MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1177/0022219417708172

Медицинская библиотека · Journal of learning disabilities · 2017

Learning Disabilities and Low Social Status: The Role of Peer Academic Reputation and Peer Reputation of Teacher Liking.

van der Sande Lisa, Hendrickx Marloes M H G, Boor-Klip Henrike J, Mainhard Tim

СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАПеревод пока не подготовлен

Аннотация

Although many studies have found that children with learning disabilities (LD) are less liked by peers than children without LD, the results are not unequivocal. In the present study, we investigated the social status (in terms of likeability and popularity) of children with LD by considering peer academic reputation and peer reputation of teacher liking. These variables are potentially important alternative factors for differences in social status between children with and without LD. Fifth-grade students ( n = 1,453; Mage = 10.60) in 58 classes in the Netherlands completed peer nominations for academic reputation, teacher liking, and social status. The data were analyzed with Bayesian structural equation modeling. The associations between LD and social status were completely mediated by the lower peer academic reputation of children with LD. As expected, peer reputation of teacher liking served as a protective factor against low social status for children with low peer academic reputation in general but not specifically for children with LD. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

Для цитирования: van der Sande Lisa, Hendrickx Marloes M H G, Boor-Klip Henrike J, Mainhard Tim. Learning Disabilities and Low Social Status: The Role of Peer Academic Reputation and Peer Reputation of Teacher Liking.. Journal of learning disabilities. 2017. DOI: 10.1177/0022219417708172.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.