↓ Skip to main content

Peer status and classroom seating arrangements: A social relations analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, October 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
132 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
Peer status and classroom seating arrangements: A social relations analysis
Published in
Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, October 2014
DOI 10.1016/j.jecp.2014.09.007
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yvonne H.M. van den Berg, Antonius H.N. Cillessen

Abstract

The current studies addressed the associations of classroom seating arrangements with peer status using the social relations model. Study 1 examined whether physical distance between classmates was associated with likeability and popularity. Participants were 336 children from 14 fifth- and sixth-grade classrooms (Mage=11.36 years, 47.3% boys). Children who sat closer to the center of the classroom were liked more. Moreover, classmates who sat closer together liked each other more and perceived each other as more popular. Study 2 examined whether children's likeability and popularity judgments were also reflected in the way they positioned themselves relative to their peers when they could arrange their classroom themselves. Participants were 158 children from 6 fifth- and sixth-grade classrooms (Mage=11.64 years, 50.5% boys). Participants placed liked and popular peers closer to themselves than disliked and unpopular peers. If children placed a classmate closer to themselves, they perceived that peer as better liked and more popular and were perceived as better liked and more popular in return. Implications for further research on classroom seating arrangements and peer relationships are discussed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users 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 132 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 <1%
Luxembourg 1 <1%
Unknown 130 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 17%
Student > Bachelor 18 14%
Student > Master 15 11%
Researcher 12 9%
Other 7 5%
Other 26 20%
Unknown 31 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 32 24%
Social Sciences 24 18%
Linguistics 6 5%
Arts and Humanities 5 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 3%
Other 22 17%
Unknown 39 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 23. 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 10 January 2015.
All research outputs
#1,638,447
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Experimental Child Psychology
#165
of 1,743 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,276
of 269,032 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Experimental Child Psychology
#4
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,743 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its peers.
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 269,032 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.