Popularidad y relaciones entre iguales en el aula: un estudio prospectivo

• Ignacio Ramos-Vidal ^[1]
  1. [1] Universidad de Sevilla

     Universidad de Sevilla

     Sevilla, España

     
• Localización: Psicología educativa, ISSN 1135-755X, Vol. 22, Nº. 2, 2016, págs. 113-124
• Idioma: español
• DOI: 10.1016/j.pse.2015.12.001
• Títulos paralelos:
  • Popularity and peer relationships in the classroom: A prospective study
• Enlaces
  • Texto completo (pdf)
• Dialnet Métricas: 15 Citas
• Resumen
  • español

    Este artículo analiza la red de popularidad entre los companeros ˜ de clase y la conexión que este fenómeno establece con diferentes tipos de relaciones (positivas, neutras y negativas) que se producen dentro del aula. Empleamos el Análisis de Redes Sociales (ARS) para identificar contextos de interacción en el aula. Evaluamos diferentes tipos de relaciones en 20 clases pertenecientes a dos centros de educación secundaria localizados en el área suburbana de la Ciudad de México. Participaron en total 660 estudiantes (67% mujeres, 33% varones), que proporcionaron los datos de la investigación. Calculamos los indicadores de cohesión para las redes positivas, neutras, negativas y de popularidad. Los análisis de clúster muestran dos perfiles basados en las propiedades estructurales de las redes que denominamos “simétrico neutro” y “asimétrico positivo”. El primero presenta una distribución equilibrada entre sexos, baja homofilia y predominancia de relaciones neutras y positivas y el segundo muestra una distribución asimétrica de alumnos en función del sexo, elevada heterofilia y alta cohesión en relaciones positivas. Los análisis de regresión muestran que el número de alumnos por clase se relaciona de forma negativa con la densidad de la red positiva y de forma positiva con la densidad de la red negativa. La comparación simultánea de múltiples redes muestra que la popularidad se asocia con estar inmerso en relaciones positivas. Por el contrario los datos indican cierta incompatibilidad entre el hecho de ser popular y estar inmerso en relaciones negativas. Se discuten los hallazgos para mejorar la convivencia escolar y las políticas públicas en materia educativa.

  • English

    This paper analyzes in depth the network of popularity among classmates and the connections that this phenomenon maintains with different kinds of relationships (i.e., positive, neutral, and negative) that take place within the classroom. We use Social Network Analysis (SNA) to identify interaction contexts in the classroom. Different kinds of relationships in 20 classrooms from two secondary schools located in the suburban area of Mexico City were assessed. The research data was provided by 660 students (67% girls; 33% boys). Cohesion measures were calculated for positive, neutral, negative, and popularity networks. Cluster analysis shows two profiles based on structural properties of the networks that we have called “Neutral Symmetric” and “Positive Asymmetric”. The first one presents low homophily relative to sex, predominance of positive and neutral relationships, and a significant level of negative links. The second profile presents a heterogeneous distribution according to sex, high homophily and high rates of cohesion in positive relationships. Regression analysis shows that the number of students per class is negatively related to the positive network density, and positively related to the negative network density. The simultaneous comparison of multiple networks shows that popularity is associated with being immersed in positive relationships. By contrast, the data suggest certain incompatibility between being popular and being immersed in negative relationships. The findings are discussed in order to improve school life and public policies in education

