@misc{BoschWilbert2020, author = {Bosch, Jannis and Wilbert, J{\"u}rgen}, title = {Contrast and Assimilation Effects on Self-Evaluation of Performance and Task Interest in a Sample of Elementary School Children}, series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe}, journal = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe}, number = {600}, issn = {1866-8364}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-44481}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-444819}, pages = {13}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Social comparison processes and the social position within a school class already play a major role in performance evaluation as early as in elementary school. The influence of contrast and assimilation effects on self-evaluation of performance as well as task interest has been widely researched in observational studies under the labels big-fish-little-pond and basking-in-reflected-glory effect. This study examined the influence of similar contrast and assimilation effects in an experimental paradigm. Fifth and sixth grade students (n = 230) completed a computer-based learning task during which they received social comparative feedback based on 2 × 2 experimentally manipulated feedback conditions: social position (high vs. low) and peer performance (high vs. low). Results show a more positive development of task interest and self-evaluation of performance in both the high social position and the high peer performance condition. When applied to the school setting, results of this study suggest that students who already perform well in comparison to their peer group are also the ones who profit most from social comparative feedback, given that they are the ones who usually receive the corresponding positive performance feedback.}, language = {en} } @article{BoschWilbert2020, author = {Bosch, Jannis and Wilbert, J{\"u}rgen}, title = {Contrast and Assimilation Effects on Self-Evaluation of Performance and Task Interest in a Sample of Elementary School Children}, series = {Frontiers in Education}, volume = {4}, journal = {Frontiers in Education}, number = {165}, publisher = {Frontiers Media}, address = {Lausanne}, issn = {2504-284X}, doi = {10.3389/feduc.2019.00165}, pages = {11}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Social comparison processes and the social position within a school class already play a major role in performance evaluation as early as in elementary school. The influence of contrast and assimilation effects on self-evaluation of performance as well as task interest has been widely researched in observational studies under the labels big-fish-little-pond and basking-in-reflected-glory effect. This study examined the influence of similar contrast and assimilation effects in an experimental paradigm. Fifth and sixth grade students (n = 230) completed a computer-based learning task during which they received social comparative feedback based on 2 × 2 experimentally manipulated feedback conditions: social position (high vs. low) and peer performance (high vs. low). Results show a more positive development of task interest and self-evaluation of performance in both the high social position and the high peer performance condition. When applied to the school setting, results of this study suggest that students who already perform well in comparison to their peer group are also the ones who profit most from social comparative feedback, given that they are the ones who usually receive the corresponding positive performance feedback.}, language = {en} } @article{DuenkelKniggeWilbert2020, author = {D{\"u}nkel, Nora and Knigge, Michel and Wilbert, J{\"u}rgen}, title = {Determinanten und Akkuratheit von Sch{\"u}lerurteilen {\"u}ber sprachliche F{\"a}higkeiten von Mitsch{\"u}ler(inne)n im Deutschen und den Herkunftssprachen T{\"u}rkisch und Russisch}, series = {Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Erziehungswissenschaft : ZfE}, volume = {23}, journal = {Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Erziehungswissenschaft : ZfE}, number = {5}, publisher = {Springer}, address = {Wiesbaden}, issn = {1434-663X}, doi = {10.1007/s11618-020-00972-8}, pages = {1019 -- 1052}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Models of language acquisition suggest that the development of language abilities is influenced by the language skills of relevant interaction partners (e.g. peers). Because objective measures of interaction partners' language skills are rarely available, third party ratings may be an alternative measure. Therefore, the present study investigates students' ratings of their fellow students' language skills as indicators of actual language performance in German and the heritage languages Turkish and Russian. Multilevel models were applied to address the following questions: Which factors influence students' ratings of peers' language skills? How accurate are these ratings and what influences the accuracy of ratings? In all languages, students' ratings were moderately related to peers' test performance and the accuracy of ratings was positively moderated if the students had class together, shared the same language background and with increasing relationship quality. The ratings for German language abilities further revealed negative performance related stereotypes towards peers with Turkish and Russian language backgrounds. The results are discussed with respect to possibilities and boundaries of assessing peers' language skills through student ratings and implications of negative performance related stereotypes.}, language = {de} } @article{HoffmannWilbertLehoferetal.2020, author = {Hoffmann, Lisa and Wilbert, J{\"u}rgen and Lehofer, Mike and Schwab, Susanne}, title = {Are we good friends?