Running head: Peer relations in school and positive and...

Running head: Peer relations in school and positive and negative affect

The importance of social learning environment factors for

affective well-being among students.

Ella Maria Cosmovici Idsoe

University of Stavanger, Norway

Submitted to Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties

Correspondence should be addressed to: Ella Cosmovici Idsøe, Norwegian Centre for

Learning Environment and Behavioural Research in Education, University of Stavanger, N-

4036 Stavanger, NORWAY.

Telephone +47 51 83 29 00, e-mail: [email protected]

1


Abstract

We investigated whether perceived inclusion and exclusion with peers at school, as well as

self-reported bullying exposure, affected positive and negative affect among 1161 students

from grades five through seven. Positive affect was significantly, but only weakly affected by

perceived exclusion and inclusion. Negative affect was not related to perceived inclusion,

however, both perceived exclusion and self-reported bullying exposure gave effects on

negative affect. Our research points to the need of creating a learning environment that

promotes inclusion and caring and supportive interpersonal relationships. This will probably

increase student functioning.

Keywords: peer relations, positive affect, negative affect, victims of bullying,

2


The importance of social learning environment factors for

affective well-being among students

In a report from the Norwegian Institute of Public Health (2010) it is estimated that 15-20

% of Norwegian youngsters suffer from depression and anxiety which is problematic for their

academic achievement. Both nationally and internationally there are efforts in trying to

understand which learning environment factors can contribute to promoting school mental

health (Gustafsson et al., 2010; Kidger et al., 2012; Stewart, 2008). Even though many factors

may contribute to these children’s problems, research indicates that the school context and

climate can influence student’s emotional and affective well-being (Husu & Tiri, 2007;

Rasmussen, 2004). Some authors (Nansel et al., 2001; Pellegrini & Long, 2002),

characterize early adolescence as being a critical period for the development of the social self

and maybe this is why disturbed relationships can have a strong impact on children’s affect at

this age. Supportive relations with parents, teachers, and peers have been shown to act as a

stress buffer for children at this age and contribute to children’s positive socio-emotional

adjustment and development, while disturbed relationships lead to the opposite effect

(Rueger, Malecki, Demaray, 2008). It has also been suggested that this is an ideal period to

intervene in a preventive way to facilitate a healthy psychosocial development later in

adolescence (Colarossi & Eccles, 2003).

We believe that there is a need for a more complete understanding of the many forms of

peer relationships that can evolve in the school context, and their potential effects on

children’s emotional well-being and long term adjustment. This could be essential for the

development of empirically based, effective intervention programs. Relatively few studies

have investigated peer related factors in the learning environment that can lead to positive or

negative affect in early adolescents. Our aim was to investigate how perceptions of being

included and excluded by peers in school affect positive and negative affect among students.

3


Positive and negative affect

The affect concept represents the spectrum of different feeling states and attitudes which

is reflected in two broad dimensions – positive and negative affect (Zevon and Tellegen,

1982; Watson, Clark and Tellegen, 1988). Affective well-being can be equated with the

amount of time a person experiences positive versus negative affect (Diener , 2009 ). Positive

affect comprises the whole range of positive emotions such as joy, excitement, enthusiasm,

prosocial behaviour etc., while the negative affect is defined by negative emotions such as

fear/anxiety, sadness/depression, anger, guilt etc. (Watson & Clark, 1984, 1997; Laurent et al,

1999; Snyder & Lopez, 2002). A study developed by Laurent and associates (1999) reports

that positive affect correlates negatively with measures of depression and anxiety while

negative affect correlated positively with depression and anxiety measures. The two broad

constructs of positive and negative affect are mutually exclusive (Martin and Huebner, 2007,

Diener, 2009).

Student’s emotions affect their thinking and behaviour. Previous studies have shown that

positive affect promotes general well-being and good mental health (Ladd, 2005; Beran,

2008). Recent research suggests connections between positive affect and academic

achievement. According to Pekrun et al. (2002), positive affect can influence students’

motivation to learn and the use of flexible learning strategies and selfregulation, while

negative affect has the opposite effect on achievement. Researchers like Folkman (2008) and

Fredrikson et al., (2003) emphasize that positive affect also plays an important role in coping

with stressful situations. It is thereby reasonable to believe that factors in the learning

environment may have importance for how students think and feel, which again have

importance for their achievement.

