Pilot Study Paper Submitted Andrew2

8/7/2019 Pilot Study Paper Submitted Andrew2

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/pilot-study-paper-submitted-andrew2 1/23

Socio-Affective Differences

Running head: Socio-Affective Differences in Chilean Schoolchildren

The Development of a Scale to Examine Socio-Affective Differences in Chilean

Schoolchildren.

Andrew Colin Higham

Pontifica Universidad Catolíca de Chile

[email protected]

1




Abstract

The aim of this paper was to develop an instrument to investigate socio-

affective differences between gifted adolescents and those of regular ability in

Santiago, Chile. At such an early stage in the development of a new program,

this form of research is a very valuable route of investigation, particularly for

nations which formerly have no such system in place. In addition it can

provide a foundation on which to build a more robust model in consequent

research.

The current research attempted to design and test an instrument for the

identification of affect in the Chilean sixth form student population. The

results showed a number of differences between students of differing genders

and socio-economic status, in addition to support for the reliability of a test

battery for identifying affective differences in this population. Considerations

for the use of such an instrument in future research were then discussed.

2




Over the past two decades, there has been increasing interest in the education of

gifted children and the effect of environmental influences on affect, resulting from

increases in characteristics such as self-esteem/self-concept and locus of control. A look

at the literature surrounding the field of gifted education shows a number of strategies,

which have been developed in order to utilize the potential of those individuals with

exceptional academic gifts and talents. These include strategies, which can be seen as

some combination of acceleration, enrichment and out of school opportunities. As a

result of this research, many programs and specialized schools (e.g. the Roeper school,

Johns Hopkins, Storrs) for the gifted have been developed worldwide with the goal of

facilitating an advanced level of learning It is the combination of methods, that is a

strategy, not the education itself.

However, the influence of the external environment on the affective

development of these gifted individuals must be viewed as more than simply programs

developed for them within the framework of education, but the entirety of the child’s

environment. In viewing this environment as a whole, it is the combined influence of

educational provision, the home and peer environment and the greater socio-economic

group of which the individual is a part, which can all be seen as influencing the

affective development of the child

The aim of this initial investigation was to highlight the influence of affective

factors on the child, during participation in a program of educational enrichment, with

particular interest being on the influence of the socio-economic group and internal

factors, such as the development of the child’s self concept/self-esteem and locus of

control. Consequent research in these areas will then provide information towards the

development of a research model with the aim of identifying the predominant internal

and external factors for those of different ages and levels of ability. If these factors can

3




be identified, it will allow not only a greater understanding of these students, but an

opportunity to more adequately meet the needs of different groups of gifted individuals

and facilitate greater level of learning and personal development.

However, in order to examine if there is any socio-affective effect, we must first

define which factors make up this effect. To do this it is necessary to examine the

relevant literature from the perspective of both external and internal influences on

affect.

Peer Relations and Social Support

This leads us to the question of how gifted students relate to their peers. Do they

fit the common stereotype of the social misfit, who has difficulty relating to others? Or

is the reality somewhat different to the popular image given of the gifted student?

Mayseless (1993) in a review of a number of studies suggested that, in reality,

the opposite is often true and that pre-adolescent and adolescent gifted students are

often at least as popular as other students of the same age, but often self-report a lower

level of popularity than their peers of average ability. However, this could be seen as a

reflection of the level of value placed on peer relations by the gifted youth. Support for

this can be seen from the work of Kline et al., (1991). Kline et al found that the gifted of

both genders scored very highly on a self-report measure of peer relationship, but with

age this value, over time, was seen to increase for females and decrease for males.

In addition, when compared to regular ability students, Mayseless (1993) found

that gifted students gave a lower rating for relationships with closest friends of the same

sex than regular ability students. Mayseless (1993) purports that this could be due to the

4




gifted having higher levels of expectation as regards friendship, or being more task

orientated in their relationships than average ability students.

However, a number of factors have been seen to help the social relationships of

gifted students. For example Van Tassel Baska et al (1994), found that students of

higher socioeconomic status felt they had a greater level of social support than students

of lower socioeconomic status. This raises the question of if there is a difference in

parenting style related to higher socio-economic status. However, the source of the

support differed for different groups of students with males reporting a greater overall

level of support from friends than females. Therefore, this would suggest that further

investigation is necessary.

