, J. L., Karweit, N., eds. 1983.
Cambridge:CambridgeUniv. Press Friends in School: Patterns of Selection and
Corsaro, W. A., Rizzo, T. A. 1988. Dis- Influence in SecondarySchools. New York:
cussione and friendship: Socialization pro- Academic
cesses in the peer culture of Italian nursery Evans, C., Eder, D. 1989. "No exit": Pro-
school children. Am. Sociol. Rev. 53:879- cesses of social isolation in the middle
94 school. Pres. Am. Sociol. Assoc. Meet. San
Corsaro, W. A., Rizzo, T. A. 1990. Disputes Francisco, Calif.
in the peer culture of American and Italian Everhart,R. 1983. Reading, Writingand Re-
nursery school children. In Conflict Talk, sistance: Adolescence and Labor in a Junior
ed. A. D. Grimshaw, pp. 21-66, Cam- High School. Boston: Routledge
bridge: CambridgeUniv. Press Fine, G. A. 1981. Friends, impression man-
Corsaro, W. A., Heise, D. R. 1989. Event agement, and preadolescent behavior. See
structure models from ethnographic data. Asher & Gottman 1981, pp. 29-52
Sociological Methodology, In press Fine, G. A. 1984. Humorous interactionand
Cusick, P. 1973. Inside High School. New the social constructionof meaning:Making
York: Holt, Rinehart& Winston sense in a jocular vein. In Studies in Sym-
Damon, W. 1977. The Social World of the bolic Interaction, vol 4, ed. N. Denzin,
Child. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass 83-101. Greenwich, Conn: JAI
Davies, B. 1982. Life in the Classroom and Fine, G. A. 1986. The social organizationof
Playground: The Accounts of Primary adolescent gossip: The rhetoric of moral
School Children. London: Routledge evaluation. See Cook-Gumperz,Corsaro,&
Dodge, K., Schlundt, D., Schocken, I., De- Streeck pp. 405-23
Lugach, J. 1983. Social competence and Fine, G. A. 1987. With the Boys: Little
children's sociometric status: The role of League Baseball and Preadolescent Cul-
peer group entry strategies. Merrill-Pal. ture. Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
29:309-36 Forbes, D., Katz, M., Paul, B., Lubin, D.
Dunn, J. 1988. The Beginnings of Social Un- 1982. Children'splans for joining play: An
derstanding. Oxford: Basil Blackwell analysis of structureand function. In Chil-
Eckert, P. 1988. Adolescent social structure dren's Planning Strategies, ed. D. Forbes,
and the spread of linguistic change. Lang. M. Greenberg, pp. 61-79. San Francisco:
Soc. 17:183-208 Jossey-Bass
Eder, D. 1985. The cycle of popularity:In- Garvey, C. 1984. Children's Talk. Cam-
terpersonalrelations among female adoles- bridge, Mass: HarvardUniv. Press
cents. Sociol. Educ. 58:154-65 Geertz, C. 1973. The Interpretationof Cul-
Eder, D. 1988. Building cohesion throughcol- tures. New York: Basic
laborative narration. Soc. Psych. Q. 51:- Genishi, C., Di Paolo, M. 1982. Learning
225-35 through argumentin a preschool. In Com-
Eder, D. 1990. The role of teasing in adoles- municating in the Classroom, ed. L. C.
cent peer culture. In Sociological Studies of Wilkinson, pp. 49-68. New York:Academ-
Child Development, Vol. 4. ed., S Cahill. ic
Greenwich, Ct: JAI. In press Giddens, A. 1984. The Constitutionof Soci-
Eder, D., Enke, J. 1988. Gossip as a means ety. Oxford, England: Polity
for transmitting and developing social Goffman, E. 1961. Asylumns. Garden City,
structure. Pres. Am. Sociol. Assoc. Meet. NY: Anchor
Atlanta, Georgia Gomme, A. 1964. The Traditional Games of
Eder, D., Parker, S. 1987. The cultural England, Scotland, and Ireland. 2 vol. New
production and reproduction of gender: York: Dover
The effect of extracurricularactivities on Goodwin, M. H. 1980a. "He-said-she-said":
peer group culture. Sociol. Educ. 60:200- Formalculturalproceduresfor the construc-
213 tion of a gossip dispute activity. Am.
Eisenberg, A. 1986. Teasing: Verbal play in Ethnol. 7:674-95
Goodwin, M. H. 1980b. Directive/response dren's world views. See Ekberg& Mjaavatn

