Cited by 432Mentoring and Academic DevelopmentYouth Development and Social SupportCareer Development and Diversity

A model for the influence of mentoring relationships on youth development

Rhodes, Jean E., Spencer, Renée, Keller, Thomas E., Liang, Belle, Noam, Gil·2006·Journal of Community Psychology

Abstract

Anecdotal reports of the protective qualities of mentoring relationships for youth are corroborated by a growing body of research. What is missing, however, is research on the processes by which mentors influence developmental outcomes. In this article, we present a conceptual model of the mentoring process along with a delineation of some of the current research on what makes for more effective mentoring relationships. A set of recommendations for future research is offered. © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/jcop.20124

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Rhodes et al.'s model of youth mentoring posits that a close mentoring relationship stimulates three intertwined processes: enhancement of social and emotional development, improvement in cognitive functioning, and promotion of positive identity development, all of which subsequently result in positive outcomes.

    “A prominent model of mentoring relationships is Rhodes et al.’s (2006) model of youth mentoring. Drawing on theories of parent-child, teacher-child, and peer relationships, the model posits that a close mentoring relationship stimulates three intertwined processes: (1) enhancement of social and emotional development; (2) improvement in cognitive functioning; and (3) promotion of positive identity”

    From Unpacking Community-Based Youth Mentoring Relationships: An Integrative Review (2021) · cites this paper as Rhodes et al. (2006)

  • Natural mentors who are trustworthy and consistent may help youth feel more confident and open to emotional support when facing stressful events or chronic adversity.

    “Although, youth with a history of unavailable or inconsistent care may be less likely to turn to others in times of stress (Belsky & Cassidy, 1994), natural mentors who are trustworthy and consistent may help youth feel more confident and open to emotional support when facing stressful events or chronic adversity (Rhodes et al., 2006; Rutter, 1987).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rhodes, J. E., Spencer, R., Keller, T. E., Liang, B., & Noam, G.
Affiliations
  • University of Massachusetts Boston (US)
  • Boston University (US)
  • University of Chicago (US)
  • Boston College (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
Corresponding author
Rhodes, Jean E.
Venue
Journal of Community Psychology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2006-10-05
Volume
34
Issue
6
Pages
691-707
ISSN
  • 0090-4392 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-6629
OpenAlex
W2110355970
Cited by
432
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 22 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 35 · 2020: 27 · 2019: 35 · 2018: 25 · 2017: 28 · 2016: 31 · 2015: 23 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 24 · 2012: 29
FWCI
10.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Community Psychology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mentoring and Academic Development
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Youth Development and Social Support
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Career Development and Diversity
Keywords
mentoring relationships, youth development, protective factors, mentoring process, conceptual model, developmental outcomes

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review