The authors examined how certain ability-related academic self-perceptions are organized in the self-systems of 5th graders. One hundred ninety children completed questionnaires concerning their perceived ability, expectancies for the near future, expectancies for the distant future, and causal attributions to ability. Each of these 4 self-perceptions was assessed separately for math, reading, and general school. Confirmatory factor analyses revealed that children differentiated their ability-related self-perceptions in ways that are not accounted for by current models of academic self-concept. That is, in addition to differentiating the 3 domains of math, reading, and general school, children also differentiated the 4 selfperceptions within academic domains. These findings both support and extend current theories of academic self-concept.Children's ability-related self-perceptions are important predictors of their task engagement and performance. For example, children who perceive themselves as highly competent are more likely to persist when they confront difficulties and are more likely to use the abilities and strategies they possess (Harter, 1990;Pintrich & Schrauben, 1992). However, ability-related self-perceptions encompass a wide range of constructs, such as self-concept, perceived ability, and performance expectancies. Although these constructs may be highly related, there are potentially important distinctions between them that are often ignored.The purpose of the present study was to examine how certain ability-related academic self-perceptions are organized in the self-systems of late elementary school children. Specifically, this study focused on the interrelationships among four ability-related self-perceptions in the academic domains of math, reading, and general school. The four self-perceptions were (a) expectancies for the near future (i.e., expectancies for their next report card), (b) expectancies for the distant future (i.e., during the next academic year), (c) perceived ability (i.e., perceived "smartness"), and (d) causal attributions to ability (i.e., success attributions to high ability and failure attributions to factors other than low ability).The present study was influenced by the work of Marsh and colleagues on the organization of academic self-concept

College students provided ratings regarding the intensity of depressive symptoms every day for 45 consecutive days. Participants also made daily ratings of the degree to which they experienced 3 psychosocial processes that have been theoretically linked to depression: dependency, negative cognitions, and interpersonal stress. Concomitant time-series analyses revealed significant temporal covariation of each psychosocial variable, with depressive symptoms for virtually all participants. Acrosstime analyses also revealed that elevations in interpersonal stress and feelings of dependency preceded, by 1 day, the onset of periods of intense depression, and that elevations in all 3 psychosocial variables were apparent 1 to 2 days after such episodes had ended. The findings suggest that a "daily experiences methodology" may be useful in identifying short-term antecedents and residuals of symptomatic states.

This paper presents a case study of an individual exhibiting somatoform disorder where data regarding symptoms and several psychosocial variables were collected on a daily basis for 1 89 months. Our aims are to provide a detailed illustration of concomitant time series analyses (CTSA) with these data, and to discuss possible applications of these procedures in the study of psychopathology. It appears that many clinical researchers are relatively untrained in time series methodologies (Aiken, West, Sechrest, & Reno, 1990), and hence this presentation may be of utility to those unfamiliar with the analysis of time-intensive longitudinal data.

No abstract

Fifth graders' responses to a questionnaire assessing causal attributions, academic expectancies, and self-evaluations of smartness varied as a function of whether the questionnaire was administered individually or in a group. Students with low grade point averages (GPAs) were significantly less likely to attribute their failures to external factors and significantly more likely to attribute their failures to insufficient ability in the individual condition than in the group condition. Students with high GPAs did not give different attributions in the two conditions. Administration condition also influenced children's academic expectancies. Children expressed lower and less accurate grade predictions in the individual condition than in the group condition. Because prior studies vary in terms of questionnaire administration procedures, our results provide a plausible explanation for some inconsistent findings across studies. This article is based on research conducted in partial fulfillment of master's degree requirements by Sandra R. Stader.