The effects of participation rate on the internal reliability of peer nomination measures

Social Development

Volumn 22, Issue 3, 2013, Pages 609-622

  Marks, Peter E L ^a   Babcock, Ben ^b   Cillessen, Antonius H N ^c   Crick, Nicki R ^d  

^a AUSTIN COLLEGE   (United States)

^b The American Registry of Radiologic Technologists ^*  (United States)

^c RADBOUD UNIVERSITY NIJMEGEN   (Netherlands)

^d UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

Author keywords

Friendship; Methodology; Peers peer relations; Sociometric status

Indexed keywords

EID: 84880326286     PISSN: 0961205X     EISSN: 14679507     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9507.2012.00661.x     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Alain, M., & Bégin, G. (1987). Improving reliability of peer-nomination with young children. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 64, 1263-1273.
2. Babad, E. (2001). On the conception and measurement of popularity: More facts and some straight conclusions. Social Psychology of Education, 5, 3-29.
3. Becker, B. E., & Luthar, S. S. (2007). Peer-perceived admiration and social preference: Contextual correlates of positive peer regard among suburban and urban adolescents. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 17, 117-144.
4. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1943). A constant frame of reference for sociometric research. Sociometry, 6, 363-397.
5. Brown, W. (1910). Some experimental results in the correlation of mental abilities. British Journal of Psychology, 3, 296-322.
6. de Bruyn, E. H., & Cillessen, A. H. N. (2006). Popularity in early adolescence: Prosocial and antisocial subtypes. Journal of Adolescent Research, 21, 607-627.
7. Cillessen, A. H. N., & Marks, P. E. L. (2011). Conceptualizing and measuring popularity. In A. H. N. Cillessen, D. Schwartz, & L. Mayeux (Eds.), Popularity in the peer system (pp. 25-56). New York: Guilford Press.
8. Cillessen, A. H. N., & Mayeux, L. (2004). From censure to reinforcement: Developmental changes in the association between aggression and social status. Child Development, 75, 147-163.
9. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences, 2nd ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
10. Coie, J. D., Dodge, K. A., & Coppotelli, H. (1982). Dimensions and types of status: A cross-age perspective. Developmental Psychology, 18, 557-570.
11. Crick, N. R., & Ladd, G. W. (1989). Nominator attrition: Does it affect the accuracy of children's sociometric classifications? Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 35, 197-207.
12. Crocker, L., & Algina, J. (1986). Introduction to classical & modern test theory. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
13. Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52, 281-302.
14. Foster, S. L., Bell-Dolan, D., & Berler, E. S. (1986). Methodological issues in the use of sociometrics for selecting children for social skills research and training. In R. J. Prinz (Ed.), Advances in behavioral assessment of children and families (Vol. 2, pp. 227-248). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
15. Gagné, F., Bégin, J., & Talbot, L. (1993). How well do peers agree among themselves when nominating the gifted or talented? Gifted Child Quarterly, 37, 39-45.
16. Gordon, L. V. (1969). Estimating the reliability of peer ratings. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 29, 305-313.
17. Green, S. B. (2003). A coefficient alpha for test-retest data. Psychological Methods, 8, 88-101.
18. Guilford, J. P. (1936). Psychometric methods. New York: McGraw-Hill.
19. Hamilton, C., Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., & Roberts, H. (2000). Rates of classroom participation and the validity of sociometry. School Psychology Review, 29, 251-266.
20. Hsu, L. M. (1992). Correcting correlations of personality scales for spurious effects of shared items. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 27, 31-41.
21. Jiang, X. L., & Cillessen, A. H. N. (2005). Stability of continuous measures of sociometric status: A meta-analysis. Developmental Review, 25, 1-25.
22. Parkhurst, J. T., & Asher, S. R. (1992). Peer rejection in middle school: Subgroup differences in behavior, loneliness, and interpersonal concerns. Developmental Psychology, 28, 231-241.
23. Prinstein, M. J. (2007). Assessment of adolescents' preference- and reputation-based peer status using sociometric experts. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 53, 243-261.
24. Sandstrom, M. J., & Cillessen, A. H. N. (2003). Sociometric status and children's peer experiences: Use of the daily diary method. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 49, 427-452.
25. Schafer, J. S., & Graham, J. W. (2002). Missing data: Our view of the state of the art. Psychological Methods, 7, 147-177.
26. Sijtsma, K. (2009). On the use, the misuse, and the very limited usefulness of Cronbach's alpha. Psychometrika, 74, 107-120.
27. Spearman, C. C. (1910). Correlation calculated from faulty data. British Journal of Psychology, 3, 271-295.
28. Terry, R. (2000). Recent advances in measurement theory and the use of sociometric techniques. In A. H. N. Cillessen, & W. M. Bukowski (Eds.), Recent advances in the measurement of acceptence and rejection in the peer system. New directions for child and adolescent development (Vol. 88, pp. 27-53). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
29. Walcott, C. M., Upton, A., Bolen, L. M., & Brown, M. B. (2008). Associations between peer-perceived status and aggression in young adolescents. Psychology in the Schools, 45, 550-561.
30. Zakriski, A. L., Seifer, R., Sheldrick, R. C., Prinstein, M. J., Dickstein, S., & Sameroff, A. J. (1999). Child-focused versus school-focused sociometrics: A challenge for the applied researcher. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 20, 481-499.