Social Support and affect

Social relationships have a strong influence on psychological growth and are central to

how children adapt to the opportunities and challenges of the school environment. It is well 4


known that relationships are important and complex constellations that can offer affirmation

and support but also can create stress and difficulties, or both sides can manifest in the same

time (Berscheid & Reis, 1998; Collins & Laursen, 1999).

A stable network of social support may provide continuous feelings of security, positive

affect, self-efficacy and security which can act as a buffer when stressors arise (Davidson &

Demaray, 2007). In a meta-analysis of 286 studies, the quantity and quality of contacts with

friends was a strong predictor of well-being, even stronger than that of contacts with family

members (Pinquart & Sorensen, 2000).

By contrary, inadequate social relationships in the shape of social exclusion or

dysfunctional relationships can contribute to psychological problems such as depression

(Peplau & Perlman, 1982; Seligman, 1991), social phobia or anxiety (Kashdan & Roberts,

2004). Even though social support can have many dimensions including

instrumental/material assistance, cognitive aspects and an emotional or affective dimension

(Kahn and Antonucci, 1980), in our present study we are especially interested in the

emotional-affective aspects.

Social relationship with parents

Parents are primary sources of social support for children and they are important for

children’s access to other sources of social support (e.g. siblings, teachers, friends, community

etc.) as well as their psychological well-being (Thompson, & Ontai, 2000). There have been

conducted many studies showing that the quality of parent- child relationship is a strong

predictor of emotional experiences for children which in turn affects especially children’s

peer relationships ( see Parke & Ladd, 1992, for review). A good quality parent-child

relationship have been found to contribute to social skills development and positive peer

relations (Cassidy, Parke, Butkovsky, & Braungart, 1992). By contrary, an absent or negative

parent-child relationship may place children under additional stress which can increase the

problems with peer relationships and generate higher negative affect (Hart, Olsen, Robinson 5


& Manleco, 1997). These studies show that the quality of parent-child relationship is a strong

predictor of emotional experiences for children. We included in our study the parental support

variable in order to see whether the school (peer) related predictors explain variance in

addition to parental support.

Social relationships with peers at school

School is an important social arena where young children enter/involve in increasingly

complex relationships with peers. In middle childhood, pursuit of social goals becomes an

integral aspect of classroom life. In that context, the search for peer approval is probably

important for most, if not all, pupils (Birch & Ladd, 1996). Wenzel (1989) found that students

were more concerned with social than with learning goals.

Previous research suggest that most of the students experience positive peer relationships

which are essential for healthy psychosocial development and emotional well-being (Ladd,

2005; Beran, 2008). Children that have positive peer relationships are happier; they

experience emotional support and inclusion which acts like a buffer for negative emotional

states (Asher, Parkhurst, Hymel, & Williams, 1990). We expect that positive relationships

with peers would lead to positive affect.

Emotional consequences of feeling socially excluded

Having previously presented the beneficial aspects of positive peer relationships, we

wonder how children’s affective well-being is compromised by difficulties with peer

relations. Numerous longitudinal studies have shown that children and adolescents identified

with problematic peer relations are at risk for later adjustment problems with respect to their

social and emotional functioning (see Bierman, 2004, for review). Most at risk children for

developing negative affect and later mental health disorders are the ones that have

problematic peer relationships, respectively that are rejected by peers and children that are

victims of peer bullying (Ladd, 2006; Hoglund, Lalonde & Leadbeater, 2008, Farrington,

1993). 6


One of the important variables that we included in our study refers to children’s subjective

experience of their peer rejection. Rejected children are the ones who are actively disliked and

excluded by their peers (Kupersmidt, DeRosier, 2005). They experience emotional difficulties

such as loneliness (Asher et al., 1990) and social alienation (Baumeister & Leary, 1995). The

emotional consequences of feeling socially excluded can lead to further mental health

problems (Kupersmidt, Coie, & Dodge, 1990). We expected that feeling excluded would lead

to negative affect.

Emotional consequences for victims of bullying

Peer victimization is a pervasive problem in schools today. The prevalence rates vary, but

researchers estimate that between 8% and 20% of school aged children are victims of bullying

(Perry, Kusel, & Perry, 1988; Nansel, Overpeck, Pilla, Raun, Simons-Morton, & Scheidt,

2001).

