Social problem-solving skills of aggressive-rejected children are usually assessed through hypothetical situations in a neutral setting where little or no reference is made to the emotional aspects. The aim of this study was to evaluate the social problem-solving skills of 57 aggressive-rejected (Group 1) and 57 prosocial-popular (Group 2) children of both sexes in Grades 1 and 2 by using as problem situations what happened in standardized provocations involving them with a trained peer-accomplice. An individual interview, aimed at disclosing emotions felt during the provocations, intentions attributed to the accomplice and possible reactions if confronted again with the same provocations, was conducted immediately after the session for half the subjects of each group. The other subjects were interviewed after a 10-min. delay. Analysis showed that Group 1 subjects would be less verbally assertive than Group 2 subjects if confronted again with the same provocations. The first graders from Group 1 also attributed fewer positive intents to the author of the provocations than Group 2 classmates. Second graders of both groups attributed more negative and fewer positive intents to the peer-accomplice when the interview immediately followed the provocations than when it was delayed. Similarly, second grade boys interviewed right away were more prone to use physical and verbal retaliation if the provocations were to happen again. These results highlight the influence of emotions on the social reasoning skills of aggressive-rejected and nonaggressive-nonrejected children.