Emerging Trends in The Social and Behavioral Sciences

Sibling Relationships and Development

Item

Title

Sibling Relationships and Development

Author

Campione‐Barr, Nicole

Killoren, Sarah

Research Area

Social Interactions

Topic

Family Relationships

Abstract

Although research on sibling relationships has been far less frequent than research on other close relationships such as parent–child, peer, and romantic partner relationships, researchers have found siblings to be important for the development of social competence as well as positive and negative adjustment. In addition, the sibling relationship is considered the longest lasting relationship across the life span and it serves unique developmental functions. This essay briefly describes foundational research on the influence of dyadic structural variables, relationship dynamics, and sibling influences on adjustment; outlines cutting‐edge research within the field on the contexts of family ethnicity, developmental period, and important processes and influences on relationship dynamics; and discusses key issues for future research such as expanding to under‐studied ethnic groups (e.g., Native American and Asian‐American families), family structures and contexts (e.g., adoption, single‐parents by choice, gay/lesbian parents), and mechanisms for relationship influence. Expanding the field to incorporate such research questions will likely require sibling researchers to examine findings from research on other important, close relationships, as well as collaboration of researchers from a variety of psychological disciplines as well as in the fields of sociology, neuroscience, genetics, anthropology, and human development and family studies.

Related Essays

Theory of Mind (Psychology), Henry Wellman

Family Relationships and Development (Psychology), Joan E. Grusec

A Bio‐Social‐Cultural Approach to Early Cognitive Development: Entering the Community of Minds (Psychology), Katherine Nelson

Bullying, Aggression, and Human Development (Psychology), Samuel E. Ehrenreich and Marion K. Underwood

Immigration and the Changing Status of Asian Americans (Sociology), Jennifer Lee

Kin‐Directed Behavior in Primates (Anthropology), Carol M. Berman

Immigrant Sociocultural Adaptation, Identification, and Belonging (Sociology), Sarah J. Mahler

Ethnic Enclaves (Sociology), Steven J. Gold

Modeling Life Course Structure: The Triple Helix (Sociology), Tom Schuller

Social Change and Entry to Adulthood (Sociology), Jeylan T. Mortimer

The Intrinsic Dynamics of Development (Psychology), Paul van Geert and Marijn van Dijk

The Development of Social Trust (Psychology), Vikram K. Jaswal and Marissa B. Drell

Close Friendships among Contemporary People (Sociology), Matthew E. Brashears and Laura Aufderheide Brashears

Peers and Adolescent Risk Taking (Psychology), Jason Chein

Positive Development among Diverse Youth (Psychology), Richard M. Lerner et al.

Identifier

etrds0303

extracted text

Sibling Relationships
and Development
NICOLE CAMPIONE-BARR and SARAH KILLOREN

Abstract
Although research on sibling relationships has been far less frequent than research
on other close relationships such as parent–child, peer, and romantic partner
relationships, researchers have found siblings to be important for the development
of social competence as well as positive and negative adjustment. In addition, the
sibling relationship is considered the longest lasting relationship across the life
span and it serves unique developmental functions. This essay briefly describes
foundational research on the influence of dyadic structural variables, relationship
dynamics, and sibling influences on adjustment; outlines cutting-edge research
within the field on the contexts of family ethnicity, developmental period, and
important processes and influences on relationship dynamics; and discusses key
issues for future research such as expanding to under-studied ethnic groups
(e.g., Native American and Asian-American families), family structures and
contexts (e.g., adoption, single-parents by choice, gay/lesbian parents), and
mechanisms for relationship influence. Expanding the field to incorporate such
research questions will likely require sibling researchers to examine findings
from research on other important, close relationships, as well as collaboration of
researchers from a variety of psychological disciplines as well as in the fields of
sociology, neuroscience, genetics, anthropology, and human development and
family studies.

INTRODUCTION
Siblings have been considered the “forgotten relationship” (Kramer &
Bank, 2005) as they are frequently overlooked in developmental research in
comparison to parent–child and peer relationships (McHale, Updegraff, &
Whiteman, 2012). This trend seems in contrast, however, to the estimate that
80%–85% of children worldwide have a sibling. In addition, the sibling relationship is often considered the longest lasting close relationship of the life
span (Conger & Kramer, 2010). Despite this comparative lack of examination,
the findings of research on siblings have consistently shown the relationship
to have important positive and negative influences on individual adjustment
Emerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Edited by Robert Scott and Stephen Kosslyn.
© 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. ISBN 978-1-118-90077-2.

1

2

EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES

(Brody, 2004). Also, given the unique blend of complementary (care-taking)
and reciprocal (serving as confidant and playmate) behaviors inherent in the
sibling relationship (Dunn, 2002), siblings are considered to serve unique
developmental functions, while they are also important in shaping the family
context given their location within the broader family system (Cox, 2010).
FOUNDATIONAL RESEARCH
STRUCTURAL VARIABLES
Birth Order. Early research in the field of sibling relationships focused on
the influences of dyadic structural features. In terms of birth order, earlierborn siblings typically have more power in the relationship than later-born
siblings, but they also typically perform more care-taking and instructional behaviors (particularly in childhood; Buhrmester & Furman, 1990).
Later-born siblings are also typically more strongly attached to their
earlier-born siblings than the reverse (Bank, 1992) and report greater interest
and investment in the relationship than earlier-born siblings (Buhrmester &
Furman, 1990). The question of birth order influence, however, is consistently
up for debate. Although earlier research often compared birth order between
families, recent longitudinal research has been able to tease apart age and
birth order effects on family dynamics by comparing reports within families,
but at the same chronological age. So far, these methods have been utilized
to investigate differences in parent–child conflict (Shanahan, McHale,
Osgood, & Crouter, 2007a), parent–child warmth (Shanahan, McHale,
Crouter, & Osgood, 2007b), and family decision-making (Wray-Lake,
Crouter, & McHale, 2010), although they could be used to investigate sibling
relationship qualities as well.
Age and Age Difference. Aspects of age and age differences also have
influenced the sibling relationship. Overall, research suggests that sibling
relationships become more egalitarian and less affectively intense from
childhood through adolescence (Buhrmester & Furman, 1990). Recent evidence suggests that this pattern may change again in emerging adulthood
(Scharf, Shulman, & Avigad-Spitz, 2005; Whiteman, McHale, & Crouter,
2011). Research also suggests that conflict is greater among siblings who are
closer in age than those further apart (Buhrmester & Furman, 1990), likely
due to greater competition for similar resources (e.g., clothes, peers) given
similar interests and social circles. When siblings are farther apart in age,
older siblings often act as caretakers for younger siblings (Buhrmester &
Furman, 1990), particularly in the case of older sisters (Stoneman, Brody, &
MacKinnon, 1986).

Sibling Relationships and Development

3

Sex Composition. Overall, same-sex dyads tend to display greater warmth
and involvement in their relationship than mixed-sex dyads, with sister–
sister dyads displaying the highest levels of closeness and positivity
(Buhrmester & Furman, 1990), as well as intimate disclosure (Howe, AquanAssee, Bukowski, Rinaldi, & Lehoux, 2000). Mixed-sex sibling dyads appear
to offer greater opportunities for sex-typing by parents (e.g., older sisters
with younger brothers tend to do more chores than younger sisters with
older brothers; McHale, Crouter, & Whiteman, 2003). Sex composition of the
dyad is also important for siblings during parental marital transitions, such
that older sisters are more likely to be supportive/compensatory toward
younger siblings (particularly sisters) in the face of divorce and remarriage
(see McGuire & Shanahan, 2010). Although patterns of warmth, closeness,
and support based on sex-composition of the dyad appear to be rather
consistent in the literature, the ways in which relationship processes may
differ based on gender of the individual or composition of the dyad have
been inconsistent or inconsistently examined.
RELATIONSHIP DYNAMICS
Social Learning and Deidentification. Social learning is most likely to occur
when someone has similar characteristics (e.g., same-sex siblings), is
nurturing, and is viewed as powerful (e.g., greater age status and more
experienced). For example, extant research using social learning perspectives, supports similarities in involvement in risky behaviors in adolescence
(McHale, Bissell, & Kim, 2009) and the use of relational and physical aggression in childhood (Ostrov, Crick, & Stauffacher, 2006). With few exceptions,
the focus has been on older siblings serving as role models for their younger
siblings. Recently, researchers have emphasized the importance of investigating how younger siblings may influence their older siblings by taking a
“bottom-up approach” (Whiteman, Becerra, & Killoren, 2009), particularly
in adolescence and emerging adulthood.
Research has also focused on sibling differences and why and under what
conditions siblings de-identify from one another. De-identification is the process by which siblings try to differ from one another (Whiteman et al., 2009).
In contrast to earlier assumptions about deidentification processes, quantitative data show that both older and younger siblings have been shown to
de-identify from one another (Whiteman & Christiansen, 2008).
Parental Differential Treatment. Turning to parental differential treatment
(PDT), less favored siblings have reported more externalizing behaviors over
time (Richmond, Stocker, & Rienks, 2005). In addition, differential warmth