}, series = {European Journal of Special Needs Education}, volume = {36}, journal = {European Journal of Special Needs Education}, number = {4}, publisher = {Taylor \& Francis}, address = {London}, pages = {16}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Empirical studies already examined various facets of the friendship construct. Building on this, the present study examines the questions of how the number of friendships and their quality differ between students with and without SEN and whether a homophily-effect can be identified. The sample consists of 455 fourth-graders from 28 inclusive classes in Austria. The results indicate that students with SEN have fewer friends than students without SEN. Furthermore, students without SEN preferred peers without SEN as a friend. This homophily-effect was shown for students with SEN, too. However, students with and without SEN rated the quality of their friendships similarly and no interactions between the SEN status of oneself or of the friend was found for the quality of the friendship. The results show that, in the context of inclusion, the issue of friendship needs to be increasingly addressed to improve the situation of students with SEN.}, language = {en} } @article{KulawiakUrtonKrulletal.2020, author = {Kulawiak, Pawel R. and Urton, Karolina and Krull, Johanna and Hennemann, Thomas and Wilbert, J{\"u}rgen}, title = {Internalizing Behavior of Sociometrically Neglected Students in Inclusive Primary Classrooms}, series = {frontiers in Education}, volume = {5}, journal = {frontiers in Education}, publisher = {Frontiers Media}, address = {Lausanne}, issn = {2504-284X}, doi = {10.3389/feduc.2020.00032}, pages = {12}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Internalizing problems in children belong to the category of special educational needs called emotional and behavioral difficulties. Recent decades have witnessed a critical discussion about whether children and adolescents experiencing internalizing problems are at risk of being sociometrically neglected (neither liked nor disliked by their peers). Previous studies have shown evidence both for and against the association between internalizing problems and neglected sociometric status. These contradictory results may be due to the following methodological aspects: (1) shortcomings of sociometric status classification methods (arbitrariness of the sociometric classification rules) and (2) different operationalizations of internalizing problems (broadband and narrowband dimensions of behavior). The aim of the present study is to investigate empirically whether and to what extent these methodological aspects lead to contradictory results on the internalizing behavior of neglected students. This question is investigated using a sample of students (N = 2334) in German inclusive primary schools. The systematic investigation presented here provides initial indications that the various methodological approaches can lead to conflicting results. The contradictory results are not only due to the application of different sociometric classification methods, but also to different operationalizations of internalizing behavior (narrowband and broadband scales). Earlier contradictory evidence on the internalizing behavior of neglected students must therefore be seen in a different light: the reasons for previously conflicting results may actually be methodological. Based on the results, conclusions are drawn as to how methodological aspects can be given more consideration in sociometric research on internalizing behavior.}, language = {en} } @misc{KulawiakUrtonKrulletal.2020, author = {Kulawiak, Pawel R. and Urton, Karolina and Krull, Johanna and Hennemann, Thomas and Wilbert, J{\"u}rgen}, title = {Internalizing Behavior of Sociometrically Neglected Students in Inclusive Primary Classrooms}, series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe}, journal = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe}, number = {652}, issn = {1866-8364}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-47452}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-474525}, pages = {14}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Internalizing problems in children belong to the category of special educational needs called emotional and behavioral difficulties. Recent decades have witnessed a critical discussion about whether children and adolescents experiencing internalizing problems are at risk of being sociometrically neglected (neither liked nor disliked by their peers). Previous studies have shown evidence both for and against the association between internalizing problems and neglected sociometric status. These contradictory results may be due to the following methodological aspects: (1) shortcomings of sociometric status classification methods (arbitrariness of the sociometric classification rules) and (2) different operationalizations of internalizing problems (broadband and narrowband dimensions of behavior). The aim of the present study is to investigate empirically whether and to what extent these methodological aspects lead to contradictory results on the internalizing behavior of neglected students. This question is investigated using a sample of students (N = 2334) in German inclusive primary schools. The systematic investigation presented here provides initial indications that the various methodological approaches can lead to conflicting results. The contradictory results are not only due to the application of different sociometric classification methods, but also to different operationalizations of internalizing behavior (narrowband and broadband scales). Earlier contradictory evidence on the internalizing behavior of neglected students must therefore be seen in a different light: the reasons for previously conflicting results may actually be methodological. Based on the results, conclusions are drawn as to how methodological aspects can be given more consideration in sociometric research on internalizing behavior.