speech sequences in girls' and boys' task 1988, vol. 2, pp. 646-58
activities. In Womenand Language in Liter- Karweit, N. 1983. Extracurricularactivities
ature and Society, ed. S. McConnell-Ginet, and friendship selection. See Epstein &
R. Borker, N. Furman, pp. 157-73. New Karweit 1983, pp. 131-140
York: Prager Karweit, N., Hansell, S. 1983. Sex differ-
Goodwin, M. H. 1982a. Processes of dispute ences in adolescent relationships: Friend-
management among urban Black children. ship and status. See Epstein & Karweit
Am. Ethnol. 9:76-96 1983, pp. 115-130
Goodwin, M. H. 1982b. "Instigating":Story Katriel, T. 1985. Brogez: Ritual and strategy
telling as a social process. Am. Ethnol. in Israeli children's conflicts. Lang. Soc.
9:799-819 14:467-90
Goodwin, M. H. 1985. The serious side of Katriel, T. 1987. "Bexibadim!": Ritualized
jump rope: Conversationalpracticesand so- sharing among Israeli children. Lang. Soc.
cial organization in the frame of play. J. 16:305-20
Am. Folklore 98:315-30 Kessler, S., Ashenden, D., Connell, R., Dow-
Goodwin, M. H. 1989. Language as Social sett, G. 1985. Genderrelationsin secondary
Process: ConversationalPractices in Urban schooling. Sociol. Educ. 58:34-47
Black Children. Bloomington: Ind. Univ. Kinney, D. 1989. Dweebs, headbangers, and
Press trendies: Adolescent identityformation and
Goodwin, M. H., Goodwin, C. 1988. Chil- change within socio-cultural contexts. PhD
dren's arguing. In Language, Gender, and thesis. Ind. Univ., Bloomington
Sex in a ComparativePerspective, ed. S. Kochman, T. 1983. The boundary between
Phillips, S. Steele, C. Tanz, pp. 200-248. play and nonplay in black verbal dueling.
New York: CambridgeUniv. Press Lang. Soc. 12:329-37
Gordon, C. W. 1957. The Social Systemof the Labov, W. 1972. Language in the Inner City:
High School: A Study in the Sociology of Studies in the Black English Vernacular.
Adolescence. Glencoe, Ill: Free Press Philadelphia:Univ. Penn. Press
Gottman, J. 1986. The world of coordinated Larkin, R. 1979. SuburbanYouthin Cultural
play: Same-and cross-sex friendship in Crisis. New York: Oxford
young children. See Gottman & Parker, Lesko, N. 1988. SymbolizingSociety: Stories,
1986, pp. 139-91 Rites and Structure in Catholic High
Gottman, J., Mettetal, G. 1986. Speculations School. Philadelphia:Falmer
about social and affective development: Lever, J. 1976. Sex differences in the games
Friendship and acquaintanceship through children play. Soc. Probl. 23:478-87
adolescence. See Gottman& Parker, 1986, MacLeod, J. 1987. Ain't No Makin' It:
pp. 192-240 Leveled Aspirations in a Low-Income
Gottman, J., Parker, J., eds. 1986. Con- Neighborhood. Boulder, Colo: Westview
versations of Friends: Speculations on Mandell, N. 1986. Peer interaction in day
Affective Development. New York: Cam- care settings: Implications for social cog-
bridge Univ. Press nition. In Sociological Studies of Child
Griffin, C. 1985. Typical Girls?: Young Development, ed. P. A. Adler and P.
Women From School to the Job Market. Adler, vol. 1, pp. 55-79, Greenwich, Conn:
London: Routledge JAI
Gullestad, M. 1988. Children's care for chil- Maynard,D. 1985. On the functions of social
dren. See Ekberg& Mjaavatn1988, vol. 3, conflict among children. Am. Sociol. Rev.
pp. 1205-17 50:207-23
Hanna, J. L. 1988. Disruptive School Be- McRobbie, A. 1978. Working class girls and
havior: Class, Race and Culture. New the culture of femininity. In Women Take
York: Holmes & Meier Issue, ed. Women's Studies Group: Ctr.
Harr6, R. 1986. The step to social con- Contemp. Cult. Stud., Univ. Birmingham,
structionism.In Children of Social Worlds: pp. 96-108. London: Hutchinson
Developmentin a Social Context, ed. M. P. Miller, P. 1986. Teasing as language
Richards, P. Light, pp. 287-96. Cam- socialization and verbal play in a white
bridge, Mass.: HarvardUniv. Press working-class community. See Schieffelin
Heath, S. B. 1983. Ways with Words: Lan- & Ochs 1986, 199-212
guage, Life, and Workin Communitiesand Mishler, E. 1979. "Won't you trade cookies
Classrooms. New York: CambridgeUniv. with the popcorn?": The talk of trades
Press among six-year-olds. In Language, Chil-
Hughes, L. A. 1988. "But that's not really dren, and Society: The Effects of Social
mean": Competing in a cooperative mode. Factors on Children's Learning to Com-
Sex Roles. 19:669-687 municate, ed. 0. Garnica, M. King, pp.
Hundeide, K. 1988. Contrasting lifeworlds: 221-36. Elmsford, NY: Pergamon