Most researchers define bullying (or peer victimization) as a negative or hurtful behaviour

which is typically repeated over time (Olweus, 1993). It is a subset of aggressive behaviour in

which there is an imbalance of power with less powerful person being repeatedly or unfairly

attacked (Smith, Pepler, & Rigby, 2004).

The students that have problematic peer relationships and become victims of school

bullying may experience several negative psychological effects including poor self-esteem

(Duncan, 1999; Egan & Perry, 1998), unhappiness and school avoidance (Hymel, Comfort,

Schonert-Reichl & McDougall, 1996; Parker & Asher, 1987), negative attitudes and feelings

due to fear and vulnerability (Kochenderfer, & Ladd, 1996) increased symptoms of

depression (Olweus, 1993; Slee, 1995), loneliness and acute anxiety (Juvonen & Graham,

2001; Sharp, 1995) and suicide (Head, 1996). These children are at most risk for both

internalizing and externalizing behaviour problems (Craig, 1998). We expected exposure to

bullying would lead to negative affect.

7


Method

Sample and procedure

“School Environment” was a survey conducted in Norway among pupils in grades five

through nine. The instrument used was a pupil questionnaire, and the overall purpose of the

study was to document the extent of psychosocial problems among pupils, as well as to

investigate possible correlates in school and family that might be of etiological importance. 80

schools were randomly selected from 28 municipalities in Norway, and the sample of

municipalities and schools are representative according to the Norwegian Central Bureau of

Statistics' standard of municipality classification (school size in Norway is closely related to

the degree of urbanization). The investigation was the fifth national survey that the centre

conducted since 1995. The data we used are based on the grades five, six and seven. A total of

1161 pupils, 569 boys and 592 girls, took part in the investigation.

Consent was obtained from the local school authorities, and the schools. According to

the standards prescribed by the Norwegian Data Inspectorate, written informed consent is

needed from the parents of students younger than 15 years of age. Therefore, the parents were

asked to give their consent in writing after receiving a written description of the project. The

main teacher of the class collected the answers, and administered the study according to

written instructions. The teacher was instructed to start by telling the pupils not to write their

names on the sheet, and by informing them that the completed questionnaires would be placed

in an envelope, which would be sealed and taken to the project administration by the teacher

and a pupil. No one at school would see the answers. The teacher was to ensure that the pupils

worked alone, and was to read the questions one by one to the class. The school was asked to

conduct the study in all classes at the same time. The questionnaires were returned by mail.

The response rate for pupils in classes that took part was 82%.

8


Instruments

The most common approach in assessing the features of children’s peer relationships

is through children’s own perceptions - reports (Furman, 1996).

Bullying. The scale used to measure bullying was developed at the Centre for

Behavioural Research (Roland & Idsoe, 2001). A standard written definition of bullying was

included in the questionnaire, and was administered to the pupils before they rated

themselves. This definition states that “We call it bullying or hassling when one or more

students (together) are unfriendly or unpleasant to a student that cannot defend him-/herself

easily. This could include kicking, hitting or shoving the student. It is also bullying when

students are teased or when students are shut out from the others”. We see that this

operationalisation reflects the conceptual definition. The instrument comprised four items.

The first item was a general question about bullying others, not specifying the particular type

of bullying, but rather measuring how often the pupils were bullied in general. The three

remaining questions discriminated between bullying by physical means (like kicking, hitting,

shoving), verbal means (like teasing or name-calling), and isolation (like shutting others out).

The subjects reported the frequency of being bullied into four ordinal categories. The scoring

system was 1 (“never”), 2 (“now and then”), 3 (“weekly”) and 4 (“daily”). Internal

consistency proved satisfactory (Cronbach's alpha = .86).

Positive and Negative Affect Scale-Children. The Positive and Negative Affect Scale-

Children (PANAS-C; Laurent et al.,1999) comprises two subscales: one measures PA and the

other one NA. The PA scale has 12 items and the NA scale has 15 items. Ratings are made on

a 5-point scale that ranges from not at all to extremely. Examples of PA include happy, strong

and excited. NA include nervous, scared and guilty. In our study, students rated the frequency

of their moods over the past few weeks. The validity and reliability of the PANAS-C Scale

was reported by Laurent and associates (1999) in a study where PA and NA showed an

intercorrelation of -.16, internal consistency reliability was.89 for PA and .92 for NA and PA 9


correlated negatively with measures of depression and anxiety while NA correlated positively

with depression and anxiety measures.