The Influence of Parenting Style

A number of research studies regarding parental behavior and its relationship

with a number of traits in children have grouped behaviors into a number of different

parenting styles. A variety of labels have been used to describe the relative influence of

discipline, nurturance, reinforcement and acceptance exhibited by parents during child

development (e.g. Dornbusch, Ritter, Leiberman, Roberts, & Fraleigh, 1987; Steinberg,

Elmen, & Mounts, 1989). The result of this research suggests that positive behaviors in

adolescents may be attributable to parenting styles encouraging autonomy and an

environment of mutual respect between the parent and child.

The investigation developed at PENTA-UC, used the parenting style

classifications put forward by Baumrind (1991), which give particular attention to the

specific behavioural dimensions relating to levels of demandingness and responsiveness

in the parent-child relationship.

5




The definitions given by Baumrind (1991) in relation to the dimensions of

demandingness and responsiveness relating to parenting styles are as follows:

“(Demandingness is). . .the claims parents make on children to become integrated into

the family whole, by their maturity demands, supervision, disciplinary efforts and

willingness to confront the child who disobeys” (Baumrind, 1991).

“(Responsiveness is). . .the extent to which parents intentionally foster individuality,

self-regulation, and self-assertion by being attuned, supportive and acquiescent to

children’s special needs and demands” (Baumrind, 1991).

From these two definitions, Baumrind developed three categories of parenting

style based on the degree to which these behaviors were practiced by the parent and

perceived by the child. These categories are authoritarian, permissive, and authoritative.

The authoritarian style of parenting is a result of parental behaviors placing a high level

of restriction and demand on the child, the result of authoritarian parents tending to

exert punishment, placing a high level of value in conformity of the child as opposed to

individuality. The permissive style of parenting results from non-restrictive parental

behaviors, highly responsive and accepting of the child, the child being allowed self-

regulation and freedom from restraint by the parent.

These first two described categories can be viewed as representing the extremes of

the behavioral continuum. The third category of authoritarian parenting represents a

mid-point between the two extremes. The authoritative category combines elements of

both parenting styles, being quite restrictive and responsive, balanced by explanations

of policy and equality within the parent / child relationship.

Similar to previous research, Baumrind (1991) found a relationship between the

style of parenting and adolescent behaviour. The authoritarian style of parenting

resulted in adolescents who were unfriendly, uncooperative, uninterested, and displayed

6




a higher rate of delinquency. The permissive style of parenting resulted in adolescents

who displayed a high level of aggression and independence. However, adolescents

whose parents practiced an authoritative style exhibited more positive behaviours on the

whole. These adolescents were found to be friendlier, to have qualities of leadership and

trust, a higher level of social competence, and were found to display a greater level of

responsibility.

With relation to the review at hand, the primary purpose of this exploratory study is

to measure differences of socio-economic levels of gifted adolescent perceptions of

parental demandingness and responsiveness using the three categories of authoritarian,

permissive, and authoritative parenting, and how these perceived parenting styles are

related to gifted adolescent locus of control orientation and self-concept, with a

secondary purpose of this investigation being an exploration of the relationship between

adolescent locus of control and self-concept and the resultant effect of enrichment

programs on these affective factors and in turn reciprocal effects on parenting style for

those of varying socio-economic levels.

The Influence of Socio-Economic Status

As has already been mentioned, Van Tassel Baska et al (1994) found that

students of higher socioeconomic status felt they had a greater level of support than

students of lower socioeconomic status. However, to what extent does socio-economic

status affect the parenting style of the families of gifted youth?

However, a problem with using the results of studies of socio-economic status as

a means of comparison is that many studies use many different factors as indicators of

socio-economic status and there is no single underlying theory or standardized test to

7




use as guidance. In addition, as Duncan et al., (2001) highlight, in surveys used to

measure socio-economic status, questions regarding income are always subject to a high

level of non-response. Duncan et al, (2001) suggest that, to overcome this, respondents

need to be motivated by qualitative interviewers, with a series of easy and short follow-

on questions.

