Developmental Trajectories of Rejection Sensitivity: A Five-Year Longitudinal Study of Peer Exclusion and Internalizing Symptoms

Abstract

We followed 247 children from age 8 to age 13 across five waves of data collection examining trajectories of rejection sensitivity and associations with peer exclusion experiences and internalizing symptoms. Latent growth curve models identified three distinct trajectory groups: chronically high, increasing, and normative. Children with increasing rejection sensitivity showed steeper increases in depressive symptoms over time, with effects mediated by peer victimization.

Introduction

Rejection sensitivity — the tendency to anxiously expect, readily perceive, and overreact to rejection — has emerged as an important construct in developmental psychopathology. Empirical work in adolescents has shown that heightened rejection sensitivity is associated with social difficulties and internalizing symptoms, though the temporal dynamics of this relationship remain understudied. In particular, little research has examined whether rejection sensitivity changes over time as a function of actual peer experiences, or whether individual differences in this propensity remain stable across development. Understanding the trajectories of rejection sensitivity and their consequences for adjustment may inform prevention and intervention efforts.

We conducted a five-year longitudinal study beginning in middle childhood to examine developmental trajectories of rejection sensitivity and their associations with peer experiences and psychological adjustment. We hypothesized that children would show heterogeneity in trajectories, with some showing stable levels and others showing increases in rejection sensitivity over time. Furthermore, we predicted that children whose rejection sensitivity increased over time would show steeper increases in internalizing symptoms, and that peer victimization would partially mediate this relationship.

Method

Participants

Participants were 247 children (126 girls, 121 boys, Mage = 8.3 years, SD = 0.6) recruited from six public schools in an urban school district. The sample was demographically diverse: 31% European Canadian, 28% East Asian, 22% South Asian, 12% African Canadian, 7% other. Attrition across five waves was 12% (N = 218 retained through Wave 5), with no differential attrition by baseline rejection sensitivity, F(1, 245) = 1.23, ns. Parental informed consent and child assent were obtained; the study was approved by the institutional review board.

Procedure

Participants completed annual assessments across five consecutive years (Waves 1–5), with data collection occurring in the spring of each academic year. At each wave, children completed a computerized rejection sensitivity measure adapted from the Rejection Sensitivity Questionnaire (Downey & Feldman, 1996), modified for child participants and peer contexts. Items presented hypothetical rejection scenarios (e.g., "Imagine you sit down to join a group of kids playing a game at recess") and asked children to rate their anxiety about rejection (0–4 scale). Peer victimization was assessed via the Social Experiences Questionnaire (Crick & Grotpeter, 1996), administered annually. Internalizing symptoms were measured using the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL; Achenbach & Rescorla, 2001), completed by parents at each wave. Parent education and family income were assessed at baseline via questionnaire.

Results

Latent growth curve models identified three distinct trajectory groups using mixture modeling (BIC = 2847). The normative group (n = 164, 67%) showed low baseline rejection sensitivity (M = 1.2, SD = 0.4) with minimal change over time (linear slope M = 0.03, SE = 0.02). The chronically high group (n = 52, 21%) showed elevated baseline rejection sensitivity (M = 2.8, SD = 0.3) that remained stable (slope M = 0.01, SE = 0.02). The increasing group (n = 31, 13%) showed moderate baseline levels (M = 1.6, SD = 0.3) with significant linear increases (slope M = 0.21, SE = 0.04, 95% CI [0.13, 0.29]). Trajectory group membership did not differ by gender, χ²(2, N = 247) = 2.14, ns, or family income, F(2, 244) = 0.67, ns.

Children in the increasing trajectory group showed steeper increases in internalizing symptoms (CBCL T-score change from Wave 1 to Wave 5: M = 8.2, SE = 1.5) compared to the normative group (M = 1.3, SE = 0.8), F(1, 193) = 18.4, p < .001, d = 1.12. The chronically high group also showed elevated symptom increases (M = 6.1, SE = 1.2), intermediate between the other groups. Peer victimization increased significantly more in the increasing group (Wave 1–5 difference: M = 1.4, SE = 0.2, on a 0–4 scale) compared to the normative group (M = 0.2, SE = 0.1), t(193) = 5.24, p < .001. A multilevel mediation model indicated that peer victimization partially mediated the relationship between increasing rejection sensitivity trajectory and internalizing symptoms (indirect effect b = 0.24, SE = 0.08, 95% CI [0.10, 0.41]).

Discussion

These findings provide longitudinal evidence that rejection sensitivity is not uniformly stable across childhood development, but rather shows heterogeneous trajectories with meaningful implications for emotional adjustment. The identification of a group whose rejection sensitivity increases across the early-to-middle childhood transition aligns with theories proposing that peer experiences may shape anxiety dispositions. The mediation by peer victimization suggests a likely mechanism: heightened expectation of rejection may lead to social behaviors (e.g., withdrawn behavior, hostile attributions) that increase actual peer rejection experiences, which in turn elevate internalizing symptoms.

Limitations include reliance on parent reports for internalizing symptoms; future work should incorporate child self-report and teacher observations. Additionally, the mechanism through which rejection sensitivity affects peer relationships requires investigation via observational or experience-sampling methods to characterize the actual behavioral correlates. The relatively low socioeconomic diversity in the sample may limit generalizability. Despite these limitations, the results highlight the importance of identifying children showing emerging increases in rejection sensitivity for early intervention, particularly given the documented links to later anxiety and depression.

References

Achenbach, T. M., & Rescorla, L. A. (2001). Manual for the ASEBA school-age forms and profiles. University of Vermont.
Crick, N. R., & Grotpeter, J. K. (1996). Children's treatment by peers: Victims of relational and overt aggression. Development and Psychopathology, 8(2), 367–380.
Downey, G., & Feldman, S. I. (1996). Implications of rejection sensitivity for intimate relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(6), 1327–1343.
Rubin, K. H., Bukowski, W. M., & Parker, J. G. (2006). Peer interactions, relationships, and groups. In N. Eisenberg, W. Damon, & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Social, emotional, and personality development (6th ed., Vol. 3, pp. 571–645). Wiley.
Vitaro, F., Boivin, M., & Bukowski, W. M. (2009). The role of friendship in child and adolescent psychosocial development. Advances in Child Development and Behavior, 37, 51–94.
Wentzel, K. R., & Asher, S. R. (1995). The academic lives of neglected, rejected, popular, and controversial children. Child Development, 66(3), 754–763.