Slum children and Oslo middleclass chil- Mueller, E. 1972. The maintenanceof verbal
220 CORSARO & EDER
exchanges between young children. Child Shantz, C., Hobart, C. 1989. Social conflict
Dev. 43:930-38 and development: Peers and siblings. See
Mueller, E., Cooper, C., eds. 1986. Process Brendt & Ladd 1989, pp. 71-94
and Outcome in Peer Relationships. New Shuman, A. 1986. StorytellingRights. Cam-
York: Academic bridge: CambridgeUniv. Press.
Nasaw, D. 1985. Childrenof the City. Garden Simmons, R., Blyth, D. 1987. Moving Into
City, NY: Anchor Adolescence: The Impact of Pubertal
Olweus, D. 1978. Aggression in the Schools: Change and School Context, New York:
Bullies and WhippingBoys. London:Wiley Aldine
Opie, I., Opie, P. 1959. The Lore and Lan- Sluckin, A. 1981. Growing Up in the Play-
guage of School Children. Oxford: Oxford ground. London: Routledge
Univ. Press Solberg, A. 1988. The working life of chil-
Opie, I., Opie, P. 1969. Children's Games in dren. See Ekberg & Mjaavatn1988, vol. 2,
Street and Playground. Oxford: Oxford pp. 1069-82
Univ. Press Thorne, B. 1986. Girls and boys together ...
Parker,J., Gottman,J. 1989. Social and emo- but mostly apart: Gender arrangementsin
tional development in a relational context: elementary school. In Relationships and
Friendshipinteractionfrom early childhood Development, ed. W. Hartup,Z. Rubin, pp.
to adolescence. See Brendt & Ladd 1989, 167-84. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum
pp. 95-132 Thorne, B. 1989. Crossing the gender divide:
Piaget, J. 1950. The Psychology of In- What "tomboys" can teach us about pro-
telligence. London: Routledge cesses of gender separationamong children.
Piaget, J. 1968. Six Psychological Studies. See Berentzenet al 1989, 139-73. In press
New York: Vintage Thorne, B., Luria, Z. 1986. Sexuality and
Pontecorvo, C., Orsolini, M. 1989. Discuss- gender in children's daily worlds. Soc.
ing and explaining a story at school. Dis- Probl. 33:176-89
course Processes. In press Turiel, E. 1983. The Development of Social
Rizzo, T. A. 1989. Friendship Development Knowledge. New York: Cambridge Univ.
Among Children in School. Norwood, NJ: Press
Ablex Valsiner, J. 1987. Culture and the Develop-
Rosaldo, M. 1984. Towardan anthropologyof ment of Children's Action. New York:
self and feeling. In Culture Theory:Essays Wiley
on Mind, Self, and Emotion, ed. R. Vandell, D. L., Mueller, E. 1980. Peer play
Schweder, R. LeVine, pp. 137-58. Cam- and friendshipsduringthe first two years. In
bridge: CambridgeUniv. Press Friendshipand ChildhoodRelations, ed. H.
Rosenberg, F., Simmons, R. 1975. Sex differ- C. Foot, A. J. Chapman,J. R. Smith, 181-
ences in the self-concept in adolescence. 208. New York: Wiley
Sex Roles 1:147-59 Vygotsky, L. S. 1978. Mind in Society. Cam-
Rubin, K., Maioni, T., Hornung, M. 1976. bridge, Mass.: HarvardUniv. Press
Free play behaviors in middle- and lower- Wertsch, J. ed. 1986. Culture, Communica-
class preschoolers:Partenand Piaget revisit- tion, and Cognition: Vygotskian Per-
ed. Child Dev. 47:414-19 spectives. New York: Cambridge Univ.
Rubin, Z. 1980. Children's Friendships. Press
Cambridge, Mass: HarvardUniv. Press Wertsch, J. 1989. A socioculturalapproachto
Schieffelin, B. 1986. Teasing and shaming in mind. In Child Development Today and
Kaluli children's interactions.See Schieffe- Tomorrow, ed. W. Damon, 14-33. San
lin & Ochs 1986, pp. 165-181 Francisco:Jossey-Bass
Schofield, J. 1982. Black and Whitein School. Willis, P. 1981. Learning to Labour: How
New York: Praeger Working Class Kids Get Working Class
Schutze, Y., Kreppner,K., Paulsen, S. 1986. Jobs. New York: Columbia Univ. Press
The social construction of the sibling Wulff, H. 1988. TwentyGirls: Growing Up,
relationship.See Cook-Gumperzet al 1986, Ethnicityand Excitementin a SouthLondon
pp. 129-46 Microculture. Stockholm Stud. Soc. An-
Schwartz, G., Merton, D. 1967. The language thropol., No. 21. Stockholm, Sweden:
of adolescence: An anthropological Univ. Stockholm
approach to the youth culture. Am. J. Youniss, J. 1980. Parents and Peers in Social
Sociol. 72:453-68 Development: A Sullivan-Piaget Perspec-
Schwartzman,H. 1978. Transformations:The tive. Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
Anthropology of Children's Play. New Youniss, J., Smollar, J. 1985. AdolescentRe-
York: Plenum lations with Mothers Fathers and Friends.
Shantz, C. 1987. Conflicts among children. Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
Child Dev. 58:283-205

