Cited by 263Early Childhood Education and DevelopmentChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentSocial Skills and Education

The impact of trial stage, developer involvement and international transferability on universal social and emotional learning programme outcomes: A meta-analysis

Open access
Wigelsworth, M., Lendrum, A., Oldfield, J., Scott, A., ten Bokkel, I., Tate, K., Emery, C.·2016·Cambridge Journal of Education

Abstract

This study expands upon the extant prior meta-analytic literature by exploring previously theorised reasons for the failure of school-based, universal social and emotional learning (SEL) programmes to produce expected results. Eighty-nine studies reporting the effects of school-based, universal SEL programmes were examined for differential effects on the basis of: (1) stage of evaluation (efficacy or effectiveness); (2) involvement from the programme developer in the evaluation (led, involved, independent); and (3) whether the programme was implemented in its country of origin (home or away). A range of outcomes were assessed including: social-emotional competence, attitudes towards self, pro-social behaviour, conduct problems, emotional distress, academic achievement and emotional competence. Differential gains across all three factors were shown, although not always in the direction hypothesised. The findings from the current study demonstrate a revised and more complex relationship between identified factors and dictate major new directions for the field.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/0305764x.2016.1195791

Cites

172 of 172 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so the self-check wasn’t run.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wigelsworth, M., Lendrum, A., Oldfield, J., Scott, A., ten Bokkel, I., Tate, K., & Emery, C.
Affiliations
  • University of Manchester (GB)
  • Manchester Metropolitan University (GB)
Corresponding author
Wigelsworth, M.
Venue
Cambridge Journal of Education
Published
2016-07-02
Volume
46
Issue
3
Pages
347-376
ISSN
  • 0305-764X (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-3577
OpenAlex
W2465240660
Cited by
263
References
172
Citations by year
2026: 24 · 2025: 33 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 40 · 2022: 37 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 28 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 4
FWCI
7.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Licence
other-oa
Locations
  • Cambridge Journal of Education (publishedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • e-space (Manchester Metropolitan University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
University of Manchester
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Early Childhood Education and Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
  • Social Sciences › Education › Social Skills and Education
Keywords
social-emotional learning, program evaluation, efficacy versus effectiveness, socioemotional skills, prosocial behavior, conduct problems, emotional distress, academic performance, emotional competence

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