4

EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES

by mothers has been linked more strongly to firstborn’s reports of sibling
conflict; whereas, differential warmth by fathers has been linked more
strongly to second-born’s reports of sibling conflict (Shanahan, McHale,
Crouter, & Osgood, 2008). In a study of PDT in young adulthood, more
maternal differential treatment was associated with less intimacy between
siblings, but more paternal differential treatment was related to less sibling
intimacy only for the less-favored sibling and not for the favored sibling
(Jensen, Whiteman, Fingerman, & Birditt, 2013). In addition, familism
values play a protective role such that when youth report high levels of
familism values, there are fewer significant correlations between domains
of differential treatment (e.g., privileges, warmth) and youth well-being
(McHale, Updegraff, Shanahan, Crouter, & Killoren, 2005). Findings highlight the importance of including sibling characteristics, parent gender, and
cultural values when investigating the effects of PDT on sibling relationships
adjustment.
INFLUENCES ON ADJUSTMENT/DEVELOPMENT
Positive. Sibling relationships can be positive for children’s development and
overall adjustment. Older siblings show increasing abilities to teach younger
siblings and simplify tasks. Doing so also results in increases in older siblings’
own perspective taking, as well as higher reading and language achievement scores. Alternatively, younger siblings who are nurtured by their older
siblings develop greater sensitivity to others’ feelings and perspectives.
Also, when sibling relationships are characterized as both supportive and
as having some conflict, siblings are able to test their perspective-taking
skills through conflict resolution. This has been associated with greater
social skill in younger siblings’ peer relationships as well (see Brody, 2004
for review).
Negative. Despite the positive outcomes sibling relationships can provide,
negative consequences of siblings have been more emphasized in the literature. Younger siblings of older siblings with aggressive, antisocial, and/or
externalizing problems have been found to be at greater risk for developing
similar problems than children without problematic older siblings (e.g.,
Brody, Kim, Murry, & Brown, 2003). In addition, younger sisters of older
sisters who are involved in early or risky sexual behavior and/or teen pregnancy are at greater risk for being involved in these same behaviors (e.g., East
& Jacobson, 2001). Negative consequences also exist from the quality of the
sibling relationship itself. Greater conflict and negativity between siblings
is associated with greater depression, anxiety, and externalizing behaviors

Sibling Relationships and Development

5

(e.g., Criss & Shaw, 2005; Stocker, Burwell, & Briggs, 2002). However, a
recent longitudinal study by Solmeyer, McHale, and Crouter (2013) found
that the association between sibling conflict and externalizing behavior was
only evident among sisters and mixed-sex dyads. Conflict among brothers
was not associated with later risky behavior. Importantly, these associations
have been found to be the case over and above the effects of the marital
and/or parent–child relationships. Thus, these influences are not merely
due to family environment, they are specific to the sibling relationship.
CUTTING-EDGE RESEARCH
ETHNICITY
African-American and Latino Families. Although the vast majority of sibling
research has focused on European-American families, recent research
has been extended to African-American and Latino families. In AfricanAmerican families, positive sibling relationships are related to healthy
well-being and strong ethnic identity, whereas negative sibling relationships
are linked to adjustment problems. In another study, positive sibling relationships coupled with high familism values resulted in positive adjustment
for firstborns (but not second-borns; Soli, McHale, & Feinberg, 2009). Further,
sibling relationships characterized by high relational aggression and low
familism values have been associated with poor adjustment for second-born
siblings (but not for firstborns). In two-parent Mexican-American families,
researchers have found that siblings report warmth and negativity in
their relationships and high involvement with one another (Updegraff,
McHale, Whiteman, Thayer, & Delgado, 2005). As reviewed above, parents’
differential treatment of siblings in Mexican-American families also has
been examined (McHale et al., 2005). These findings illuminate the importance of including culture and sibling characteristics in studies of sibling
relationships and youth adjustment.
PROCESSES/INFLUENCES
Positive Adjustment. More recent research has also begun to emphasize the
positive qualities and roles of sibling relationships, as opposed to negative
consequences. For instance, Kim, McHale, Crouter, and Osgood (2007) found
that increases in sibling intimacy during middle childhood and adolescence
were longitudinally associated with greater peer competence for all siblings,
and lower levels of depression for girls. Also, siblings who reported greater
warmth and lower conflict (than average) in their relationship also reported
greater empathy (than average) and the association between sibling warmth

6

EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES

and empathy increased over time (Lam, Solmeyer, & McHale, 2012). Continuing to emphasize positive aspects of the sibling relationship is important
to the further development and effectiveness of family therapy, preventions,
and interventions aimed at improving the quality of sibling relationships.
Domains of Sibling Conflict. Although it is important to expand our understanding of positive features within sibling relationships, research on sibling
conflict continues to flourish, likely due to the ubiquity of it across sibling
relationships. Recent research on sibling conflict has been particularly
interested in the content of siblings’ conflicts. Campione-Barr and Smetana
(2010) identified two content domains of conflict during adolescence:
equality and fairness (e.g., whose turn it is to do chores), and invasion of
the personal domain (e.g., entering other’s room without asking). Invasion
of the personal domain issues were found to be more frequent and more
intense than issues of equality and fairness and only the former had negative
associations with relationship quality. Also, equality and fairness conflicts
were associated with later depressive symptoms, while invasion of the
personal domain conflicts conferred greater risk for anxiety and lower
self-esteem (Campione-Barr, Greer & Kruse, 2013). With younger children,
Recchia and Howe (2010) observed that most conflicts were regarding
moral issues such as fairness/rights, psychological harm, or physical
harm. Interestingly, compromise appears most likely in physical harm
disagreements with younger children (Recchia & Howe, 2010), but when
adolescent siblings discuss issues of harm, destructive conflict is more likely
utilized (Campione-Barr, Bassett Greer, Schwab, & Kruse, 2014). Taken
together, these findings suggest that what siblings fight about is important
for functioning and adjustment.
Disclosure/Communication. The sibling processes of disclosure and communication have received more attention as of late, although they likely require
further examination. In a study of early adolescent siblings, researchers
found that youth were more likely to disclose to siblings than to parents
and friends, and particularly when they had warm relationships with
siblings (Howe et al., 2000). In childhood, sibling disclosure was related
to greater warmth, rivalry and conflict with siblings (Martinez & Howe,
2013). Observational studies also have shown that successful conversation
(i.e., smoothness of communication) between 4-year-old children and
their siblings is linked to advanced socio-cognitive abilities and sibling
relationship positivity (Cutting & Dunn, 2006). In adolescence, greater
frequency of sibling conversations about sex plays a supplemental role to
parent–child conversations about sex in predicting less risky attitudes and

Sibling Relationships and Development

7

greater condom-use self-efficacy when compared to less frequent conversations (Kowal & Blinn-Pike, 2004). In an observational study focused on
adolescent girls and their older sisters, researchers found that sisters serve
as confidants, sources of support, and mentors during conversations about
dating and sexuality (Killoren & Roach, 2014).
DEVELOPMENTAL TRANSITIONS
Emerging Adulthood. Until recently, research clarifying how sibling relationships transform from adolescence to adulthood has been very rare. Given
that developmental changes in emerging adulthood (generally considered
ages 18–25) often include moving out of the natal home (for college, work,
military, etc.), this period is often the first time in which siblings are living
apart and, thus, the relationship becomes more voluntary. Scharf et al. (2005)
found that like during adolescence, conflict during emerging adulthood continues to decline, but in contrast to adolescence, warmth in the relationship
begins to increase. Whiteman et al. (2011) also found an increase in intimacy
between siblings during the first year older siblings were in college, but this
was only the case if older siblings moved out of the home they shared with
their siblings and parents. New findings also suggest that greater conflict in
adolescence, can actually lead to better quality relationships when the older
sibling leaves home for college, and that certain types of conflicts (i.e., equality and fairness issues) may be particularly helpful in transforming the power
differential between siblings (Lindell, Campione-Barr, & Greer, 2013). More
research is needed in this area to help clarify the ways in which siblings transform their relationship from adolescence to potentially lifelong supportive
relationships throughout adulthood.
ASSOCIATIONS WITH OTHER CLOSE RELATIONSHIPS
Within the Family System. Sibling relationships do not exist in isolation.
In a novel study of multiple sibling dyads (with children ranging from
early childhood to middle adolescence) within one family, researchers
found greater similarity between affection and hostility among sibling
dyads within the same family compared to sibling dyads from different
families, showing that the family climate influences sibling relationship
quality (Jenkins, Rasbash, Leckie, Gass, & Dunn, 2012). In a longitudinal
study of bidirectional effects between parental support and sibling warmth
throughout adolescence, authors found that spillover in support from
the sibling relationship to the parent–child relationship (but not from the
parent–child to sibling relationship) in early adolescence only (Derkman,
Engels, Kuntsche, van der Vorst, & Scholte, 2011). In addition, throughout

