Yvonne H. M. van den Berg

Computerized sociometric and peer assessment: An empirical and practical evaluation

A systematic analysis and comparison was conducted of the psychometric properties of standard (paper-and-pencil) and computerized sociometry and peer assessments. The standard assessment took place with 817 children (47.5% boys) in 34 fifth- and sixth-grade classrooms of 28 elementary schools. The computerized assessment took place with 893 children (52.3% boys) in 35 fifth- and sixth-grade classrooms of 30 elementary schools. The computerized method yielded more nominations given and received and fewer missing data. Correlations among behavioural and relational constructs followed similar patterns in both methods, but were generally stronger in the computerized method. Voter agreement was the same in both methods. The computerized method resulted in higher internal consistency of sociometric and peer assessment constructs. The methods were validated by predicting preference and popularity from behavioural and relational characteristics. The two methods yielded the same pattern of results. The advantages and disadvantages of both assessment methods were discussed.

Popularity differentially predicts reactive and proactive aggression in early adolescence

Previous research has indicated that peer popularity is associated with aggressive behavior. However, it is not yet clear whether popularity is uniquely related to different functions of aggression. In this study, we examined associations between peer-perceived popularity, and reactive and proactive aggression using a cross-sectional and a longitudinal design. Yearly sociometric measures of popularity, and reactive and proactive aggression were gathered from 266 seventh and eight grade adolescents (Mage grade 7 = 12.80, SDage  = .40). Popularity was positively correlated with proactive aggression and negatively correlated with reactive aggression, both concurrently as over time. Curvilinear trends indicated that a significant minority of low versus high popular adolescents showed both functions of aggression. Somewhat stronger effects of popularity on proactive aggression were found for boys than girls. Stably popular adolescents showed the highest levels of proactive aggression, whereas stably unpopular youth showed the highest levels of reactive aggression. Implications and directions for future research are discussed.

Peer status and classroom seating arrangements: A social relations analysis

The current studies addressed the associations of classroom seating arrangements with peer status using the social relations model. Study 1 examined whether physical distance between classmates was associated with likeability and popularity. Participants were 336 children from 14 fifth- and sixth-grade classrooms (Mage=11.36 years, 47.3% boys). Children who sat closer to the center of the classroom were liked more. Moreover, classmates who sat closer together liked each other more and perceived each other as more popular. Study 2 examined whether childrens likeability and popularity judgments were also reflected in the way they positioned themselves relative to their peers when they could arrange their classroom themselves. Participants were 158 children from 6 fifth- and sixth-grade classrooms (Mage=11.64 years, 50.5% boys). Participants placed liked and popular peers closer to themselves than disliked and unpopular peers. If children placed a classmate closer to themselves, they perceived that peer as better liked and more popular and were perceived as better liked and more popular in return. Implications for further research on classroom seating arrangements and peer relationships are discussed.

Identifying Subtypes of Peer Status by Combining Popularity and Preference: A Cohort-Sequential Approach

The purpose of this study was to identify and validate subtypes of peer status by integrating preference and popularity into a single framework. Person-oriented analyses were performed among 3,630 children and adolescents of different cohorts in primary and secondary education. In the young age groups (Grade 3/4 to Grade 7), three clusters were found: popular-liked, average, and unpopular-disliked. In the older age group (Grade 8), four clusters were found: popular, liked, average, and unpopular-disliked. Thus, participants differentiated liked peers from popular peers at the age of 14, but not earlier. Distinct behavioral profiles were found for each subtype. Cohort-sequential analyses demonstrated high stability of cluster membership, especially among the high-status groups. Developmental implications and the importance of school transitions are discussed.

Aggression, hostile attributions, status, and gender: A continued quest

This study had two goals. The first goal was to examine the association between two indicators of negative bias in children and their associations with childrens aggression. The second goal was to examine a possible dual role of social status, operationalized as popularity, as a concurrent correlate of negative bias and as a moderator of the effect of negative bias on childrens aggression. The roles of gender and type of aggression were also examined. Participants were 366 fifth- and sixth-grade children (49% girls; M age = 11.07 years, SD = 0.85 year) who completed peer- and self-report measures in their classrooms. The results showed that the two indicators of negative bias were associated with each other and with childrens aggression. Popularity was weakly associated with negative bias. However, popularity did moderate the association of hostile attributions with aggression. The associations of both measures of negative bias with aggression also varied by gender, with stronger associations for boys than for girls. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

Implications of systematic nominator missingness for peer nomination data

Missing data are a persistent problem in psychological research. Peer nomination data present a unique missing data problem, because a nominator’s nonparticipation results in missing data for other individuals in the study. This study examined the range of effects of systematic nonparticipation on the correlations between peer nomination data when nominators with various levels of popularity and social preference are missing. Results showed that, compared to completely random nominator missingness, systematic missingness of raters based on popularity had a significant impact on the correlations between various peer nomination variables. Systematic missingness based on social preference had a smaller impact. These results demonstrate varying (and potentially large) effects of systematically missing nominators on studies using nomination data. It is important that researchers using peer nomination data explore whether nominators are missing in any sort of systematic way and include these results as part of each study. Future research into the nature of systematic nominator missingness could make it possible to use advanced methodologies, such as multiple imputation, in an attempt to minimize the issues associated with systematic missingness.

Effects of including versus excluding nonparticipants as potential nominees in peer nomination measures

In peer nomination research, individuals who do not provide nominations (nonparticipants) are often included on rosters as potential nominees. This can present ethical questions regarding informed consent, but psychometric consequences of excluding nonparticipants from rosters are unknown. In this investigation, Study 1 simulated both random and systematic missingness with a sample of 1,630 Dutch adolescents, comparing the reliability and correlation matrices of nomination measures when nonparticipants were included and excluded as nominees. Study 2 began with a two-school sample that already included systematic nonparticipation (≈19% missingness among 599 7th grade nominees) and examined how findings would differ if students who had not provided nominations were excluded as nominees. Results showed that the impact of including versus excluding nonparticipants as nominees may vary depending on the type of missingness (Study 1) or in different peer groups (Study 2). Both studies demonstrated that the choice of including versus excluding nonparticipants can affect reliability and intercorrelations in peer nomination data, and provide some evidence that excluding nonparticipants as nominees may compromise peer nomination data quality.

Computer‐Based Methods for Collecting Peer Nomination Data: Utility, Practice, and Empirical Support

New technologies have led to several major advances in psychological research over the past few decades. Peer nomination research is no exception. Thanks to these technological innovations, computerized data collection is becoming more common in peer nomination research. However, computer-based assessment is more than simply programming the questionnaire and asking respondents to fill it in on computers. In this chapter the advantages and challenges of computer-based assessments are discussed. In addition, a list of practical recommendations and considerations is provided to inform researchers on how computer-based methods can be applied to their own research. Although the focus is on the collection of peer nomination data in particular, many of the requirements, considerations, and implications are also relevant for those who consider the use of other sociometric assessment methods (e.g., paired comparisons, peer ratings, peer rankings) or computer-based assessments in general.