In this study, the scale was adapted and significant loading was on 2 factors. We used

12 items, 6 from PA and 6 from NA. NA alpha = .92, PA = .90.

Parent support was measured with a modified version of one of the two dimensions of

“The Parental Bonding Instrument” (Parker, Tupling, & Brown, 1979). This instrument

measures two dimensions of what is often referred to as “Parents’ upbringing style”. The first

dimension is called “Parental Care” or “Emotional support from parents” (Sample items: “My

parents have given me love”, “My parents have understood my problems and worries”). This

measure is supposed to tap the emotional support from the caregivers understood as their

contribution to the establishment of the connection between the child and the caregivers. The

original version of Parker, Tupling, and Brown (1979) measures the children’s view of mother

and father separately. However, because of lack of space in the questionnaire, we used an

abbreviated version where the scales for mother and father were merged into one (Wichstrøm,

Skogen, & Øia, 1996). The questions contained four ordinal categories ranging from “strongly

agree” to “strongly disagree”. These categories were rated from 1 to 4. Cronbach’s alpha

revealed that the internal consistency was satisfactory (alpha = .65). An introductory text

informed the students that, if they lived with only one of their parents, or with other adults as

well, they could choose who to think of as their parent(s).

Feeling included. Perceived inclusion with friends at school was assessed by a scale

developed by Bru et. al. (1998). The four items had four ordinal categories: “disagree

strongly”, “disagree a little”, “agree a little” and “agree very much”. Bru et. al. (1998) found

good factorial validity of the scale, including discriminant and concordant validity in

accordance with conceptual expectations with other relevant measures. Cronbach’s alpha for

our investigation was good (alpha = .79).

10


Feeling excluded. Perceived exclusion from friends was measured with three items

developed for our study. Item content was “I can feel left out in my class”, “Sometimes it is

difficult for me to find someone to cooperate with”, “It happens that I feel lonely at school”.

The items were measured into four categories ranging from “strongly agree” to “strongly

disagree”. The factor solution is reported in the result section. Cronbach’s alpha was very

good (alpha = .85).

Gender and age. We tested factorial invariance across gender. Furthermore, as we

found no significant moderating effect of gender on the structural parameters, gender was

included as a control variable only. Age was also included as a control variable.

Ethical considerations

This research project was carried out in accordance with ethical demands by

incorporating advice and rules established by national authorities. Information and openness

about the investigation was important. It was also important to establish trust between

informants and researchers so no-one was afraid that data would be misused in any way. The

procedures used to secure this were: to secure anonymity, to gather the necessary consents

and permissions, to give relevant information to the participants, as well as letting the

informants know that participation was on a voluntary basis. Feedback reports about the

results were offered to all the schools. Ethical guidelines have implications for gathering,

interpretation and presentation of the data (British Psychological Society, 1991).

Data Analyses

We used SPSS to calculate Cronbach’s alphas for the scales, as well as for descriptive

analyses, GLM, Pearson’s r and multiple regression analyses.

Results

Descriptive analyses

GLM analyses revealed no multivariate effect of age on the study variables (F = 1.64,

df = 12/2214, P > 0.05). However, gender gave a multivariate effect (F = 6.17, df = 6/1106, P 11


< 0.01), so the descriptive information is presented for boys and girls separately as reported in

Table 1.

Insert Table 1 about here

As can be seen from Table 1, girls reported significantly higher perceptions of being excluded

than boys based on the post hoc tests from the GLM analysis. However, the difference only

gave a Cohen’s d of -.15 that is regarded a small effect size according to Cohen’s criteria

(Cohen, 1988). Perceptions of feeling included is much higher than feeling excluded, and

there was no significant difference between boys and girls. The average level of self-reported

bullying was higher among the boys than among the girls, however, again this difference was

very small when considering that Cohen’s d was -.14. The mean levels of positive affect was

quite high for both boys and girls, while the reported negative affect was lower. None of the

affect variables were significantly different for boys and girls. Perceived parent support was

significantly higher for girls than for boys, but the Cohen’s d was only -.22.

