1. Objectifs

Intentions :
This thesis is made of two articles. «[T]he present two studies examined children’s individual and dyadic use of power in sibling and friend conflict across the early and middle childhood period.» (p. iii) «[T]he goal of the [first] study was to conduct a comparative analysis of power behaviours (resources, effectiveness) utilized by dyadic partners in sibling and friend conflict during early childhood when the focal children were aged four.» (p. 17) «[T]he purpose of the [second] study was to conduct a comparative analysis of children’s power resource use and effectiveness in the process and outcome of conflict within and across relationship contexts (i.e., sibling, friend) and time (early and middle childhood).» (p. 61)

2. Méthode

Échantillon/Matériau :
For both studies, «[s]ixty-five families from Western New York state were recruited for participation in a longitudinal study examining sibling and friend interaction in early and middle childhood, previously collected by DeHart (1999). […] At Time 1 (T1), sibling pairs consisted of a 4.5 year-old focal child (M age = 56.4 mos.; SD = 5.71 mos.), who was observed with a younger sibling (n = 37; M age = 34.9 mos.) and older sibling (n = 28; M age = 75.8, mos.). […] Forty-six families were contacted for a follow-up (Time 2; T2) study approximately three and half years later.» (p. 12) The first article of this thesis used data from Time 1, while the second article was longitudinal and, therefore, used data from both time points.

Instruments :
Questionnaire

Type de traitement des données :
Analyse statistique

3. Résumé

Results from the first study showed that, regarding power resources, «dyads used simple information most often, followed by coercive, then elaborated information, and then questioning power. Despite similarities, sibling dyads used coercive power and negative rewards power more often than friend dyads; however friend dyads used simple information power more often in win/lose outcomes than sibling dyads.» (p. 17) The use of coercive power «corroborates earlier reports that characterize sibling conflicts as more aggressive, more affectively intense, and more likely to be resolved via coercion than friend conflicts […].» (p. 39) «Regarding effectiveness of power, sibling and friend dyads were most effective using coercive power, followed by elaborated, and then questioning power; however, overall sibling dyads were more effective at influencing their partners compared to friend dyads.» (p. 17) The second study showed that, «[i]n terms of relationship effects, focal children were more likely to employ coercive physical and legitimate power with their siblings than friends in the conflict process, whereas focal children were more likely to use simple information power with friends than with siblings. Focal children were also more effective using legitimate power with siblings than with friends in the conflict process. […] In terms of developmental effects, focal children were more likely to use coercive physical power at Time 1 than Time 2 and elaborated information power at Time 2 than at Time 1. In contrast, focal children were more effective using information power and coercion when winning conflicts with friends at Time 2 than at Time 1.» (p. 52)