1993
DOI: 10.1177/073428299301100302
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Teacher Ratings of Student Social Behavior as a Predictor of Special Education Status: Discriminant Validity of the School Social Behavior Scales

Abstract: In this study 58 learning-disabled (LD), 48 mentally retarded (MR), 55 emotional-behavioral disordered (EBD), and 58 regular education (RE) students in grades one through six were compared on levels of social skills and problem social behaviors. Subjects were teacher-rated on the School Social Behavior Scales (SSBS; Merrell, 1993a). LD and MR groups had similar levels of adjustment, which were significantly poorer than the RE group, but significantly better than the EBD group. SSBS scores were found to predict… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0
2

Year Published

1995
1995
2008
2008

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

4
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
0
6
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Although one might predict that social behavior differences among these groups of students would be significant, the strength of those differences found in this study (between one and one-half and one and three-fourths standard deviations) are surprisingly large, and the ability of social behavior ratings to correctly classify these students into their respective groups is surprisingly good. In fact, based on evidence from previous research, these social behavior differences are as large as would be expected in a comparison of emotionally disturbed and regular education students (e.g., Merrell, Merz, Johnson, & Ring, 1992;Merrell, Sanders, & Popinga, 1993). Because the social-behavioral characteristics of &dquo;at-risk&dquo; students without identified disabilities have not been reported in the special education, school psychology, and psychoeducational assessment literature nearly to the extent as these same characteristics of students with disabilities, this investigation provides a valuable theoretical contribution to literature.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…Although one might predict that social behavior differences among these groups of students would be significant, the strength of those differences found in this study (between one and one-half and one and three-fourths standard deviations) are surprisingly large, and the ability of social behavior ratings to correctly classify these students into their respective groups is surprisingly good. In fact, based on evidence from previous research, these social behavior differences are as large as would be expected in a comparison of emotionally disturbed and regular education students (e.g., Merrell, Merz, Johnson, & Ring, 1992;Merrell, Sanders, & Popinga, 1993). Because the social-behavioral characteristics of &dquo;at-risk&dquo; students without identified disabilities have not been reported in the special education, school psychology, and psychoeducational assessment literature nearly to the extent as these same characteristics of students with disabilities, this investigation provides a valuable theoretical contribution to literature.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…Arguably, no single group of students has benefited more from social skills research than students with emotional disturbance. Students with emotional disturbance tend to have more antisocial behaviors (Merrell, Sanders, & Popinga, 1993) and negative peer relationships (Asher & Hymel, 1981) than other populations with disabilities. Developing positive peer relationships and prosocial behaviors depends on "explicit social instruction" (Hallenbeck & Kauffman, 1995).…”
Section: Benjamin Lignugaris/kraft Utah State Universitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Validity of the scales has been demonstrated in several ways, including statistically significant convergent and discriminant validity with other behavior rating scales (Emerson, Crowley, & Merrell, 1994;Merrell, 1993b); evidence of strong sensitivity to theoretically based group differences (Merrell, 1992(Merrell, , 1993bMerrell & Gill, 1994; Merrell, Sanders, & Popinga, 1993;Robbins & Merrell, 1998); convergence with other types of assessment such as sociometric procedures, self-report instruments, and direct behavioral observation (Merrell, 1993b;Merrell, Cedeno, & Johnson, 1993); and strong classification accuracy of students from various special education and clinical groups (Merrell, 1992(Merrell, , 1993bMerrell, Sanders, & Popinga, 1993). Additionally, a parent report version of the SSBS, the Home and Community Social Behavior Scales, was recently developed (Merrell, 2002).…”
Section: Instrumentmentioning
confidence: 99%