A comparison of methods for defining sociometric status among children.

Terry, Robert; Coie, John D.

doi:10.1037/0012-1649.27.5.867

Cited by 240 publications

(236 citation statements)

References 27 publications

(63 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

205

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The percentages of students across the sociometric groups were as follows: popular 26.4%, rejected 16.6%, neglected 14.8%, controversial 6.1%, and average 36.1%. A relatively small number of students who belong to the controversial sociometric group (in our case 17) was also reported by other authors (e.g., Bukowski & Newcomb, 1985;Coie & Dodge, 1988;Terry & Coie, 1991) and probably reflects the fact that controversial students possess extremely mixed behavioural tendencies (Dodge, 1983) which cause a highly variable perception of them by peers.…”

Section: Social Anxiety and Social Acceptancesupporting

confidence: 56%

“…More specifically, it enables us to identify social ac-ceptance of each student in the classroom by classifying students into social status groups (Terry & Coie, 1991). The 2-dimensional system (Coie et al, 1982), which was used in our study, includes positive and negative peer nominations (the domain of joint socializing was applied in the present study).…”

Section: Social Acceptancementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Social Anxiety, Social Acceptance and Academic Self-Perceptions in High-School Students

Levpušček

Berce

2012

Drustvena istrazivanja

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Social Anxiety and Social Acceptancesupporting

confidence: 56%

Section: Social Acceptancementioning

confidence: 99%

Social Anxiety, Social Acceptance and Academic Self-Perceptions in High-School Students

Levpušček

Berce

2012

Drustvena istrazivanja

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Our review of recent work on peer relations suggests that researchers in child development have been preoccupied with continuity in social adjustment (see Parker and Asher 1987;Strayer 1989;Terry and Coie 1991). At a metatheoretical level, this reflects a number of assumptions about more or less stable psychological characteristics revealed by consistent behavioral styles in interaction with peers.…”

Section: Conclusion: Sociostructural Constraints On Individual Develomentioning

confidence: 99%

Child social ethology and peer relations: a developmental review of methodology and findings

Santos

Winegar

1999

acta ethol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

During the last three decades, developmental research has increasingly emphasized the relevance of peer relations in children's socialization. However, most studies of child development still focus upon individual differences in social status, tacitly neglecting relational constraints inherent in the ecology of the peer group. In contrast, socioethological approaches have stressed that natural groups provide a variety of distinct social roles that may have a differential impact upon individual growth and development. However, ethological analyses have often been limited to aggressive relations and group dominance structures. Comparable studies of affiliative organization have been hampered by the paucity of models for the study of cohesive social structure, only recently having begun to overcome this obstacle. A potential third dimension of preschool peer group ethology, object use, has been relatively neglected in studies of peer relations. However, recent research suggests that object use is a salient and important component of the social world of the young child. This article reviews methodology and recent findings in the area of peer relations and discusses the developmental implications of this work.

show abstract

“…This includes teacher reports of the child's behavior at school, such as the Teacher Report Form (TRF), a teacher version of the Child Behavior Checklist (Achenbach 1991); the child's own report of delinquent and aggressive behavior, such as the "Things You Have Done" (TYD) measure (Elliott, Ageton, and Huizinga 1985;Elliott, Huizinga, and Menard 1989); and peer reports of the child's behavior. The last evaluates peers' perceptions of children in their classrooms across a variety of dimensions (Coie, Dodge, and Coppotelli 1982;Asher and Dodge 1986;Terry and Coie 1991). Our analyses incorporate these measures as well as supplemental information on special education obtained from school records.…”

Section: Data Collectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Alternative Methods for Handling Attrition

Foster¹,

Fang

2004

Eval Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using data from the evaluation of the Fast Track intervention, this article illustrates three methods for handling attrition. Multiple imputation and ignorable maximum likelihood estimation produce estimates that are similar to those based on listwise-deleted data. A panel selection model that allows for selective dropout reveals that highly aggressive boys accumulate in the treatment group over time and produces a larger estimate of treatment effect. In contrast, this model produces a smaller treatment effect for girls. The article's conclusion discusses the strengths and weaknesses of the alternative approaches and outlines ways in which researchers might improve their handling of attrition. Keywordsattrition; imputation; selection models; nonresponse When asked, many program evaluators likely will name attrition as one of the greater threats to evaluation. 1 The deleterious effects are several. First, even under the best of conditions, attrition likely reduces the statistical power of the analyses of the available data (Orr 1999 ).2 In addition, attrition may compromise the external validity of the study, especially in those circumstances in which the likelihood of response is related to observed characteristics, such as race or place of residence. In those instances, the resulting parameter estimates may generalize only to a subset of the population of interest (Orr 1999). Suppose, for example, that all African American participants drop out of an evaluation. In that instance, the study's findings likely generalize only to the remaining racial and ethnic groups in the study. This example is extreme; one generally does not lose all individuals of a given race or ethnicity (or of any subgroup, unless it is very narrowly defined). Rather, attrition is often linked to a range of Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to E. Michael Foster, Pennsylvania State University, 159 Henderson Building South, University Park, PA 16802-6500. For additional information concerning Fast Track, see http://www.fasttrackproject.org. Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group members include, in alphabetical order, Karen L. Bierman, Department of Psychology, Pennsylvania State University; John D. Coie, Department of Psychology, Duke University; Kenneth A. Dodge, Center for Child and Family Policy, Duke University; E. Michael Foster, Department of Health Policy and Administration, Pennsylvania State University; Mark T. Greenberg, Department of Human Development and Family Studies, Pennsylvania State University; John E. Lochman, Department of Psychology, University of Alabama; Robert J. McMahon, Department of Psychology, University of Washington; and Ellen E. Pinderhughes. Department of Child Development, Tufts University 1 Note that this article addresses dropout from the evaluation rather than from the intervention itself. The empirical example represents an intention-to-treat analysis. 2 Power is often reduced but not in every case; power might be improved if the most extreme (and least predictable) o...

show abstract

A comparison of methods for defining sociometric status among children.

Cited by 240 publications

References 27 publications

Social Anxiety, Social Acceptance and Academic Self-Perceptions in High-School Students

Social Anxiety, Social Acceptance and Academic Self-Perceptions in High-School Students

Child social ethology and peer relations: a developmental review of methodology and findings

Alternative Methods for Handling Attrition

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About