Multivariate Analyses

Inspection of Table 2 reveals that all the study variables are significantly intercorrelated. In

order to investigate our research questions we regressed the affect variables on the other

variables in two separate regression analyses.




12


The results for the multiple regression with positive affect as the dependent variable is

reported in Table 3. Parent Support gave an effect on positive affect, but it was rather weak (β

= .17, p < .01). Furthermore, feeling excluded also gave a significant effect on positive affect,

but this was even weaker (β = -.12, p < .01). Finally, feeling included gave a significant effect

on positive affect (β = .20, p < .01). Altogether, the independent variables in the model

explained about 14% of the total variance in positive affect (R2 = .14).

Negative affect was weakly associated with perceived parent support (β = -.09, p <

.01) as can be seen from Table 4. Feeling excluded gave a stronger effect (β = .28, p < .01),

and being bullied also gave a significant effect on negative affect (β = .20, p < .01). The

independent variables in the model explained about 18% of the variance in negative affect.

Discussion

We investigated whether perceived inclusion and exclusion with peers at school, as

well as self-reported bullying exposure, affected positive and negative affect among 1161

students from grades five through seven. Positive affect was significantly, but only weakly

affected by perceived exclusion and inclusion. Negative affect was not related to perceived

inclusion, however, both perceived exclusion and self-reported bullying exposure gave effects

on negative affect.

Substance

There were no significant differences in the mean levels of the study variables across

grade levels, indicating no average age differences. However, girls reported slightly higher

levels of perceived exclusion than boys. When it came to perceived inclusion, both boys and

girls reported higher levels for this construct, but there were no gender differences. As

expected, boys had higher levels of self-reported bullying exposure than girls. While

perceived negative affect was lower among both boys and girls, the levels of perceived

positive affect was quite high, although no gender differences occurred.

13


Positive affect was positively associated with feeling included with peers at school.

This is reasonable when acknowledging how important the search for peer approval seems to

be for most, if not all, pupils (Birch & Ladd, 1996). Feelings of inclusion are important for

healthy psychosocial development and emotional well-being (Ladd, 2005; Beran, 2008), and

is confirmed by our findings.

On the contrary, feelings of exclusion were negatively associated with positive affect,

indicating that feeling socially excluded may lower the positive affectional states. This is also

in accordance with our expectations. So, adjusting the learning environment to promote

inclusion and prevent exclusion will most likely increase feelings of positive affect among

students.

Negative affect was also associated with perceived feelings of exclusion – just like

positive affect. However, in addition it was associated with self-reported bullying exposure.

The devastating consequences of being bullied are quite serious (Nielsen et al., 2015), so the

importance of a learning environment that focuses on these etiological factors must be

underscored.

Importance for practice

Our research points to the need of creating a learning environment that promotes

inclusion and caring and supportive interpersonal relationships. Good classroom management

including routines and guidelines for behaviour, active use of bullying prevention strategies

is critical in establishing a positive school environment and increasing feelings of school

inclusion. Teachers that promote respect in the classroom foster safety and inclusion by

reducing the risk of bully victimization (Ryan & Patrick, 2001). Affective well-being is likely

to be important for school learning. It is therefore important to assess among students, as well

as aspects of the school environment that could influence affective well-being.

More research, with different designs is needed in order to grasp the complexity of the

peer relations in school and their effects on student’s emotional well being. Effective school 14


based intervention programs could be developed by taking into account the need to promote

inclusion and reducing bullying in the peer group.

Methodological constraints

This study has some limitations as the design is cross-sectional. This limits the

inference of cause and effect. Furthermore, all the data are self-reported and this should be

kept in mind when interpreting the results.

References

Asher, S. R., Zelis, K. M., Parker, J. G., & Bruene, C. M., (1991) Self-referral for peer

relationship problems among aggressive and withdrawn low-accepted children. Paper

presented at the meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Seattle,

WA.

Asher, S. R., Parkhurst, J. T., Hymel, S., & Williams, G. A. (1990) Peer rejection and

loneliness in childhood. In S. R. Asher & J. D. Coie (Eds.), Peer rejection in

childhood (pp. 253-273). New York: Cambridge University Press

Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995) The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal

attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 497-

529.