Self-Concept

The Problem of Definition in Self-concept Research

“A general definition of self-concept refers to the image the individual holds of

themselves, this can be viewed as a combination of attitudes, feelings and knowledge

[regarding] abilities, skills, appearance and social acceptability” (Byrne, 1984)

Self-concept can be seen as a construct of many facets, including cognitive,

perceptual, affective and evaluative dimensions. The evaluative dimension refers to how

various aspects of personality, achievement, social status etc. of self are assessed by the

child. However, it is this process of evaluation that is generally referred to as ‘self-

esteem’.

Recently, this has developed into a hierarchical model of self-concept that can be

seen as an extension of the multi-dimensional model of self-concept. For example,

Shavelson et al., (1976) proposed a model which portrays self-concept as the result of

evaluations of specific behaviours, the levels of definition becoming increasingly

broader, with the most general level of self-concept at its peak. It is this most general

peak which can be conceived as that which is commonly regarded as self-esteem, as it is

the total sum of self-concept judgements for every part of the individuals perception.

8




Therefore, as a result, it could be said that it is from this that an individual judges their

worth.

Locus of Control

Locus of control (Rotter, 1996) can be defined as the extent to which an

individual attributes success or failure to their own actions or to powers beyond their

control. Those described as having an, ‘internal’ locus of control, feel that they have

more control over the events and outcomes that affect them. In contrast, those described

as having an, ‘external’ locus of control are those who believe that they have little

control over what happens to them. An internal locus of control stems from the

individual possessing a causal understanding of behavior and resultant effect. An

internal locus of control can be viewed as being developed from freely making choices

and taking personal responsibility for the resultant outcome of those choices. Through

experience of this process, the young person learns to attribute the cause of success or

failure internally, therefore being able to learn from the experience.

Method

Rationale, Research Questions and Hypotheses

The purpose of this study was to provide a first stage in the development of a

questionnaire intended to investigate the affective characteristics (self-concept / self-

esteem, self-control, pro-sociality, locus of control and empathy) of talented Chilean

children and their evolution over time in comparison with regular ability students. This

primary stage was intended to form the basis for a longitudinal study of the influence of

9




differing socio economic status’ and parenting styles and participation or non-

participation in a course of enriched education and subsequent effects on these socio

affective characteristics over time

Therefore, the aim at this stage was to design a questionnaire which was

appropriate for a sample of Chilean children from all educational levels. Like many

countries, Chile has a stratified system of education, which, on the most part reflects the

socio-economic status of the students, within each Metropolitan community. Those

from the lowest socio-economic levels in each community attend schools classified as

‘Municipales’ (Municipal schools). This type of school will generally have both the

lowest resources and the highest number of students in each class. Those of a higher

socio-economic status than Municipales attend schools named ‘Particular

Subvencionado’ (Private subsidized schools). For these schools, the government

distributes vouchers, which can be used as part payment for the education of the student.

These schools will often have slightly higher resources and smaller class sizes than in

the ‘Municipales’. Those of the highest socio-economic status attend schools named

‘Particular Pagado’ (Paid private schools). For these schools, the government gives no

contribution to the education of the child. These schools will usually have the highest

level of resources and smallest class sizes than in the other types of school.

The study was designed to primarily examine the applicability of the instrument

designed, within the aforementioned school system. The rationale for this was that it

would first be necessary for the questionnaire to be applicable to the education system

as a whole, before it can be used for comparison with those from this system, given

additional enriched education.

The design of the questionnaire was achieved by using a combination of

questions taken from the available testing literature, with relation childhood affect. The

10




questionnaire will be repeated, in order to form a longitudinal study over the students’

progress during a three-year period

This will help to further clarify affective areas of most importance to talented

students, in order to develop guidance in enhancing the effectiveness of enrichment

programmes for talented children. The results of this research will then hopefully result

in the possibility of the development of a unified model of socio-affective influence on

the gifted adolescent. Although there is a myriad of research in this area, problems of

definition of the terms used makes the development of a model premature before

primary relationships between the specific areas in this study are identified.

To examine the reliability of this measure, we had to consider the following

research questions:

1) Are there significant differences in affect between genders within different

demographic groups?

To answer this question, a comparison of questionnaire responses for

students of different genders was conducted, using comparative testing to

find differences between groups. Therefore testing the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 1

There will be a significant difference in affect (self-concept / self-esteem,

pro-sociality, locus of control and motivation), between students of different

genders.