Childrens Peer Culture - Corsaro

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Childrens Peer Culture - Corsaro

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Children's Peer Cultures

Author(s): William A. Corsaro and Donna Eder

CHILDREN'S PEER CULTURES

The Importance of Peer Culture in Theories of Child

culture in various theories of child development and socialization. Our pur-

BEHAVIORIST THEORIES Until the mid-1960s most theories of child de-

CONSTRUCTIVIST THEORIES Best represented in the cognitive devel-

interactionsremains at an interpersonallevel. Interpersonalalignments (e.g.

INTERPRETIVE THEORIES One importantoutcome of the acceptanceof the

reproductiveratherthan linear. From this perspective, children enter into a

marily on access to culturalresources and differentialtreatmentby teachers

PEER CULTURE IN EARLY CHILDHOOD

serve as the beginnings of friendshipand a peer culture (Budwig et al 1986,

Social Relations and Peer Concerns

SHARING AND FRIENDSHIP A consistent finding in studies of young chil-

lunchtime in elementary school; and Katriel's (1987) analysis of ritualized

As the example illustrates,the routinehas a definite structure:(a) opening or

CONTROLAND AUTONOMY Children's attemptsto challenge adult author-

CONFLICT AND SOCIAL DIFFERENTIATION While social participationand

increased differentiationand conflict in peer relationsthroughoutchildhood.

frequentlyculminates in he-said-she-saidconfrontionsin which one girl (A)

PEER CULTURE IN ADOLESCENCE

to be more similar in terms of attitudes toward school, college plans, and

toward greater diversity within white middle-class males, leading to the

Interactive Processes and Language Activities

Certainlocalities and events can also manifestthe meaningsof the subculture.

unique experiences in certainlocalities, and the appearanceand behaviorsof

Finally, teasing is more loosely structuredthan ritual insulting, allowing for

CENTRAL THEMES IN PEER CULTURE FROM EARLY

tional settings or otherformalorganizationslike clubs or athleticteams. More

embody demandsto which individualchildrenmust adapt(Parker& Gottman

Goodwin, M. H. 1980b. Directive/response dren's world views. See Ekberg& Mjaavatn

You might also like