Beran, T. N. (2008) Consequences of being bullied at school. In D. Pepler & W. Craig (Eds.)

Understanding and Addressing Bullying: An International Perspective, (pp. 44-58).

Bloomington, USA.

Berscheid, R., & Reis, H. (1998) Attraction and close relationships. In D.T. Gilbert, S.T.

Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.) Handbook of social psychology (4th ed., pp. 193-281).

New York: McGraw-Hill.

Bierman, K. L. (2004) Peer rejections: Developmental processes and intervention strategies.

New York: Guilford Press.

Birch, S. H. & Ladd, G. W. (1996). Interpersonal relationships in school environment and 15


children's early school adjustment: The role of teachers and peers. In J. Juvonen & K.

R. Wentzel (Eds.), Social motivation. Understanding children's school adjustment.

(pp. 199-247). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Bru, E., Boyesen, M., Munthe, E., & Roland, E. (1998). Perceived social support at school

and emotional and musculoskeletal complaints among Norwegian 8th grade students.

Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 42 (4), 339 – 356.

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, N. J.:

Laurence Erlbaum.

Colarossi, L. G., & Eccles, J.S. (2003) Differential effects of support providers on

adolescents’ mental health. Social Work Research, 27, 19-30.

Collins, W.A., & Laursen, B. (Eds.). (1999). Minnesota Symposia on Child Psychology: Vol.

30. Relationships as developmental contexts. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum

Craig, W.M. (1998). The relationship among bullying, victimization, depression, anxiety and

aggression in elementary school children. Personality and Individual Differences, 24,

123-130.

Davidson, M. L., & Demaray, K. M. (2007) Social Support as a Moderator between

Victimization and Internalizing-Externalizing Distress from Bullying. School

Psychology Review, vol. 36, no.3, 383-405.

Diener, E. (Ed.) (2009) Assessing well-being: the collected works of Ed Diener, Springer

Science and Business Media, New York.

Duncan, R.D. (1999). Maltreatment by parents and peers: The relationship between child

abuse, bully victimization and psychological distress. Child Maltreatment, 4(1), 45-55.

Egan, S.K., & Perry, D.G. (1998) Does low self-regard invite victimization? Developmental

Psychology, 34(2), 299-309.

Folkman, S. (2008). The case for positive emotions in the stress process. Anxiety, Stress and

Coping, 21, 3–14. 16


Fredrikson, B. L., Tugade, M. M., Waugh, C. E., & Larkin, G. R. (2003). What good are

positive emotions in crisis? A prospective study of resilience and emotions following

the terrorist attacks on the United States on September 11th, 2001. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 365–376.

Furman, W. (1996) The measurement of friendship perceptions: Conceptual and

methodological issues. In W. M. Bukovski, A. F. Newcomb & W. W. Hartup (Eds.),

The company they keep: Friendships in childhood and adolescence (pp. 41-65).

Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

Gustafsson, J.-E., Allodi M. Westling, Alin Åkerman, B. Eriksson, C., Eriksson, L.,

Fischbein, S., Granlund, M., Gustafsson, P. Ljungdahl, S., Ogden, T., Persson, R.S.

(2010). School, learning and mental health: a systematic review. Stockholm: The

Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, The Health Committee.

Hoglund, W. L. G., Lalonde, C. E., & Leadbeater, B. J. (2008) Social-Cognitive Competence,

Peer Rejection and Neglect, and Behavioral and Emotional Problems in Middle

Childhood, Social Development, v17, nr.3, pp. 528-553.

Hymel, S., Comfort, C., Schonert-Reichl, K., & McDougall, P. (1996). Academic failure and

school dropout: The influence of peers. In J.Juvonen & K.R. Wentzel (Eds.), Social

motivation: Understanding children’s school adjustment (pp. 313-345). Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

Husu, J. & Tirri, K. (2007). Developing whole school pedagogical values – A case of going

through the ethos of “good schooling”. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23, pp 390-

401.

Juvonen, J., & Graham, S. (2001). Peer harassment in school: The plight of the vulnerable and

victimized. New York: Guilford.