2) Are there significant differences in affect between students from different

demographic groups?

11




To answer this question, a comparison of questionnaire responses for

students of varying levels of socio-economic status was conducted, using

comparative testing to find differences between groups. Therefore testing the

following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 2

Those students from higher socio-economic groups will display a greater

level of affect (self-concept / self-esteem, pro-sociality, locus of control and

motivation), than students from the lower socio-economic groups.

Participants

The sample consisted of 101 students. 34% of these were male (n=34) and 66%

(n=67) were female. These were all taken from 6 th grade level and had a mean age of

11.57 years (SD = 0.64; range = 10-13).

The students were recruited from the three types of institution distributed across

the Chilean educational system, these being 29% from municipal schools (n=29), 42%

from private voucher schools (n=42) and 30% from private paid schools (n=30).

Materials

The apparatus used for this experiment was a questionnaire battery derived from

literature in the area, all having previously shown high levels of reliability (Cronbach’s

alpha >.7). These were as follows:

Academic Self-Concept: The Self Concept section from ‘Yo, Mis Amigos, Y Mi

Colegio’, (Arancibia, 2003).

12




Social Self-Esteem: The Self Esteem section from ‘Yo, Mis Amigos, Y Mi Colegio’,

(Arancibia, 2003).

Self Control: The Self Control section from ‘Yo, Mis Amigos, Y Mi Colegio’,

(Arancibia, 2003).

Pro-Social Tendencies: Pro-Social Tendencies Measure (PTM, Carlo and Randall,

2002).

Parental Authority: The Parental Authority Questionnaire (PAQ, Reitman et al, 2002).

Locus of Control: Children’s Nowicki-Strickland Locus of Control scale (CNSIE,

Nowicki and Strickland, 1973)

Motivation: Academic motivation section from ‘Yo, Mis Amigos, Y Mi Colegio’,

(Arancibia, 2003).

Primarily, before any analysis could be performed, it was necessary to translate

the questionnaires for appropriate use with a Chilean sample. This was done by a

method of backwards translation. The method of backwards translation requires the

assistance of four bi-lingual translators. Two of the translators were given English

copies of the tests to translate into Spanish. Once completed, these were then given to

the other to translators to translate the tests back to English. Any differences in the

translations were discussed and once a consensus was reached, appropriate corrections

were made.

Procedure

During the following stage of the investigation, schools representing the

different types of establishment in the Chilean educational system were approached and

asked to volunteer one class to take part in the study. Participants were then introduced

to the study by a Chilean assistant, to avoid cultural or language problems and guided

13




through the standardized instructions. Participants were then reminded that there were

no correct or incorrect responses and told that if they had any questions they were to

raise their hand and someone would then come to address their question. There was no

time limit given, but pre-testing had suggested that all students would be able to

complete the test in the one hour allotted time slot given by the schools. After

completion, all questionnaires were collected and the students were thanked for their co-

operation and debriefed.

Results

Due to the use of the previously stated backwards translation, it was considered

necessary to first retest the reliability of the scales. The results of this showed an

acceptable level of reliability (α > 0.7) for the scales used to measure Locus of Control

(α > 0.82), Self-Esteem (α > 0.87), Self-Control (α > 0.75) and Pro-Social Tendencies

(α > 0.76).

Gender Differences and Affect

__________________________ Insert Table 1 about here

__________________________

For gender related differences, there were significant differences regarding the

influence of self-control, pro-social ability and empathy (see Table 1), thus supporting

Hypothesis 1, that there will be significant differences between the different genders.

For males, this difference was strongest regarding the influence of self-control (d =

3.28, p<.01), whereby, for females, there was a difference regarding the influence of

pro-social ability (d = 5.48 p<.05) and a strong difference for empathy (d = 3.99, p<.01).

14




However, the effect of locus of control or self-esteem, although having good levels of

reliability, did not differ significantly between the groups.