8

EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES

adolescence, maternal acceptance increased as sibling intimacy increased;
whereas, paternal conflict increased as sibling conflict increased (Kim,
McHale, Osgood, & Crouter, 2006). Regarding links to the marital relationship, incongruence in parental differential conflict with siblings was linked
to lower marital satisfaction and higher marital conflict (Kan, McHale, &
Crouter, 2008).
Associations with Peers/Friends. Sibling relationships also are linked to
friendships. In an observational study of young children’s relationships
with a friend and an older sibling, researchers found greater asymmetry in
children’s relationships with their older siblings compared to their friends
(McElwain & Volling, 2005). Importantly, they also found that positive relationship quality with one partner (either friend or sibling) was an important
buffer of poor adjustment when children had a negative relationship with
the other partner. In young adulthood, having a harmonious relationship
with a friend compensated for a poor relationship with a sibling, however,
having a harmonious relationship with a sibling did not compensate for a
poor relationship with a friend (Sherman, Lansford, & Volling, 2006).
Associations with Romantic Partners. Research linking sibling and romantic
relationships is sparse. Researchers have shown that late adolescents’
positive and negative conflict resolution behaviors with siblings predicted
conflict resolution strategies with romantic partners (Reese-Weber & Kahn,
2005; Shalash, Wood, & Parker, 2013). Further, sibling conflict has been
linked to romantic relationship intimacy, for girls, but not for boys (Doughty,
McHale, & Feinberg, 2013). In addition, PDT of siblings was linked to sibling
jealousy, which in turn, was linked to adolescents’ romantic relationships
(e.g., conflict, ambivalence, jealousy; Rauer & Volling, 2007). Sex composition has important implications for adolescents’ romantic relationships.
Specifically, older siblings in mixed-gender dyads (compared to same-gender
dyads) reported greater romantic relationship intimacy (Doughty et al., 2013).
KEY ISSUES FOR FUTURE RESEARCH
Research on sibling relationships over the past two decades has moved the
field from being predominantly concerned with similarities and differences
in siblings and the influence of dyad constellation variables to examining
important processes and mechanisms in the sibling relationship and influences on positive and negative adjustment. There are several aspects of the
sibling relationship, however, that researchers in the field have paid little
attention to or know little about. While structural variable such as birth order,

Sibling Relationships and Development

9

age difference, and gender composition have been frequently examined,
other family structures or contexts have received little attention. First, most
research has focused on a single sibling dyad within each family, regardless
of the number of children in the family. The logistics of examining more than
one sibling dyad within the same family has been a daunting task for most
researchers, but newer statistical techniques (e.g., multilevel modeling; social
network analysis) give us greater opportunities to examine multiple, interconnected relationships. Second, previous research has typically focused
on two-heterosexual-parent families with biologically related children.
Family contexts, and thus sibling relationships, have become much more
diverse in recent decades, yet research on these contexts has been scarce.
For example, beyond behavior genetics studies, little research has examined
the sibling relationship within the context of adoptive families. Similarly,
little is known about sibling relationships in families formed through
assisted reproduction methods, which may create anywhere from fully
biologically to nonbiologically related siblings. In addition, both adoptive
and nontraditional conception methods may be utilized in the contexts of
two-heterosexual-parent families, intentional single-parent families, or gayor lesbian-parent families; the latter two family structures have received very
little attention in the context of family relationships in general, and sibling
relationships in particular, to date as well (see McGuire & Shanahan, 2010).
Although more recent research has begun to examine sibling relationships
within ethnic groups besides European-American families, research is still
sparse, if at all present, on some groups. Research on sibling relationships
within Native American families could be enlightening in examining the
effects of discrimination and culture in a nonimmigrant ethnic minority
group. In addition, research within the context of Asian-American families
has been extremely rare. Given that Asian-American families are less likely
to live in poverty and have higher median income levels than all other ethnic
minority groups within the United States (Le, 2013), research on these sibling
relationships could be helpful in examining the effects of discrimination and
culture without the added confound of lower socioeconomic status as has
often been the case in research on other ethnic minority groups (see McGuire
& Shanahan, 2010).
Finally, recent research has begun to examine the processes and mechanisms by which the sibling relationship influences development (e.g., modeling, communication, conflict resolution), but this work is still relatively new
to the field. Research within other close relationships, such as parent–child,
peer, and romantic relationships, has examined a broader variety of processes by which these relationships influence development and adjustment.
Future research on siblings should aim to investigate the role of mechanisms
found within other relationships, as well as compare the ways by which those

10

EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES

processes and their magnitude of influence change over the life-course (see
Cox, 2010). Research of this nature also serves to inform sibling-focused prevention and intervention programs (see Kennedy & Kramer, 2008; Feinberg,
Sakuma, Hostetler, & McHale, 2013 for examples).
REFERENCES
Bank, S. (1992). Remembering and reinterpreting sibling bonds. In F. Boer & J. Dunn
(Eds.), Children’s sibling relationships: Developmental and clinical issues (pp. 139–150).
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Brody, G. H. (2004). Siblings’ direct and indirect contributions to child development. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 13(3), 124–126. doi:10.1111/j.09637214.2004.00289.x
Brody, G. H., Kim, S., Murry, V. M., & Brown, A. C. (2003). Longitudinal direct
and indirect pathways linking older sibling competence to the development
of younger sibling competence. Developmental Psychology, 39(3), 618–628. doi:
10.1037/0012-1649.39.3.618
Buhrmester, D., & Furman, W. (1990). Perceptions of sibling relationships during middle childhood and adolescence. Child Development, 61(5), 1387–1398.
doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.1990.tb02869.x
Campione-Barr, N., & Smetana, J. G. (2010). “Who said you could wear my sweater?”
Adolescent siblings’ conflicts and associations with relationship quality. Child
Development, 81(2), 464–471. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2009.01407.x
Campione-Barr, N., Greer, K. B., & Kruse, A. (2013). The impact of different domains
of sibling conflict on adolescent adjustment. Child Development, 84, 938–954.
doi:10.1111/cdev.12022
Campione-Barr, N., Bassett Greer, K., Schwab, K., & Kruse, A. (2014). Differing
domains of actual sibling conflict discussions and associations with conflict styles
and relationship quality. Social Development, 23, 666–683. doi:10.1111/sode.12059
Conger, K. J., & Kramer, L. (2010). Introduction to the special section: Perspectives on
sibling relationships: Advancing child development research. Child Development
Perspectives, 4(2), 69–71. doi:10.1111/j.1750-8606.2010.00120.x
Cox, M. J. (2010). Family systems and sibling relationships. Child Development Perspectives, 4(2), 95–96. doi:10.1111/j.1750-8606.2010.00124.x
Criss, M. M., & Shaw, D. S. (2005). Sibling relationships as contexts for delinquency
training in low-income families. Journal of Family Psychology, 19(4), 592–600.
doi:10.1037/0893-3200.19.4.592
Cutting, A. L., & Dunn, J. (2006). Conversations with siblings and friends: Links with
between relationship quality and social understanding. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 24(1), 73–87. doi:10.1348/026151005X7033
Derkman, M. M. S., Engels, R. C. M. E., Kuntsche, E., van der Vorst, H., &
Scholte, R. H. J. (2011). Bidirectional associations between sibling relationships and
parental support during adolescence. Journal of Youth Adolescence, 40(4), 490–501.
doi:10.1007/s10964-010-9576-8

Sibling Relationships and Development

11

Doughty, S. E., McHale, S. M., & Feinberg, M. E. (2013). Sibling experiences as predictors of romantic relationship qualities in adolescence. Journal of Family Issues.
Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/0192513X13495397
Dunn, J. (2002). Sibling relationships. In P. K. Smith & C. H. Hart (Eds.), Blackwell
Handbook of Childhood Social Development (pp. 223–237). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
East, P. L., & Jacobson, L. J. (2001). The younger siblings of teenage mothers:
A followup of their pregnancy risk. Developmental Psychology, 37(2), 254–264.
doi:10.1037//0012-1649.37.2.254
Feinberg, M. E., Sakuma, K. L., Hostetler, M., & McHale, S. M. (2013). Enhancing
sibling relationships to prevent adolescent problem behaviors: Theory, design and
feasibility of siblings are special. Evaluation and Program Planning, 36(1), 97–106.
doi:10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2012.08.003
Howe, N., Aquan-Assee, J., Bukowski, W. M., Rinaldi, C. M., & Lehoux, P. M.
(2000). Sibling self-disclosure in early adolescence. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 46(4),
653–671.
Jenkins, J., Rasbash, J., Leckie, G., Gass, K., & Dunn, J. (2012). The role of
maternal factors in sibling relationship quality: A multilevel study of multiple dyads per family. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 53(6), 622–629.
doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.2011.02484.x
Jensen, A. C., Whiteman, S. D., Fingerman, K. L., & Birditt, K. S. (2013). “Life still isn’t
fair”: Parental differential treatment of young adult siblings. Journal of Marriage and
Family, 75, 438–452. doi:10.1111/joomf.12002
Kan, M. L., McHale, S. M., & Crouter, A. C. (2008). Interparental incongruence in
differential treatment of adolescent siblings: Links with marital quality. Journal of
Marriage and the Family, 70(2), 466–479. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2008.00494.x
Kennedy, D. K., & Kramer, L. (2008). Improving emotion regulation and sibling
relationship quality: The More Fun with Sisters and Brothers Program. Family Relations, 57(5), 567–578. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3729.2008.00523.x
Kim, J., McHale, S. M., Osgood, W. D., & Crouter, A. C. (2006). Longitudinal course
and family correlates of sibling relationships from childhood through adolescence.
Child Development, 77(6), 1746–1761. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2006.00971.x
Kim, J. Y., McHale, S. M., Crouter, A. C., & Osgood, D. W. (2007). Longitudinal linkages between sibling relationships and adjustment from middle childhood through adolescence. Developmental Psychology, 43(4), 960–973. doi:10.1037/
0012-1649.43.4.960
Killoren, S. E., & Roach, A. L. (2014). Sibling conversations about dating and sexuality: Sisters as confidants, sources of support, and mentors. Family Relations, 63,
232–243.
Kowal, A. K., & Blinn-Pike, L. (2004). Sibling influences on adolescents’ attitudes
toward safe sex practices. Family Relations, 53(4), 377–384. doi:10.1111/j.0197-6664.
2004.00044.x
Kramer, L., & Bank, L. (2005). Sibling relationship contributions to individual and
family well-being: Introduction to the special issue. Journal of Family Psychology,
19(4), 483–485. doi:10.1037/0893-3200.19.4.483

