A direct nomination method for the identification of neglected members in children's peer groups

This paper describes two studies that compared a direct nomination method for identifying the neglected members of children's peer groups with the commonly used derived social impact score method. In the first study, first-grade children were asked to nominate peers to a neglect dimension in addition to the traditional sociometric dimensions of like and dislike. Both neglect and social impact scores were quite stable over time. Social impact scores were significantly more stable than neglect scores when the full range of scores was considered; however, when the two measures were compared in terms of the stability with which children are identified as extreme scores, the two methods were equally reliable. In spite of this similarity, the two measures identified different children as extreme scorers on each occasion. In an attempt to explain this confusion, the second study investigated the patterns of correlations between observed behaviors and directly nominated neglect, like, and dislike scores and derived social preference and social impact scorers. Results indicated that directly nominated neglect scores were correlated with observed behavioral variables that are consistent with the notion of social neglect. Derived social impact scores were related to observed behavioral variables exactly as their component parts (directly nominated like and dislike scores) were related to these variables; thus, they carried little new information.