Type of School and Affect

__________________________ Insert Table 2 about here

__________________________

For socio-affective influences, there were significant differences regarding the influence

of self-esteem, self-control and empathy (see Table 2), thus supporting Hypothesis 2,

that there will be significant differences between the different different socio-affective

levels. For self-esteem, this difference was significant between the municipal and

prívate voucher schools (d = 11.63, p<.05). For empathy, this difference was also

significant between municipal and prívate voucher schools (d = 3.76, p<.05). The

strongest difference was regarding self-control whereby there were differences between

the municipal schools and both the prívate voucher schools (d = 4.76, p<.01) and prívate

paid schools (d = 3.86, p<.05). However, the effect of locus of control or pro-social

ability, although having good levels of reliability, did not differ significantly between

the groups.

Discussion

This study investigated differences of affective influences for Chilean sixth

graders of both different genders and the three levels of the Chilean educational system,

with respect to self-concept / self-esteem, self-control, pro-sociality, locus of control

and empathy. The initial aim of this investigation, was to develop a reliable

questionnaire battery for use in a simple of Chilean highschool students. Ultimately, the

15




aim of this questionnaire would be to identify differences in affective characteristics

between gifted and regular ability students of both genders and from all socio-economic

levels. Furthermore, to investigate the influence of a program of enriched education on

these gifted students, in comparison with those in regular schooling and in turn evaluate

the effectiveness of such program.

Bearing the aforementioned in mind, the results of the study do indeed suggest

that the resulting questionnaire can be used to test levels of affect in sixth grade Chilean

schoolchildren. The analysis has shown that there are very high reliability scores for

Locus of Control (α > 0.82), Self-Esteem (α > 0.87), Self-Control (α > 0.75) and Pro-

Social Tendencies (α > 0.76). These findings alone would suggest that this test is

appropriate for use in affective research for this sample.

As regards the differences, for genders a great deal of this could be explained by

gender role socialization and teacher and parent expectations. This has often been found

in studies related to achievement, such as Eccles (1983) model. In addition affective

influence has been suggested to play a more important role in this achievement process

than cognitive ability (Preckel et al, 2008). This could be seen as true in this case, as

males were more strongly influenced by self-control issues, necessary in a more

masculine environment, whereby females were more strongly influenced by pro-

sociality and empathy, these being stereotypically more female traits.

The same could also be said for socio-economic level. It is possible that lower

socio-economic levels are influenced to a greater negative degree by role socialization

and it has been noted that deprivation, segregation and stigmatization stunt the

development of aspiration (Ambrose, 2002). Indeed, in this study, it is self-esteem and

empathy in which those of the lowest socio-economic level score significantly less than

16




questionnaire was examined, not only by psychologists from the culture to be addressed,

but also by translation professionals, trained in the subject matter being examined.

One further consideration is the classification of socio-economic status by type

of school. Although there is quite a linear relationship between standard of school and

social status, this is a less than exact measurement tool. It would be of great benefit if

the consequent larger scale study developed a more precise system of measurement for

this variable.

Conclusion

In summary, gifted students have been suggested as having higher scores on

measure of social skills, often putting the needs of others before their own, yet are often

less willing to compromise (Lehman, 1981). If this is indeed the case cross-culturally, it

is necessary to develop a system for these individuals, so these talents may be identified

and nurtured in order to provide a valuable resource, not only for the individual, for the

society of which they are an important part.

The results of this research have given inference to the differences that may exist

within this particular culture. However, more importantly, they have provided an initial

stage in the development of a tool for the identification and development of affect in not

only the gifted, but all adolescents in this culture. Now that this goal has been achieved,

it is necessary to apply this instrument to a larger representative sample of children from

all socio-economic groups, both gifted and of regular ability, in enriched education and

every regular educational level. If this goal is achieved, it is hoped that, in time affective

benefits will be seen.

18




References

Ambrose, D. (2002), Socioeconomic Stratification and It’s Influences on Talent

Development: Some Interdisciplinary Perspectives. Gifted Child Quarterly, 46, 170-

180.

Arancibia, V. (2003), Yo, Mis Amigos, Y Mi Colegio. Ministerio de Educación. Chile.

Baumrind, D. (1991). The influence of parenting style on adolescent competence and

substance use. Journal of Early Adolescence, 11(1), 56-95.

Byrne, B. M. (1984). The general/academic nomological network: A review of

construct validation research. Review of Educational Research, 54, 427-456.