12

EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES

Lam, C. B., Solmeyer, A. R., & McHale, S. M. (2012). Sibling relationships and empathy across the transition to adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 41(12),
1657–1670. doi:10.1007/s10964-012-9781-8
Le, C.N. (2013). “The model minority image” Asian-nation: The landscape of Asian
America. Retrieved from http://www.asian-nation.org/model-minority.shtml
Lindell, A. K., Campione-Barr, N., & Greer, K. B. (2013). Associations between adolescent sibling conflict and relationship quality during the transition to college.
Emerging Adulthood Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/2167696813502778
Martinez, B., & Howe, N. (2013). Canadian early adolescents’ self-disclosure to siblings and best friends. International Journal of Child, Youth, and Family Studies, 2,
274–300.
McElwain, N. L., & Volling, B. L. (2005). Preschool children’s interactions with
friends and older siblings: Relationship specificity and joint contributions to
problem behavior. Journal of Family Psychology, 19(4), 486–496. doi:10.1037/08933200.19.4.486
McGuire, S., & Shanahan, L. (2010). Sibling experiences in diverse family contexts.
Child Development Perspectives, 4(2), 72–79. doi:10.1111/j.1750-8606.2010.00121.x
McHale, S. M., Crouter, A. C., & Whiteman, S. D. (2003). The family contexts of gender development in childhood and adolescence. Social Development, 12(1), 125–148.
doi:10.1111/1467-9507.00225
McHale, S. M., Bissell, J., & Kim, J. Y. (2009). Sibling relationship, family, and genetic
factors in sibling similarity in sexual risk. Journal of Family Psychology, 23(4),
562–572. doi:10.1037/a0014982
McHale, S. M., Updegraff, K. A., & Whiteman, S. D. (2012). Sibling relationships
and influences in childhood and adolescence. Journal of Marriage and Family, 74(5),
913–930. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2012.01011.x
McHale, S. M., Updegraff, K. A., Shanahan, L., Crouter, A. C., & Killoren, S. E. (2005).
Siblings’ differential treatment in Mexican American families. Journal of Marriage
and Family, 67(5), 1259–1274. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2005.00215.x
Ostrov, J. M., Crick, N. R., & Stauffacher, K. (2006). Relational aggression in sibling
and peer relationships during early childhood. Journal of Applied Developmental
Psychology, 27(3), 241–253. doi:10.1016/j.appdev.2006.02.005
Rauer, A. J., & Volling, B. L. (2007). Differential parenting and sibling jealousy: Developmental correlates of young adults’ romantic relationships. Personal Relationships,
14(4), 495–511. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6811.2007.00168.x
Recchia, H. E., & Howe, N. (2010). When do siblings compromise? Associations with
children’s descriptions of conflict issues, culpability, and emotions. Social Development, 19(4), 838–857. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9507.2009.00567
Reese-Weber, M., & Kahn, J. H. (2005). Familial predictors of sibling and romanticpartner conflict resolution: Comparing late adolescents from intact and divorced
families. Journal of Adolescence, 28(4), 479–493. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2004.
09.004
Richmond, M. K., Stocker, C. M., & Rienks, S. L. (2005). Longitudinal associations
between sibling relationship quality, parental differential treatment, and children’s adjustment. Journal of Family Psychology, 19(4), 550–559. doi:10.1037/08933200.19.4.550

Sibling Relationships and Development

13

Scharf, M., Shulman, S., & Avigad-Spitz, L. (2005). Sibling relationships in emerging adulthood and in adolescence. Journal of Adolescent Research, 20(1), 64–90.
doi:10.1177/0743558404271133
Shalash, F. A., Wood, N. D., & Parker, T. S. (2013). Our problems are your siblings’
fault: Exploring the connections between conflict styles of siblings during adolescence and later adult committed relationships. The American Journal of Family
Therapy, 41, 288–298.
Shanahan, L., McHale, S. M., Crouter, A. C., & Osgood, D. W. (2008). Linkages
between parents’ differential treatment, youth depressive symptoms, and sibling
relationships. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 70(2), 480–494. doi:10.1037/00121649.43.3.539
Shanahan, L., McHale, S. M., Osgood, D. W., & Crouter, A. C. (2007a). Conflict
with mothers and fathers from middle childhood through adolescence: Withinand between-family comparisons. Developmental Psychology, 43(3), 539–550.
doi:10.1037/0012-1649.43.3.539
Shanahan, L., McHale, S. M., Crouter, A. C., & Osgood, D. W. (2007b). Warmth
with mothers and fathers from middle childhood through adolescence: Withinand between-family comparisons. Developmental Psychology, 43(3), 551–563.
doi:10.1037/0012-1649.43.3.539
Sherman, A. M., Lansford, J. E., & Volling, B. L. (2006). Sibling relationships and best
friendships in young adulthood: Warmth, conflict, and well-being. Personal Relationships, 13(2), 151–165. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6811.2006.00110.x
Smetana, J. G. (2006). Social-cognitive domain theory: Consistencies and variations
in children’s moral and social judgments. In M. Killen, & J. G. Smetana (Eds.),
Handbook of Moral Development (pp. 119–154). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Soli, A. R., McHale, S. M., & Feinberg, M. E. (2009). Risk and protective effects of
sibling relationships among African American adolescents. Family Relations, 58(2),
578–592. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3729.2009.00576.x
Solmeyer, A. R., McHale, S. M., & Crouter, A. C. (2013). Longitudinal associations between sibling relationship qualities and risky behavior across adolescence.
Developmental Psychology Advance online publication. doi:10.1037/a0033207
Stocker, C. M., Burwell, R. A., & Briggs, M. L. (2002). Sibling conflict in middle
childhood predicts children’s adjustment in early adolescence. Journal of Family
Psychology, 16(1), 50–57. doi:10.1037/0893-3200.16.1.50
Stoneman, Z., Brody, G. H., & MacKinnon, C. E. (1986). Same-sex and cross-sex siblings: Activity choices, roles, behavior, and gender stereotypes. Sex Roles, 15(9/10),
495–511. doi:10.1007/BF00288227
Turiel, E. (2002). The culture of morality: Social development, context, and conflict.
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Updegraff, K. A., McHale, S. M., Whiteman, S. D., Thayer, S. M., & Delgado, M.
Y. (2005). Adolescent sibling relationships in Mexican-American families: Exploring the role of familism. Journal of Family Psychology, 19(4), 512–522. doi:10.1037/
0893-3200.19.4.512
Whiteman, S. D., & Christiansen, A. (2008). Processes of sibling influence in adolescence: Individual and family correlates. Family Relations, 57(1), 24–34. doi:10.1002/
cd.255

14

EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES

Whiteman, S. D., McHale, S. M., & Crouter, A. C. (2011). Family relationships
from adolescence to early adulthood: Changes in the family system following firstborns’ leaving home. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 21(2), 461–474.
doi:10.1111/j.1532-7795.2010.00683.x
Whiteman, S. D., Becerra, J. M., & Killoren, S. E. (2009). Mechanisms of sibling socialization in normative family development. In L. Kramer & K. J. Conger (Eds.),
Siblings as Aents of Socialization. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development.
126, 29–43. doi:10.1002/cd
Wray-Lake, L., Crouter, A. C., & McHale, S. M. (2010). Developmental patterns in
decision-making autonomy across middle childhood and adolescence: European
American parents’ perspectives. Child Development, 81(2), 636–651. doi:10.1111/
j.1467-8624.2009.01420.x

FURTHER READING
Updegraff, K. A., Thayer, S. M., Whiteman, S. D., Denning, D. J., & McHale, S. M.
(2005). Relational aggression in adolescents’ sibling relationships: Links to sibling and parent–adolescent relationship quality. Family Relations, 54(3), 373–385.
doi:10.1111/j.1741-3729.2005.00324.x

NICOLE CAMPIONE-BARR SHORT BIOGRAPHY
Nicole Campione-Barr is an Assistant Professor in the developmental psychology area of the Department of Psychological Sciences at the University
of Missouri. Dr. Campione-Barr’s research has been particularly focused on
adolescents’ relationships within the family, including with parents and siblings. Her research is also focused on examining family relations through
the lens of social cognitive domain theory (Turiel, 2002; Smetana, 2006), with
particular interests in the ways adolescents interpret conflict and other methods of communication within the family, as well as the process of adolescents’ growing autonomy. Dr. Campione-Barr also teaches undergraduate
and graduate courses on the social and emotional development of children
and adolescents and serves as coordinator of the graduate certificate program
in life span development and co-director of the dual degree PhD program in
child clinical and developmental psychology at the University of Missouri.
Departmental personal webpage: http://psychology.missouri.edu/
campionebarrn
Family Relationships and Adolescent Development Lab webpage: https://
sites.google.com/site/fradlabmissouri/
SARAH KILLOREN SHORT BIOGRAPHY
Sarah Killoren is an Assistant Professor in the Human Development and
Family Studies department at the University of Missouri. Dr. Killoren’s

Sibling Relationships and Development

15

research focuses on sibling and parent–child relationships, culture, and
youth adjustment with an emphasis on the roles of siblings and parents in
Latino adolescents’ normative sexuality development and positive adjustment. She teaches undergraduate and graduate level courses on family
interaction, stress and resilience in families, and youth policy.
Departmental Personal Web page: http://hdfs.missouri.edu/faculty_
killoren.html
RELATED ESSAYS
Theory of Mind (Psychology), Henry Wellman
Family Relationships and Development (Psychology), Joan E. Grusec
A Bio-Social-Cultural Approach to Early Cognitive Development: Entering
the Community of Minds (Psychology), Katherine Nelson
Bullying, Aggression, and Human Development (Psychology), Samuel E.
Ehrenreich and Marion K. Underwood
Immigration and the Changing Status of Asian Americans (Sociology),
Jennifer Lee
Kin-Directed Behavior in Primates (Anthropology), Carol M. Berman
Immigrant Sociocultural Adaptation, Identification, and Belonging (Sociology), Sarah J. Mahler
Ethnic Enclaves (Sociology), Steven J. Gold
Modeling Life Course Structure: The Triple Helix (Sociology), Tom Schuller
Social Change and Entry to Adulthood (Sociology), Jeylan T. Mortimer
The Intrinsic Dynamics of Development (Psychology), Paul van Geert and
Marijn van Dijk
The Development of Social Trust (Psychology), Vikram K. Jaswal and Marissa
B. Drell
Close Friendships among Contemporary People (Sociology), Matthew E.
Brashears and Laura Aufderheide Brashears
Peers and Adolescent Risk Taking (Psychology), Jason Chein
Positive Development among Diverse Youth (Psychology), Richard M. Lerner
et al.