Kahn, R. L. and Antonucci, T. (1980) Convoys over the life course: attachments, roles, and

17


social support. In Life-span Development and Behavior, vol. 3, Bates, P. B. and Brim,

O. G. (Eds.) New York: Academic Press, pp. 253-286.

Kashdan, T. B., Rose, P., & Fincham, F. D. (2004). Curiosity and exploration: Facilitating

positive subjective experiences and personal growth opportunities. Journal of

Personality Assessment, 82, 291–305.

Kidger, J., Araya, R., Donovan, J., & Gunnell, D. (2012). The Effect of the School

Environment on the Emotional Health of Adolescents: A Systematic Review.

Pediatrics, 129(5), 925-949. doi: 10.1542/peds.2011-2248

Kochenderfer, B. J. & Ladd, G. W. (1996) Peer victimization: Cause or consequence of

school maladjustment? Child Development, 67, 1305-1317

Kupersmidt, B. J., DeRosier, E. M. (2005) How Peer Problems Lead to Negative Outcomes:

An Integrative Mediational Modell. In J. B. Kupersmidt & K. A. Dodge (Eds.),

Children’s Peer Relations. From Development to Intervention. (pp.119-138).

Washington: APA

Ladd, W.G. (2005) Children’s Peer Relations and Social Competence: A Century of Progress.

(Current Perspectives in Psychology), Yale Univ. Press, USA.

Ladd, W. G. (2006) Peer rejection, aggressive or withdrawn behavior, and psychological

maladjustment from ages 5 to 12: An examination of four predictive models. Child

Development, 77, 822-846.

Laurent, J., Catanzaro, S.J., Joiner, T.E., Rudolph, K.D., Potter, K.I., Lambert, S., et al.

(1999). A measure of positive and negative affect for children: Scale development and

preliminary validation. Psychological Assessment, 11, 326-338.

Martin, K.M., Huebner, S.E., (2007) Peer victimization and prosocial experiences and

emotional well-being of middle school students. Psychology in the Schools, Vol.

44(2), 199-208.

Nansel, T. R., Overpeck, M., Pilla, R. S., Ruan, W. J., Simons-Morton, B., & Scheidt, P. 18


(2001). Bully behaviours among US youth: Prevalence and association with

psychological adjustment. Journal of the American Medical Association, 285, 2094-

2100.

Olweus, D. (1993) Victimization by peers: Antecedents and long-term outcomes. In K. H.

Rubin& J. B. Asendorpf (Eds.), Social Withdrawal, inhibition, and shyness in

childhood (pp. 315-341). Hillsdale, NJ, England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Parker, J. G., & Asher, S. R. (1987) Peer relations and later personal adjustment: Are low

accepted children at risk? Psychological Bulletin, 102, 357-389.

Parker, J. G., Rubin, K. H., Price, J. M., & DeRosier, M. E. (1995) Peer relationships, child

development and adjustment: A developmental psychopathology perspective. In D.

Cicchetti & D. J. Cohen (Eds.) Developmental Psychopathology (Vol. 2, pp. 96-161).

New York: Wiley.

Parker, J. G., Rubin, K. H., Erath, A. S., Wojslawowicz, J. C. & Buskirk, A. A. (2006)

Peer relationships, child development and adjustment: A developmental

psychopathology perspective. In D. Cicchetti & D. J. Cohen (Eds.) Developmental

Psychopathology (Vol. 1, pp. 419-493). New York: Wiley.

Peplau, L. A., & Perlman, D. (Eds.). (1982). Loneliness. New York: Wiley.

Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., Titz, W., & Perry, R. P. (2002). Academic emotions in students’ self-

regulated learning and achievement: A program of qualitative and quantitative

research. Educational Psychologist, 37, 91–105.

Perry, D. G., Kusel, S. J., & Perry, L. C. (1988) Victims of peer aggression. Developmental

Psychology, 24, 807-814.

Pinquart, M., & Sorensen, S. (2000). Influences of socioeconomic status,

social network, and competence on subjective well-being in later life: A meta-analysis.

Psychology and Aging, 15, 187–224.

Rasmussen, A. (2004). Social Education and Inclusion in Primary Classrooms. Paper 19


presented at the Australian Association for Research in Education Conference 2004.

Rueger, Y.S., Malecki, K. C., Demaray, K. M. (2008) Gender differences in the relationship

between perceived social support and student adjustment during early adolescence.

School Psychology Quarterly, vol. 23, No.4, 496-514.’