Carlo, G. & Randall, B. A. (2002). The development and validation of a

multidimensional measure of prosocial behavior. Journal of Youth and Adolescence,

31, 31-44.

Dornbusch, S. M., Ritter, P., Leiderman, P. H., Roberts, D. F. & Fraleigh, M. J. (1987).

The relation of parenting style to adolescent school performance. Child

Development, 58, 1244-1257.

Duncan, G. J., & Magnuson, K. (2001). Off with Hollingshaead: Socioeconomic

Resources, Parenting and Chile Development. In M. Bornstein and R. Bradley

(Eds.) Socioeconomic Status, parenting, and child development. Mahwah, NJ:

Lawrence Erlbaum.

Duncan Gj, Petersen E. (2001) The Long and Short of Asking Questions about Income,

Wealth and Labor Supply. Social Science Research 30 248 - 263, 2001

19




Eccles, J. S. (1983). Expectations, values and academic behaviors. In J.T. Spence

(Ed.), Achievement and achievement motivations (pp. 75- 146). San Francisco:

Freeman.

Fischer, C. S., Hout, M.,Jankowski, M. S., Lucas, S. R., Swidler, A., & Voss, K. (1996).

Inequality by design: Cracking the bell curve myth. Princeton, NJ: Princeton

University Press.

Kline, B. E., & Short, E. B. (1991). Changes in emotional resilience: Gifted adolescent

females. Roeper Review, 13, 118-121.

Kulik, J.A. & Kulik C-L.C. (1991). Ability grouping and gifted students. In N.

Colangelo and G.A. Davis (Eds.) Handbook of gifted education (pp. 178-196).

Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Mayseless, O. (1993). Gifted adolescents and intimacy in close same-sex friendships.

Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 22, 135-146.

Nowicki, S., and Strickland, B. R. A locus of control scale for children. Journal of

Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1973, 40, 148-155

Franzis Preckel, Thomas Goetz, Reinhard Pekrun, and Michael Kleine

Gender Differences in Gifted and Average-Ability Students: Comparing Girls' and

Boys' Achievement, Self-Concept, Interest, and Motivation in Mathematics Gifted

Child Quarterly, Spring 2008; 52: 146 - 159.

Reitman, D., Rhode, P. C., Hupp, S. D. A., & Altobello, C. (2002). Development and

validation of the Parental Authority Questionnaire-Revised. Journal of

Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 24 , 119-127.

20




Rotter, J. B. (1996). Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of

reinforcement. Psychological Monographs, 80(1). In

http://psych.fullerton.edu/jmeasrns/rotter.htm

Shavelson, J., Hubner, J.J. and Stanton, G.C. (1976). Self-concept: validation of

construct interpretations. Review of Educational Research, 46, 407-442.

Steinberg, L., Elmen, J. D. & Mounts, N. S. (1989). Authoritative parenting,

psychosocial maturity, and academic success among adolescents. Child

Development , 60, 1424-1436.

Van Tassel-Baska, J., & Olszweski-Kubilius, P. (1994). A study of self-concept and

social support in advantaged and disadvantaged seventh and eighth grade gifted

students. Roeper Review, 16, 186–192.

21






Means, Standard Deviations and Anova Results for the Comparison of Locus of

Control, Self-Esteem, Self, Control, Pro-Social Ability and Empathy Between Different

Socio-Affective Levels, Measured by Type of School.

Municipal Private Voucher Private Paid Anova______________ ______________ ______________

_____________

Measures of Affect M S.D. M S.D. M S.D. f

______________________________________________________________________

_______________

Locus of Control 62.28 3.24 60.24 10.14 60.87 5.20 .67

Self-Esteem 116.04 15.50 127.67 15.70 125.57 17.80 4.67*Self-Control 21.86 6.00 17.10 5.97 18.00 4.36 6.70**

Pro-social Ability 63.45 8.32 68.70 12.42 65.67 10.89 2.04

Empathy 31.76 4.48 35.52 6.62 32.83 5.64 4.05*

______________________________________________________________________

Note: For all scales, Municipal n=29, Private Voucher n=42, Private paid n=30

* p<.05

** p<.01

23

Pilot Study Paper Submitted Andrew2

Documents

Transcript of Pilot Study Paper Submitted Andrew2