Sibling Relationships
and Development
NICOLE CAMPIONE-BARR and SARAH KILLOREN

Abstract
Although research on sibling relationships has been far less frequent than research
on other close relationships such as parent–child, peer, and romantic partner
relationships, researchers have found siblings to be important for the development
of social competence as well as positive and negative adjustment. In addition, the
sibling relationship is considered the longest lasting relationship across the life
span and it serves unique developmental functions. This essay briefly describes
foundational research on the influence of dyadic structural variables, relationship
dynamics, and sibling influences on adjustment; outlines cutting-edge research
within the field on the contexts of family ethnicity, developmental period, and
important processes and influences on relationship dynamics; and discusses key
issues for future research such as expanding to under-studied ethnic groups
(e.g., Native American and Asian-American families), family structures and
contexts (e.g., adoption, single-parents by choice, gay/lesbian parents), and
mechanisms for relationship influence. Expanding the field to incorporate such
research questions will likely require sibling researchers to examine findings
from research on other important, close relationships, as well as collaboration of
researchers from a variety of psychological disciplines as well as in the fields of
sociology, neuroscience, genetics, anthropology, and human development and
family studies.

INTRODUCTION
Siblings have been considered the “forgotten relationship” (Kramer &
Bank, 2005) as they are frequently overlooked in developmental research in
comparison to parent–child and peer relationships (McHale, Updegraff, &
Whiteman, 2012). This trend seems in contrast, however, to the estimate that
80%–85% of children worldwide have a sibling. In addition, the sibling relationship is often considered the longest lasting close relationship of the life
span (Conger & Kramer, 2010). Despite this comparative lack of examination,
the findings of research on siblings have consistently shown the relationship
to have important positive and negative influences on individual adjustment
Emerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Edited by Robert Scott and Stephen Kosslyn.
© 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. ISBN 978-1-118-90077-2.

1

2

EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES

(Brody, 2004). Also, given the unique blend of complementary (care-taking)
and reciprocal (serving as confidant and playmate) behaviors inherent in the
sibling relationship (Dunn, 2002), siblings are considered to serve unique
developmental functions, while they are also important in shaping the family
context given their location within the broader family system (Cox, 2010).
FOUNDATIONAL RESEARCH
STRUCTURAL VARIABLES
Birth Order. Early research in the field of sibling relationships focused on
the influences of dyadic structural features. In terms of birth order, earlierborn siblings typically have more power in the relationship than later-born
siblings, but they also typically perform more care-taking and instructional behaviors (particularly in childhood; Buhrmester & Furman, 1990).
Later-born siblings are also typically more strongly attached to their
earlier-born siblings than the reverse (Bank, 1992) and report greater interest
and investment in the relationship than earlier-born siblings (Buhrmester &
Furman, 1990). The question of birth order influence, however, is consistently
up for debate. Although earlier research often compared birth order between
families, recent longitudinal research has been able to tease apart age and
birth order effects on family dynamics by comparing reports within families,
but at the same chronological age. So far, these methods have been utilized
to investigate differences in parent–child conflict (Shanahan, McHale,
Osgood, & Crouter, 2007a), parent–child warmth (Shanahan, McHale,
Crouter, & Osgood, 2007b), and family decision-making (Wray-Lake,
Crouter, & McHale, 2010), although they could be used to investigate sibling
relationship qualities as well.
Age and Age Difference. Aspects of age and age differences also have
influenced the sibling relationship. Overall, research suggests that sibling
relationships become more egalitarian and less affectively intense from
childhood through adolescence (Buhrmester & Furman, 1990). Recent evidence suggests that this pattern may change again in emerging adulthood
(Scharf, Shulman, & Avigad-Spitz, 2005; Whiteman, McHale, & Crouter,
2011). Research also suggests that conflict is greater among siblings who are
closer in age than those further apart (Buhrmester & Furman, 1990), likely
due to greater competition for similar resources (e.g., clothes, peers) given
similar interests and social circles. When siblings are farther apart in age,
older siblings often act as caretakers for younger siblings (Buhrmester &
Furman, 1990), particularly in the case of older sisters (Stoneman, Brody, &
MacKinnon, 1986).

Sibling Relationships and Development

3

Sex Composition. Overall, same-sex dyads tend to display greater warmth
and involvement in their relationship than mixed-sex dyads, with sister–
sister dyads displaying the highest levels of closeness and positivity
(Buhrmester & Furman, 1990), as well as intimate disclosure (Howe, AquanAssee, Bukowski, Rinaldi, & Lehoux, 2000). Mixed-sex sibling dyads appear
to offer greater opportunities for sex-typing by parents (e.g., older sisters
with younger brothers tend to do more chores than younger sisters with
older brothers; McHale, Crouter, & Whiteman, 2003). Sex composition of the
dyad is also important for siblings during parental marital transitions, such
that older sisters are more likely to be supportive/compensatory toward
younger siblings (particularly sisters) in the face of divorce and remarriage
(see McGuire & Shanahan, 2010). Although patterns of warmth, closeness,
and support based on sex-composition of the dyad appear to be rather
consistent in the literature, the ways in which relationship processes may
differ based on gender of the individual or composition of the dyad have
been inconsistent or inconsistently examined.
RELATIONSHIP DYNAMICS
Social Learning and Deidentification. Social learning is most likely to occur
when someone has similar characteristics (e.g., same-sex siblings), is
nurturing, and is viewed as powerful (e.g., greater age status and more
experienced). For example, extant research using social learning perspectives, supports similarities in involvement in risky behaviors in adolescence
(McHale, Bissell, & Kim, 2009) and the use of relational and physical aggression in childhood (Ostrov, Crick, & Stauffacher, 2006). With few exceptions,
the focus has been on older siblings serving as role models for their younger
siblings. Recently, researchers have emphasized the importance of investigating how younger siblings may influence their older siblings by taking a
“bottom-up approach” (Whiteman, Becerra, & Killoren, 2009), particularly
in adolescence and emerging adulthood.
Research has also focused on sibling differences and why and under what
conditions siblings de-identify from one another. De-identification is the process by which siblings try to differ from one another (Whiteman et al., 2009).
In contrast to earlier assumptions about deidentification processes, quantitative data show that both older and younger siblings have been shown to
de-identify from one another (Whiteman & Christiansen, 2008).
Parental Differential Treatment. Turning to parental differential treatment
(PDT), less favored siblings have reported more externalizing behaviors over
time (Richmond, Stocker, & Rienks, 2005). In addition, differential warmth

4

EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES

by mothers has been linked more strongly to firstborn’s reports of sibling
conflict; whereas, differential warmth by fathers has been linked more
strongly to second-born’s reports of sibling conflict (Shanahan, McHale,
Crouter, & Osgood, 2008). In a study of PDT in young adulthood, more
maternal differential treatment was associated with less intimacy between
siblings, but more paternal differential treatment was related to less sibling
intimacy only for the less-favored sibling and not for the favored sibling
(Jensen, Whiteman, Fingerman, & Birditt, 2013). In addition, familism
values play a protective role such that when youth report high levels of
familism values, there are fewer significant correlations between domains
of differential treatment (e.g., privileges, warmth) and youth well-being
(McHale, Updegraff, Shanahan, Crouter, & Killoren, 2005). Findings highlight the importance of including sibling characteristics, parent gender, and
cultural values when investigating the effects of PDT on sibling relationships
adjustment.
INFLUENCES ON ADJUSTMENT/DEVELOPMENT
Positive. Sibling relationships can be positive for children’s development and
overall adjustment. Older siblings show increasing abilities to teach younger
siblings and simplify tasks. Doing so also results in increases in older siblings’
own perspective taking, as well as higher reading and language achievement scores. Alternatively, younger siblings who are nurtured by their older
siblings develop greater sensitivity to others’ feelings and perspectives.
Also, when sibling relationships are characterized as both supportive and
as having some conflict, siblings are able to test their perspective-taking
skills through conflict resolution. This has been associated with greater
social skill in younger siblings’ peer relationships as well (see Brody, 2004
for review).
Negative. Despite the positive outcomes sibling relationships can provide,
negative consequences of siblings have been more emphasized in the literature. Younger siblings of older siblings with aggressive, antisocial, and/or
externalizing problems have been found to be at greater risk for developing
similar problems than children without problematic older siblings (e.g.,
Brody, Kim, Murry, & Brown, 2003). In addition, younger sisters of older
sisters who are involved in early or risky sexual behavior and/or teen pregnancy are at greater risk for being involved in these same behaviors (e.g., East
& Jacobson, 2001). Negative consequences also exist from the quality of the
sibling relationship itself. Greater conflict and negativity between siblings
is associated with greater depression, anxiety, and externalizing behaviors

