Cited by 36

The Self‐systems of Aggressive Children: A Cluster‐analytic Investigation

Edens, John F., Cavell, Timothy A., Hughes, Jan N.·1999·Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry

Abstract

The purpose of the present study was to identify clinically relevant subtypes of aggressive children based on measures of children's self‐systems and significant others' perceptions of relationship quality. In a sample of aggressive second‐ and third‐graders, a cluster analysis of these children's perceptions of support and significant others' (mother, teacher, and peers) perceptions of relationship quality revealed one subgroup in which self‐ and other‐ratings were both below the group mean ( concordant‐negative ), one in which both were above the sample mean ( concordant‐positive ), and one in which they were discrepant (high child‐report and low other‐report). All three clusters were rated as more aggressive than controls. However, children in the discrepant group were rated as considerably more aggressive and delinquent than those in the two concordant clusters, who did not differ from each other on measures of internalizing and externalizing behaviors. Results are discussed from an attachment perspective and in terms of the clinical significance of this self‐other discrepancy.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/1469-7610.00461

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Edens, J. F., Cavell, T. A., & Hughes, J. N.
Venue
Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1999-03
Volume
40
Issue
3
Pages
441-453
ISSN
  • 0021-9630
  • 1469-7610
Cited by
36
References
0
Language
en

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