↓ Skip to main content

First Selection, Then Influence: Developmental Differences in Friendship Dynamics Regarding Academic Achievement

Overview of attention for article published in Developmental Psychology, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
75 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
163 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
First Selection, Then Influence: Developmental Differences in Friendship Dynamics Regarding Academic Achievement
Published in
Developmental Psychology, July 2017
DOI 10.1037/dev0000314
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mariola Claudia Gremmen, Jan Kornelis Dijkstra, Christian Steglich, René Veenstra

Abstract

This study concerns peer selection and influence dynamics in early adolescents' friendships regarding academic achievement. Using longitudinal social network analysis (RSiena), both selection and influence processes were investigated for students' average grades and their cluster-specific grades (i.e., language, exact, and social cluster). Data were derived from the SNARE (Social Network Analysis of Risk behavior in Early adolescence) study, using 6 waves (N = 601; Mage = 12.66, 48.9% boys at first wave). Results showed developmental differences between the first and second year of secondary school (seventh and eighth grade). Whereas selection processes were found in the first year on students' cluster-specific grades, influence processes were found in the second year, on both students' average and cluster-specific grades. These results suggest that students initially tend to select friends on the basis of similar cluster-based grades (first year), showing that similarity in achievement is attractive for friendships. Especially for low-achieving students, similar-achieving students were highly attractive as friends, whereas they were mostly avoided by high-achieving students. Influence processes on academic achievement take place later on (second year), when students know each other better, indicating that students' grades become more similar over time in response to their connectedness. Concluding, this study shows the importance of developmental differences and specific school subjects for understanding peer selection and influence processes in adolescents' academic achievement. (PsycINFO Database Record

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 163 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 163 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 31 19%
Student > Master 17 10%
Student > Bachelor 14 9%
Researcher 11 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 4%
Other 21 13%
Unknown 62 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 39 24%
Social Sciences 27 17%
Arts and Humanities 5 3%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 2%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 2%
Other 20 12%
Unknown 64 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 April 2017.
All research outputs
#20,660,571
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Developmental Psychology
#4,203
of 4,509 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#252,263
of 326,855 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Developmental Psychology
#25
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,509 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.6. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 326,855 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.