Sibling Relationships and Development

5

(e.g., Criss & Shaw, 2005; Stocker, Burwell, & Briggs, 2002). However, a
recent longitudinal study by Solmeyer, McHale, and Crouter (2013) found
that the association between sibling conflict and externalizing behavior was
only evident among sisters and mixed-sex dyads. Conflict among brothers
was not associated with later risky behavior. Importantly, these associations
have been found to be the case over and above the effects of the marital
and/or parent–child relationships. Thus, these influences are not merely
due to family environment, they are specific to the sibling relationship.
CUTTING-EDGE RESEARCH
ETHNICITY
African-American and Latino Families. Although the vast majority of sibling
research has focused on European-American families, recent research
has been extended to African-American and Latino families. In AfricanAmerican families, positive sibling relationships are related to healthy
well-being and strong ethnic identity, whereas negative sibling relationships
are linked to adjustment problems. In another study, positive sibling relationships coupled with high familism values resulted in positive adjustment
for firstborns (but not second-borns; Soli, McHale, & Feinberg, 2009). Further,
sibling relationships characterized by high relational aggression and low
familism values have been associated with poor adjustment for second-born
siblings (but not for firstborns). In two-parent Mexican-American families,
researchers have found that siblings report warmth and negativity in
their relationships and high involvement with one another (Updegraff,
McHale, Whiteman, Thayer, & Delgado, 2005). As reviewed above, parents’
differential treatment of siblings in Mexican-American families also has
been examined (McHale et al., 2005). These findings illuminate the importance of including culture and sibling characteristics in studies of sibling
relationships and youth adjustment.
PROCESSES/INFLUENCES
Positive Adjustment. More recent research has also begun to emphasize the
positive qualities and roles of sibling relationships, as opposed to negative
consequences. For instance, Kim, McHale, Crouter, and Osgood (2007) found
that increases in sibling intimacy during middle childhood and adolescence
were longitudinally associated with greater peer competence for all siblings,
and lower levels of depression for girls. Also, siblings who reported greater
warmth and lower conflict (than average) in their relationship also reported
greater empathy (than average) and the association between sibling warmth

6

EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES

and empathy increased over time (Lam, Solmeyer, & McHale, 2012). Continuing to emphasize positive aspects of the sibling relationship is important
to the further development and effectiveness of family therapy, preventions,
and interventions aimed at improving the quality of sibling relationships.
Domains of Sibling Conflict. Although it is important to expand our understanding of positive features within sibling relationships, research on sibling
conflict continues to flourish, likely due to the ubiquity of it across sibling
relationships. Recent research on sibling conflict has been particularly
interested in the content of siblings’ conflicts. Campione-Barr and Smetana
(2010) identified two content domains of conflict during adolescence:
equality and fairness (e.g., whose turn it is to do chores), and invasion of
the personal domain (e.g., entering other’s room without asking). Invasion
of the personal domain issues were found to be more frequent and more
intense than issues of equality and fairness and only the former had negative
associations with relationship quality. Also, equality and fairness conflicts
were associated with later depressive symptoms, while invasion of the
personal domain conflicts conferred greater risk for anxiety and lower
self-esteem (Campione-Barr, Greer & Kruse, 2013). With younger children,
Recchia and Howe (2010) observed that most conflicts were regarding
moral issues such as fairness/rights, psychological harm, or physical
harm. Interestingly, compromise appears most likely in physical harm
disagreements with younger children (Recchia & Howe, 2010), but when
adolescent siblings discuss issues of harm, destructive conflict is more likely
utilized (Campione-Barr, Bassett Greer, Schwab, & Kruse, 2014). Taken
together, these findings suggest that what siblings fight about is important
for functioning and adjustment.
Disclosure/Communication. The sibling processes of disclosure and communication have received more attention as of late, although they likely require
further examination. In a study of early adolescent siblings, researchers
found that youth were more likely to disclose to siblings than to parents
and friends, and particularly when they had warm relationships with
siblings (Howe et al., 2000). In childhood, sibling disclosure was related
to greater warmth, rivalry and conflict with siblings (Martinez & Howe,
2013). Observational studies also have shown that successful conversation
(i.e., smoothness of communication) between 4-year-old children and
their siblings is linked to advanced socio-cognitive abilities and sibling
relationship positivity (Cutting & Dunn, 2006). In adolescence, greater
frequency of sibling conversations about sex plays a supplemental role to
parent–child conversations about sex in predicting less risky attitudes and

Sibling Relationships and Development

7

greater condom-use self-efficacy when compared to less frequent conversations (Kowal & Blinn-Pike, 2004). In an observational study focused on
adolescent girls and their older sisters, researchers found that sisters serve
as confidants, sources of support, and mentors during conversations about
dating and sexuality (Killoren & Roach, 2014).
DEVELOPMENTAL TRANSITIONS
Emerging Adulthood. Until recently, research clarifying how sibling relationships transform from adolescence to adulthood has been very rare. Given
that developmental changes in emerging adulthood (generally considered
ages 18–25) often include moving out of the natal home (for college, work,
military, etc.), this period is often the first time in which siblings are living
apart and, thus, the relationship becomes more voluntary. Scharf et al. (2005)
found that like during adolescence, conflict during emerging adulthood continues to decline, but in contrast to adolescence, warmth in the relationship
begins to increase. Whiteman et al. (2011) also found an increase in intimacy
between siblings during the first year older siblings were in college, but this
was only the case if older siblings moved out of the home they shared with
their siblings and parents. New findings also suggest that greater conflict in
adolescence, can actually lead to better quality relationships when the older
sibling leaves home for college, and that certain types of conflicts (i.e., equality and fairness issues) may be particularly helpful in transforming the power
differential between siblings (Lindell, Campione-Barr, & Greer, 2013). More
research is needed in this area to help clarify the ways in which siblings transform their relationship from adolescence to potentially lifelong supportive
relationships throughout adulthood.
ASSOCIATIONS WITH OTHER CLOSE RELATIONSHIPS
Within the Family System. Sibling relationships do not exist in isolation.
In a novel study of multiple sibling dyads (with children ranging from
early childhood to middle adolescence) within one family, researchers
found greater similarity between affection and hostility among sibling
dyads within the same family compared to sibling dyads from different
families, showing that the family climate influences sibling relationship
quality (Jenkins, Rasbash, Leckie, Gass, & Dunn, 2012). In a longitudinal
study of bidirectional effects between parental support and sibling warmth
throughout adolescence, authors found that spillover in support from
the sibling relationship to the parent–child relationship (but not from the
parent–child to sibling relationship) in early adolescence only (Derkman,
Engels, Kuntsche, van der Vorst, & Scholte, 2011). In addition, throughout

8

EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES

adolescence, maternal acceptance increased as sibling intimacy increased;
whereas, paternal conflict increased as sibling conflict increased (Kim,
McHale, Osgood, & Crouter, 2006). Regarding links to the marital relationship, incongruence in parental differential conflict with siblings was linked
to lower marital satisfaction and higher marital conflict (Kan, McHale, &
Crouter, 2008).
Associations with Peers/Friends. Sibling relationships also are linked to
friendships. In an observational study of young children’s relationships
with a friend and an older sibling, researchers found greater asymmetry in
children’s relationships with their older siblings compared to their friends
(McElwain & Volling, 2005). Importantly, they also found that positive relationship quality with one partner (either friend or sibling) was an important
buffer of poor adjustment when children had a negative relationship with
the other partner. In young adulthood, having a harmonious relationship
with a friend compensated for a poor relationship with a sibling, however,
having a harmonious relationship with a sibling did not compensate for a
poor relationship with a friend (Sherman, Lansford, & Volling, 2006).
Associations with Romantic Partners. Research linking sibling and romantic
relationships is sparse. Researchers have shown that late adolescents’
positive and negative conflict resolution behaviors with siblings predicted
conflict resolution strategies with romantic partners (Reese-Weber & Kahn,
2005; Shalash, Wood, & Parker, 2013). Further, sibling conflict has been
linked to romantic relationship intimacy, for girls, but not for boys (Doughty,
McHale, & Feinberg, 2013). In addition, PDT of siblings was linked to sibling
jealousy, which in turn, was linked to adolescents’ romantic relationships
(e.g., conflict, ambivalence, jealousy; Rauer & Volling, 2007). Sex composition has important implications for adolescents’ romantic relationships.
Specifically, older siblings in mixed-gender dyads (compared to same-gender
dyads) reported greater romantic relationship intimacy (Doughty et al., 2013).
KEY ISSUES FOR FUTURE RESEARCH
Research on sibling relationships over the past two decades has moved the
field from being predominantly concerned with similarities and differences
in siblings and the influence of dyad constellation variables to examining
important processes and mechanisms in the sibling relationship and influences on positive and negative adjustment. There are several aspects of the
sibling relationship, however, that researchers in the field have paid little
attention to or know little about. While structural variable such as birth order,