Ryan A.M., Patrick, H. (2001) The classroom social environment and changes in adolescent’s

motivation and engagement during middle school. American Educational Research

Journal, 38 (2): 437-460

Sharp, S. (1995) How much does bullying hurt? The effects of bullying on the personal well-

being and educational progress of secondary aged students. Educational and Child

Psychology, 12(2), 81-88.

Slee, P.T. (1995) Peer victimization and its relationship to depression among Australian

primary school students. Personality and Individual Differences, 18(1), 57-62.

Smith, P. K., Pepler, D., & Rigby, K. (Eds.) (2004) Bullying in schools: How successful can

interventions be? New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Snyder C. & Lopez S.J., (2002), Handbook of Positive Psychology, Oxford University Press,

New York.

Thompson, R. A., & Ontai, L. (2000) Striving to do well what comes naturally: Social

support, developmental psychopathology, and social policy. Development and

Psychopathology, 12, 657-675.

Stewart, D. E. (2008). Implementing mental health promotion in schools: A process

evaluation. International Journal of Mental Health Promotion, 10(1), 32-41.

Wang, M. T., & Eccles, J. S. (2012). Social support matters: Longitudinal effects of social

support on three dimensions of school engagement from middle to high school. Child

Development, 83(3), 877-895.

Watson, D., Clark, L.A., (1984). Negative affectivity: The disposition to experience aversive

emotional states. Psychological Bulletin, 96, 465-490. 20


Watson, D., Clark, L.A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief

measures of Positive and Negative Affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality

and Social Psychology, 54, 1063-1070.

Watson, D., Clark, L.A., (1997). Measurement and mismeasurement of mood: recurrent and

emergent issues. Journal of Personality Assessment, 68, 267-296.

Zevon, M. A. & Tellegen, A. (1982). The structure of mood change: An

idiographic/nomothetic analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43,

111-122.

21


Table 1

Means, standard deviations, and Cohen’s d for boys’ (n = 569) and girls’ (n = 592).

Mean Standard deviation Mean diff. Cohen’s d

Boys Girls Boys Girls

Feling Excluded 1.58* 1.72 .90 1.01 -.14 -.15

Feeling Included 3.45 3.50 .66 .69

Being Bullied 1.21** 1.13 .56 .56 .08 .14

Positive Affect 4.25 4.34 .95 .94

Negative Affect 2.01 2.08 1.07 1.07

Parent Support 2.14** 2.25 .52 .50 -.11 -.22

** = p < .01, * = p < .05

22


Table 2

Bivariate correlations (Pearson’s r) for scale scores of the variables in the study.

FE FI BB PA NA PS

Feling Excluded 1.00

Feeling Included -.40** 1,00

Being Bullied .39** -.30** 1,00

Positive Affect -.26** .30** -.21** 1,00

Negative Affect .38** -.19** .32** -.17** 1,00

Parent Support -.14** .19** -.12** .24** -.15** 1.00

* p < .05 ** p < .01

23


Table 3

Multiple regression analysis for Positive Affect.

Unstandardized

coefficients

Standardized

coefficient

B SE Beta t p

(constant) 2.96 0.30 9.95 0.00

Gender 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.99 0.32

Age 0.00 0.03 0.00 -0.11 0.91

Parent Support 0.32 0.05 0.17 5.96 0.00

Feling Excluded -0.12 0.03 -0.12 -3.18 0.00

Feeling Included 0.28 0.04 0.20 6.37 0.00

Being Bullied -0.15 0.06 -0.08 -2.56 0.10

Adjusted R2 = .14

24


Table 4

Multiple regression analysis for Negative Affect.

Unstandardized

coefficients

Standardized

coefficient

B SE Beta t p

(constant) 1.25 0.33 3.80 0.00

Gender 0.07 0.06 0.03 1.15 0.25

Age 0.01 0.04 0.01 0.40 0.69

Parent Support -0.19 0.06 -0.09 -3.17 0.00

Feling Excluded 0.32 0.04 0.28 8.96 0.00

Feeling Included 0.00 0.05 0.00 -0.08 0.94

Being Bullied 0.43 0.07 0.20 6.63 0.00

Adjusted R2 = .18

25

Running head: Peer relations in school and positive and...

Documents

Transcript of Running head: Peer relations in school and positive and...