}, language = {en} } @misc{KulawiakWilbertSchlacketal.2020, author = {Kulawiak, Pawel R. and Wilbert, J{\"u}rgen and Schlack, Robert and B{\"o}rnert-Ringleb, Moritz}, title = {Prediction of child and adolescent outcomes with broadband and narrowband dimensions of internalizing and externalizing behavior using the child and adolescent version of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire}, series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe}, journal = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe}, number = {669}, issn = {1866-8364}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-48515}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-485156}, pages = {19}, year = {2020}, abstract = {The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) is a frequently used screening instrument for behavioral problems in children and adolescents. There is an ongoing controversy—not only in educational research—regarding the factor structure of the SDQ. Research results speak for a 3-factor as well as a 5-factor structure. The narrowband scales (5-factor structure) can be combined into broadband scales (3-factor structure). The question remains: Which factors (narrowband vs. broadband) are better predictors? With the prediction of child and adolescent outcomes (academic grades, well-being, and self-belief), we evaluated whether the broadband scales of internalizing and externalizing behavior (3-factor structure) or narrowband scales of behavior (5-factor structure) are better suited for predictive purposes in a cross-sectional study setting. The sample includes students in grades 5 to 9 (N = 4642) from the representative German Health Interview and Examination Survey for Children and Adolescents (KiGGS study). The results of model comparisons (broadband scale vs. narrowband scales) did not support the superiority of the broadband scales with regard to the prediction of child and adolescent outcomes. There is no benefit from subsuming narrowband scales (5-factor structure) into broadband scales (3-factor structure). The application of narrowband scales, providing a more differentiated picture of students' academic and social situation, was more appropriate for predictive purposes. For the purpose of identifying students at risk of struggling in educational contexts, using the set of narrowband dimensions of behavior seems to be more suitable.}, language = {en} } @article{KulawiakWilbertSchlacketal.2020, author = {Kulawiak, Pawel R. and Wilbert, J{\"u}rgen and Schlack, Robert and B{\"o}rnert-Ringleb, Moritz}, title = {Prediction of child and adolescent outcomes with broadband and narrowband dimensions of internalizing and externalizing behavior using the child and adolescent version of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire}, series = {PLOS ONE}, volume = {15}, journal = {PLOS ONE}, number = {10}, publisher = {PLOS}, address = {San Francisco, California}, issn = {1932-6203}, doi = {10.1371/journal.pone.0240312}, pages = {17}, year = {2020}, abstract = {The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) is a frequently used screening instrument for behavioral problems in children and adolescents. There is an ongoing controversy—not only in educational research—regarding the factor structure of the SDQ. Research results speak for a 3-factor as well as a 5-factor structure. The narrowband scales (5-factor structure) can be combined into broadband scales (3-factor structure). The question remains: Which factors (narrowband vs. broadband) are better predictors? With the prediction of child and adolescent outcomes (academic grades, well-being, and self-belief), we evaluated whether the broadband scales of internalizing and externalizing behavior (3-factor structure) or narrowband scales of behavior (5-factor structure) are better suited for predictive purposes in a cross-sectional study setting. The sample includes students in grades 5 to 9 (N = 4642) from the representative German Health Interview and Examination Survey for Children and Adolescents (KiGGS study). The results of model comparisons (broadband scale vs. narrowband scales) did not support the superiority of the broadband scales with regard to the prediction of child and adolescent outcomes. There is no benefit from subsuming narrowband scales (5-factor structure) into broadband scales (3-factor structure). The application of narrowband scales, providing a more differentiated picture of students' academic and social situation, was more appropriate for predictive purposes. For the purpose of identifying students at risk of struggling in educational contexts, using the set of narrowband dimensions of behavior seems to be more suitable.}, language = {en} } @article{WilbertUrtonKrulletal.2020, author = {Wilbert, J{\"u}rgen and Urton, Karolina and Krull, Johanna and Kulawiak, Pawel R. and Schwalbe, Anja and Hennemann, Thomas}, title = {Teachers' accuracy in estimating social inclusion of students with and without special educational needs}, series = {Frontiers in education}, volume = {5}, journal = {Frontiers in education}, publisher = {Frontiers Media}, address = {Lausanne}, issn = {2504-284X}, doi = {10.3389/feduc.2020.598330}, pages = {11}, year = {2020}, abstract = {It is unclear to what extent teachers can accurately assess the social inclusion of their students with and without SEN. The study aims to shed light on these desiderata. Students (N = 1.644) with SEN (learning, behavior, and language problems) and without SEN and their teachers (N = 79) participated in the study. Sociometric peer nominations, students' self-perceived social inclusion, and teachers' assessments regarding students' social inclusion and self-perceived social inclusion were administered. The results suggest that teachers are moderately accurate in identifying social acceptance and social rejection, while accuracy is low when assessing students' self-perceived social inclusion. That said, rating accuracy varied strongly between teachers, ranging from no agreement to a perfect concordance. Teachers seem to be more accurate in estimating the social acceptance of students with learning problems. The results emphasize the importance of differentiating between various social inclusion criteria (i.e., students' self-report vs. peer nominations) and accounting for inter-individual differences in teachers' rating accuracy.}, language = {en} }