Sibling Relationships and Development

9

age difference, and gender composition have been frequently examined,
other family structures or contexts have received little attention. First, most
research has focused on a single sibling dyad within each family, regardless
of the number of children in the family. The logistics of examining more than
one sibling dyad within the same family has been a daunting task for most
researchers, but newer statistical techniques (e.g., multilevel modeling; social
network analysis) give us greater opportunities to examine multiple, interconnected relationships. Second, previous research has typically focused
on two-heterosexual-parent families with biologically related children.
Family contexts, and thus sibling relationships, have become much more
diverse in recent decades, yet research on these contexts has been scarce.
For example, beyond behavior genetics studies, little research has examined
the sibling relationship within the context of adoptive families. Similarly,
little is known about sibling relationships in families formed through
assisted reproduction methods, which may create anywhere from fully
biologically to nonbiologically related siblings. In addition, both adoptive
and nontraditional conception methods may be utilized in the contexts of
two-heterosexual-parent families, intentional single-parent families, or gayor lesbian-parent families; the latter two family structures have received very
little attention in the context of family relationships in general, and sibling
relationships in particular, to date as well (see McGuire & Shanahan, 2010).
Although more recent research has begun to examine sibling relationships
within ethnic groups besides European-American families, research is still
sparse, if at all present, on some groups. Research on sibling relationships
within Native American families could be enlightening in examining the
effects of discrimination and culture in a nonimmigrant ethnic minority
group. In addition, research within the context of Asian-American families
has been extremely rare. Given that Asian-American families are less likely
to live in poverty and have higher median income levels than all other ethnic
minority groups within the United States (Le, 2013), research on these sibling
relationships could be helpful in examining the effects of discrimination and
culture without the added confound of lower socioeconomic status as has
often been the case in research on other ethnic minority groups (see McGuire
& Shanahan, 2010).
Finally, recent research has begun to examine the processes and mechanisms by which the sibling relationship influences development (e.g., modeling, communication, conflict resolution), but this work is still relatively new
to the field. Research within other close relationships, such as parent–child,
peer, and romantic relationships, has examined a broader variety of processes by which these relationships influence development and adjustment.
Future research on siblings should aim to investigate the role of mechanisms
found within other relationships, as well as compare the ways by which those

10

EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES

processes and their magnitude of influence change over the life-course (see
Cox, 2010). Research of this nature also serves to inform sibling-focused prevention and intervention programs (see Kennedy & Kramer, 2008; Feinberg,
Sakuma, Hostetler, & McHale, 2013 for examples).
REFERENCES
Bank, S. (1992). Remembering and reinterpreting sibling bonds. In F. Boer & J. Dunn
(Eds.), Children’s sibling relationships: Developmental and clinical issues (pp. 139–150).
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Brody, G. H. (2004). Siblings’ direct and indirect contributions to child development. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 13(3), 124–126. doi:10.1111/j.09637214.2004.00289.x
Brody, G. H., Kim, S., Murry, V. M., & Brown, A. C. (2003). Longitudinal direct
and indirect pathways linking older sibling competence to the development
of younger sibling competence. Developmental Psychology, 39(3), 618–628. doi:
10.1037/0012-1649.39.3.618
Buhrmester, D., & Furman, W. (1990). Perceptions of sibling relationships during middle childhood and adolescence. Child Development, 61(5), 1387–1398.
doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.1990.tb02869.x
Campione-Barr, N., & Smetana, J. G. (2010). “Who said you could wear my sweater?”
Adolescent siblings’ conflicts and associations with relationship quality. Child
Development, 81(2), 464–471. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2009.01407.x
Campione-Barr, N., Greer, K. B., & Kruse, A. (2013). The impact of different domains
of sibling conflict on adolescent adjustment. Child Development, 84, 938–954.
doi:10.1111/cdev.12022
Campione-Barr, N., Bassett Greer, K., Schwab, K., & Kruse, A. (2014). Differing
domains of actual sibling conflict discussions and associations with conflict styles
and relationship quality. Social Development, 23, 666–683. doi:10.1111/sode.12059
Conger, K. J., & Kramer, L. (2010). Introduction to the special section: Perspectives on
sibling relationships: Advancing child development research. Child Development
Perspectives, 4(2), 69–71. doi:10.1111/j.1750-8606.2010.00120.x
Cox, M. J. (2010). Family systems and sibling relationships. Child Development Perspectives, 4(2), 95–96. doi:10.1111/j.1750-8606.2010.00124.x
Criss, M. M., & Shaw, D. S. (2005). Sibling relationships as contexts for delinquency
training in low-income families. Journal of Family Psychology, 19(4), 592–600.
doi:10.1037/0893-3200.19.4.592
Cutting, A. L., & Dunn, J. (2006). Conversations with siblings and friends: Links with
between relationship quality and social understanding. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 24(1), 73–87. doi:10.1348/026151005X7033
Derkman, M. M. S., Engels, R. C. M. E., Kuntsche, E., van der Vorst, H., &
Scholte, R. H. J. (2011). Bidirectional associations between sibling relationships and
parental support during adolescence. Journal of Youth Adolescence, 40(4), 490–501.
doi:10.1007/s10964-010-9576-8

Sibling Relationships and Development

11

Doughty, S. E., McHale, S. M., & Feinberg, M. E. (2013). Sibling experiences as predictors of romantic relationship qualities in adolescence. Journal of Family Issues.
Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/0192513X13495397
Dunn, J. (2002). Sibling relationships. In P. K. Smith & C. H. Hart (Eds.), Blackwell
Handbook of Childhood Social Development (pp. 223–237). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
East, P. L., & Jacobson, L. J. (2001). The younger siblings of teenage mothers:
A followup of their pregnancy risk. Developmental Psychology, 37(2), 254–264.
doi:10.1037//0012-1649.37.2.254
Feinberg, M. E., Sakuma, K. L., Hostetler, M., & McHale, S. M. (2013). Enhancing
sibling relationships to prevent adolescent problem behaviors: Theory, design and
feasibility of siblings are special. Evaluation and Program Planning, 36(1), 97–106.
doi:10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2012.08.003
Howe, N., Aquan-Assee, J., Bukowski, W. M., Rinaldi, C. M., & Lehoux, P. M.
(2000). Sibling self-disclosure in early adolescence. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 46(4),
653–671.
Jenkins, J., Rasbash, J., Leckie, G., Gass, K., & Dunn, J. (2012). The role of
maternal factors in sibling relationship quality: A multilevel study of multiple dyads per family. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 53(6), 622–629.
doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.2011.02484.x
Jensen, A. C., Whiteman, S. D., Fingerman, K. L., & Birditt, K. S. (2013). “Life still isn’t
fair”: Parental differential treatment of young adult siblings. Journal of Marriage and
Family, 75, 438–452. doi:10.1111/joomf.12002
Kan, M. L., McHale, S. M., & Crouter, A. C. (2008). Interparental incongruence in
differential treatment of adolescent siblings: Links with marital quality. Journal of
Marriage and the Family, 70(2), 466–479. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2008.00494.x
Kennedy, D. K., & Kramer, L. (2008). Improving emotion regulation and sibling
relationship quality: The More Fun with Sisters and Brothers Program. Family Relations, 57(5), 567–578. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3729.2008.00523.x
Kim, J., McHale, S. M., Osgood, W. D., & Crouter, A. C. (2006). Longitudinal course
and family correlates of sibling relationships from childhood through adolescence.
Child Development, 77(6), 1746–1761. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2006.00971.x
Kim, J. Y., McHale, S. M., Crouter, A. C., & Osgood, D. W. (2007). Longitudinal linkages between sibling relationships and adjustment from middle childhood through adolescence. Developmental Psychology, 43(4), 960–973. doi:10.1037/
0012-1649.43.4.960
Killoren, S. E., & Roach, A. L. (2014). Sibling conversations about dating and sexuality: Sisters as confidants, sources of support, and mentors. Family Relations, 63,
232–243.
Kowal, A. K., & Blinn-Pike, L. (2004). Sibling influences on adolescents’ attitudes
toward safe sex practices. Family Relations, 53(4), 377–384. doi:10.1111/j.0197-6664.
2004.00044.x
Kramer, L., & Bank, L. (2005). Sibling relationship contributions to individual and
family well-being: Introduction to the special issue. Journal of Family Psychology,
19(4), 483–485. doi:10.1037/0893-3200.19.4.483