• Referencias bibliográficas
  • Adler, P. A. y Adler, P. (1998). Peer power: Preadolescent culture and identity. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
  • Allen, J., Porter, M., McFarland, C., Marsh, P. y McElhaney, K. (2005). The Two Faces of Adolescents’ Success with Peers: Adolescent Popularity,...
  • Aral, S. y Walker, D. (2012). Identifying influential and susceptible members of social networks. Science, 337(6092), 337–341. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1215842
  • Borgatti, S. P., Everett, M. G. y Freeman, L. C. (2002). Ucinet for windows: Software for social network analysis. Boston, MA: Analytic Technologies,...
  • Brass, D. J., Butterfield, K. y Skaggs, B. C. (1998). Relationships and unethical behavior: A social network perspective. Academy of Management...
  • Brechwald, W. y Prinstein, M. J. (2011). Beyond Homophily: A Decade of Advances in Understanding Peer Influence Processes. Journal of Research...
  • Carr, E., Dunlap, G., Horner, R., Koegel, R.L., Turnbul, P., Sailor, W., … Fox, L. (2002).Positive behavior support evolution of an applied...
  • Cillessen, A. H. y Rose, A. J. (2005). Understanding popularity in the peer system.Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 102–105.
  • Degirmencioglu, S. M., Urberg, K. A., Tolson, J. M. y Richard, P. (1998). Adolescent friendship networks: Continuity and change over the school...
  • Dekker, D., Krackhardt, D. y Snijders, T. A. B. (2007). Sensitivity of MRQAP tests to collinearity and autocorrelation conditions. Psychometrika,...
  • Ellis, W. E. y Zarbatany, L. (2007). Peer group status as a moderator of group influence on children’s deviant, aggressive, and prosocial...
  • Everett, M. G. y Borgatti, S. P. (2014). Networks containing negative ties. Social Net-works, 38, 111–120.
  • Giordano, P. C. (2003). Relationships in adolescence. Annual Review of Sociology, 29, 257–281.
  • Harary, F. (1969). Graph theory. New York: Addison-Wesley.
  • Haynie, D. L. (2003). Contexts of risk? Explaining the link between girls’pubertal development and their delinquency involvement. Social Forces,...
  • Huitsing, G., Van Duijn, M., Snijders, T. A. B., Wang, P., Sainio, M., Salmivalli, C. y Veenstra, R. (2012). Univariate and multivariate models...
  • Jackson, D. R., Cappella, E. y Neal, J. W. (2015). Norms in the Classroom Social Network: Contexts of Aggressive Behavior and Social Preference...
  • Juvonen, J. (2001). School violence: Prevalence, fears, and prevention. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation.
  • Kaufman, L. y Rousseeuw, P. J. (2009). Finding groups in data: an introduction to cluster analysis (Vol. 344). John Wiley & Sons.
  • Kossinets, G. y Watts, D. J. (2006). Empirical analysis of an evolving social network. Science, 311(5757), 88–90.
  • Krackhardt, D. (1988). Predicting with networks: Nonparametric multiple regression analysis of dyadic data. Social Networks, 10, 359–381.
  • Krackhardt, D. (1993). MRQAP: Analytic versus permutation solutions (Working paper).Carnegie Mellon University.
  • Krackhardt, D. y Stern, R. N. (1988). Informal networks and organizational crises: An experimental simulation. Social Psychology Quarterly,...
  • Kwon, K. y Lease, M. (2014). Perceived influence of close friends, well-liked peers, and popular peers Reputational or personal influence?...
  • Labianca, G. y Brass, D. J. (2006). Exploring the social ledger: Negative relationships and negative asymmetry in social networks in organizations....
  • Lafontana, K. M. y Cillessen, A. H. (2002). Children’s stereotypes of popular andunpopular peers: A multi-method assessment. Developmental...
  • Marsden, P. V. (2002). Egocentric and sociocentric measures of network centrality.Social Networks, 24, 407–422.
  • McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L. y Cook, J. (2001). Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 415–444.
  • Mitchell, J. C. (Ed.). (1969). Social networks in urban settings. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press.
  • Mizruchi, M. S. y Marquis, C. (2006). Egocentric, sociocentric, or dyadic? Identifying the appropriate level of analysis in the study of organizational...
  • Mortimer, J. T. y Call, K. T. (2001). Arenas of Comfort in Adolescence: A Study of Adjustment in Context. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Parkhurst, J. T. y Hopmeyer, A. (1998). Sociometric popularity and peer-perceived popularity two distinct dimensions of peer status. The Journal...
  • Prinstein, M. J. y Dodge, K. A. (Eds.). (2008). Understanding peer influence in children and adolescents. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
  • Ramos-Vidal, I. (2015). Estrategias de análisis estructural aplicadas a la evaluación de Políticas Públicas. Gestión y Análisis de Políticas...
  • Ramos-Vidal, I. y Ricaurte, P. (2015). Niveles de análisis y estrategias metodológicas en la ciencia de las redes. Revista Virtualis, 6(11),...
  • Ryan, A. M. (2000). Peer groups as a context for the socialization of adolescents’ motivation, engagement, and achievement in school. Educational...
  • Stone, M. R. y Brown, B. (1999). Identity claims and projections: Descriptions of self and crowds in secondary school. New Directions for...
  • Valente, T. W. (2012). Network interventions. Science, 337(6090), 49–53.
  • Witkow, M., Bellmore, A. D., Nishina, A., Juvonen, J. y Graham, S. (2005). Mutual antipathies during early adolescence: more than just rejection....