Comparing the reliability and predictive power of child, teacher, and guardian reports of noncognitive skills.
Big Five
personality traits
predictive power
psychological assessment
respondent types
Journal
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
ISSN: 1091-6490
Titre abrégé: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 7505876
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
08 02 2022
08 02 2022
Historique:
accepted:
21
12
2021
entrez:
8
2
2022
pubmed:
9
2
2022
medline:
26
2
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Children's noncognitive or socioemotional skills (e.g., persistence and self-control) are typically measured using surveys in which either children rate their own skills or adults rate the skills of children. For many purposes-including program evaluation and monitoring school systems-ratings are often collected from multiple perspectives about a single child (e.g., from both the child and an adult). Collecting data from multiple perspectives is costly, and there is limited evidence on the benefits of this approach. Using a longitudinal survey, this study compares children's noncognitive skills as reported by themselves, their guardians, and their teachers. Although reports from all three types of respondents are correlated with each other, teacher reports have the highest internal consistency and are the most predictive of children's later cognitive outcomes and behavior in school. The teacher reports add predictive power beyond baseline measures of Intelligence Quotient (IQ) for most outcomes in schools. Measures collected from children and guardians add minimal predictive power beyond the teacher reports.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35131849
pii: 2113992119
doi: 10.1073/pnas.2113992119
pmc: PMC8833216
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Subventions
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : R37 HD065072
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 the Author(s). Published by PNAS.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare no competing interest.
Références
Br J Educ Psychol. 2014 Jun;84(Pt 2):239-52
pubmed: 24829119
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2007 Jul;93(1):116-30
pubmed: 17605593
PLoS One. 2021 Mar 25;16(3):e0248629
pubmed: 33765063
Appl Psychol Meas. 2018 Jun;42(4):291-306
pubmed: 29881126
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2020 Jan 14;117(2):931-935
pubmed: 31888989
Assessment. 2006 Jun;13(2):187-96
pubmed: 16672733
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2017 Jul;113(1):117-143
pubmed: 27055049
Psychol Bull. 2009 Mar;135(2):322-38
pubmed: 19254083
Front Psychol. 2018 Mar 14;9:325
pubmed: 29593621
Psychol Bull. 2010 Nov;136(6):1092-1122
pubmed: 21038940
Labour Econ. 2012 Aug 1;19(4):451-464
pubmed: 23559694
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2007 Dec;2(4):313-45
pubmed: 26151971
Educ Res. 2015 May;44(4):237-251
pubmed: 27134288
Am Econ Rev. 2013 Oct;103(6):2052-2086
pubmed: 24634518