12

EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES

Lam, C. B., Solmeyer, A. R., & McHale, S. M. (2012). Sibling relationships and empathy across the transition to adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 41(12),
1657–1670. doi:10.1007/s10964-012-9781-8
Le, C.N. (2013). “The model minority image” Asian-nation: The landscape of Asian
America. Retrieved from http://www.asian-nation.org/model-minority.shtml
Lindell, A. K., Campione-Barr, N., & Greer, K. B. (2013). Associations between adolescent sibling conflict and relationship quality during the transition to college.
Emerging Adulthood Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/2167696813502778
Martinez, B., & Howe, N. (2013). Canadian early adolescents’ self-disclosure to siblings and best friends. International Journal of Child, Youth, and Family Studies, 2,
274–300.
McElwain, N. L., & Volling, B. L. (2005). Preschool children’s interactions with
friends and older siblings: Relationship specificity and joint contributions to
problem behavior. Journal of Family Psychology, 19(4), 486–496. doi:10.1037/08933200.19.4.486
McGuire, S., & Shanahan, L. (2010). Sibling experiences in diverse family contexts.
Child Development Perspectives, 4(2), 72–79. doi:10.1111/j.1750-8606.2010.00121.x
McHale, S. M., Crouter, A. C., & Whiteman, S. D. (2003). The family contexts of gender development in childhood and adolescence. Social Development, 12(1), 125–148.
doi:10.1111/1467-9507.00225
McHale, S. M., Bissell, J., & Kim, J. Y. (2009). Sibling relationship, family, and genetic
factors in sibling similarity in sexual risk. Journal of Family Psychology, 23(4),
562–572. doi:10.1037/a0014982
McHale, S. M., Updegraff, K. A., & Whiteman, S. D. (2012). Sibling relationships
and influences in childhood and adolescence. Journal of Marriage and Family, 74(5),
913–930. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2012.01011.x
McHale, S. M., Updegraff, K. A., Shanahan, L., Crouter, A. C., & Killoren, S. E. (2005).
Siblings’ differential treatment in Mexican American families. Journal of Marriage
and Family, 67(5), 1259–1274. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2005.00215.x
Ostrov, J. M., Crick, N. R., & Stauffacher, K. (2006). Relational aggression in sibling
and peer relationships during early childhood. Journal of Applied Developmental
Psychology, 27(3), 241–253. doi:10.1016/j.appdev.2006.02.005
Rauer, A. J., & Volling, B. L. (2007). Differential parenting and sibling jealousy: Developmental correlates of young adults’ romantic relationships. Personal Relationships,
14(4), 495–511. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6811.2007.00168.x
Recchia, H. E., & Howe, N. (2010). When do siblings compromise? Associations with
children’s descriptions of conflict issues, culpability, and emotions. Social Development, 19(4), 838–857. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9507.2009.00567
Reese-Weber, M., & Kahn, J. H. (2005). Familial predictors of sibling and romanticpartner conflict resolution: Comparing late adolescents from intact and divorced
families. Journal of Adolescence, 28(4), 479–493. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2004.
09.004
Richmond, M. K., Stocker, C. M., & Rienks, S. L. (2005). Longitudinal associations
between sibling relationship quality, parental differential treatment, and children’s adjustment. Journal of Family Psychology, 19(4), 550–559. doi:10.1037/08933200.19.4.550

Sibling Relationships and Development

13

Scharf, M., Shulman, S., & Avigad-Spitz, L. (2005). Sibling relationships in emerging adulthood and in adolescence. Journal of Adolescent Research, 20(1), 64–90.
doi:10.1177/0743558404271133
Shalash, F. A., Wood, N. D., & Parker, T. S. (2013). Our problems are your siblings’
fault: Exploring the connections between conflict styles of siblings during adolescence and later adult committed relationships. The American Journal of Family
Therapy, 41, 288–298.
Shanahan, L., McHale, S. M., Crouter, A. C., & Osgood, D. W. (2008). Linkages
between parents’ differential treatment, youth depressive symptoms, and sibling
relationships. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 70(2), 480–494. doi:10.1037/00121649.43.3.539
Shanahan, L., McHale, S. M., Osgood, D. W., & Crouter, A. C. (2007a). Conflict
with mothers and fathers from middle childhood through adolescence: Withinand between-family comparisons. Developmental Psychology, 43(3), 539–550.
doi:10.1037/0012-1649.43.3.539
Shanahan, L., McHale, S. M., Crouter, A. C., & Osgood, D. W. (2007b). Warmth
with mothers and fathers from middle childhood through adolescence: Withinand between-family comparisons. Developmental Psychology, 43(3), 551–563.
doi:10.1037/0012-1649.43.3.539
Sherman, A. M., Lansford, J. E., & Volling, B. L. (2006). Sibling relationships and best
friendships in young adulthood: Warmth, conflict, and well-being. Personal Relationships, 13(2), 151–165. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6811.2006.00110.x
Smetana, J. G. (2006). Social-cognitive domain theory: Consistencies and variations
in children’s moral and social judgments. In M. Killen, & J. G. Smetana (Eds.),
Handbook of Moral Development (pp. 119–154). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Soli, A. R., McHale, S. M., & Feinberg, M. E. (2009). Risk and protective effects of
sibling relationships among African American adolescents. Family Relations, 58(2),
578–592. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3729.2009.00576.x
Solmeyer, A. R., McHale, S. M., & Crouter, A. C. (2013). Longitudinal associations between sibling relationship qualities and risky behavior across adolescence.
Developmental Psychology Advance online publication. doi:10.1037/a0033207
Stocker, C. M., Burwell, R. A., & Briggs, M. L. (2002). Sibling conflict in middle
childhood predicts children’s adjustment in early adolescence. Journal of Family
Psychology, 16(1), 50–57. doi:10.1037/0893-3200.16.1.50
Stoneman, Z., Brody, G. H., & MacKinnon, C. E. (1986). Same-sex and cross-sex siblings: Activity choices, roles, behavior, and gender stereotypes. Sex Roles, 15(9/10),
495–511. doi:10.1007/BF00288227
Turiel, E. (2002). The culture of morality: Social development, context, and conflict.
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Updegraff, K. A., McHale, S. M., Whiteman, S. D., Thayer, S. M., & Delgado, M.
Y. (2005). Adolescent sibling relationships in Mexican-American families: Exploring the role of familism. Journal of Family Psychology, 19(4), 512–522. doi:10.1037/
0893-3200.19.4.512
Whiteman, S. D., & Christiansen, A. (2008). Processes of sibling influence in adolescence: Individual and family correlates. Family Relations, 57(1), 24–34. doi:10.1002/
cd.255

14

EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES

Whiteman, S. D., McHale, S. M., & Crouter, A. C. (2011). Family relationships
from adolescence to early adulthood: Changes in the family system following firstborns’ leaving home. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 21(2), 461–474.
doi:10.1111/j.1532-7795.2010.00683.x
Whiteman, S. D., Becerra, J. M., & Killoren, S. E. (2009). Mechanisms of sibling socialization in normative family development. In L. Kramer & K. J. Conger (Eds.),
Siblings as Aents of Socialization. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development.
126, 29–43. doi:10.1002/cd
Wray-Lake, L., Crouter, A. C., & McHale, S. M. (2010). Developmental patterns in
decision-making autonomy across middle childhood and adolescence: European
American parents’ perspectives. Child Development, 81(2), 636–651. doi:10.1111/
j.1467-8624.2009.01420.x

FURTHER READING
Updegraff, K. A., Thayer, S. M., Whiteman, S. D., Denning, D. J., & McHale, S. M.
(2005). Relational aggression in adolescents’ sibling relationships: Links to sibling and parent–adolescent relationship quality. Family Relations, 54(3), 373–385.
doi:10.1111/j.1741-3729.2005.00324.x

NICOLE CAMPIONE-BARR SHORT BIOGRAPHY
Nicole Campione-Barr is an Assistant Professor in the developmental psychology area of the Department of Psychological Sciences at the University
of Missouri. Dr. Campione-Barr’s research has been particularly focused on
adolescents’ relationships within the family, including with parents and siblings. Her research is also focused on examining family relations through
the lens of social cognitive domain theory (Turiel, 2002; Smetana, 2006), with
particular interests in the ways adolescents interpret conflict and other methods of communication within the family, as well as the process of adolescents’ growing autonomy. Dr. Campione-Barr also teaches undergraduate
and graduate courses on the social and emotional development of children
and adolescents and serves as coordinator of the graduate certificate program
in life span development and co-director of the dual degree PhD program in
child clinical and developmental psychology at the University of Missouri.
Departmental personal webpage: http://psychology.missouri.edu/
campionebarrn
Family Relationships and Adolescent Development Lab webpage: https://
sites.google.com/site/fradlabmissouri/
SARAH KILLOREN SHORT BIOGRAPHY
Sarah Killoren is an Assistant Professor in the Human Development and
Family Studies department at the University of Missouri. Dr. Killoren’s

Sibling Relationships and Development

15

research focuses on sibling and parent–child relationships, culture, and
youth adjustment with an emphasis on the roles of siblings and parents in
Latino adolescents’ normative sexuality development and positive adjustment. She teaches undergraduate and graduate level courses on family
interaction, stress and resilience in families, and youth policy.
Departmental Personal Web page: http://hdfs.missouri.edu/faculty_
killoren.html
RELATED ESSAYS
Theory of Mind (Psychology), Henry Wellman
Family Relationships and Development (Psychology), Joan E. Grusec
A Bio-Social-Cultural Approach to Early Cognitive Development: Entering
the Community of Minds (Psychology), Katherine Nelson
Bullying, Aggression, and Human Development (Psychology), Samuel E.
Ehrenreich and Marion K. Underwood
Immigration and the Changing Status of Asian Americans (Sociology),
Jennifer Lee
Kin-Directed Behavior in Primates (Anthropology), Carol M. Berman
Immigrant Sociocultural Adaptation, Identification, and Belonging (Sociology), Sarah J. Mahler
Ethnic Enclaves (Sociology), Steven J. Gold
Modeling Life Course Structure: The Triple Helix (Sociology), Tom Schuller
Social Change and Entry to Adulthood (Sociology), Jeylan T. Mortimer
The Intrinsic Dynamics of Development (Psychology), Paul van Geert and
Marijn van Dijk
The Development of Social Trust (Psychology), Vikram K. Jaswal and Marissa
B. Drell
Close Friendships among Contemporary People (Sociology), Matthew E.
Brashears and Laura Aufderheide Brashears
Peers and Adolescent Risk Taking (Psychology), Jason Chein
Positive Development among Diverse Youth (Psychology), Richard M. Lerner
et al.



Media

Sibling Relationships and Development