Sociogram Analysis Class: 72

1. Sociogram AnalysisClass: 72 Cindy Lewis Vanessa Ricker Chad Thatcher Jinyu Xia

2. Who would you like to eat lunch with?

4. OBSERVATIONS • Stars: (33%) f=7,21,16, 13, 12 m=11, 6 26, 25 • Rejected (19%): f=14, 5, 19 m=27, 24 • 80.8% Have mutual choices • Ghosts: 1 • Controversial: 4 & 26 • Triangles: (19, 11, 6) (15, 2,25) • Island: Male group at top bottom of chart • Chains: Follow definition, several lead to “star” children

5. NOMINATION CHART • LOFCQ: Several stars had high locus of control (21,20,11,26) • Child 7 considered most popular, child 1 least popular. Both female. Observed greater complexity in female groups. • Anomalies • 4 and 26 are children I would consider to be “controversial” children. Both are male and connect the two male groups in the graph…scored high in the negative question but are stars for the lunch question. 26 low PSD—not reality. 4 high PSD, however chosen by 3 children for lunch Moderate to high level of cohesiveness in this class

6. Who would you like to go to the movies with?

9. Stars of the class • Boys • Student 25 -5 positive nominations • Social attraction score: 24 • Adjusted social distance: 2.00 • Student 9 -5 positive nominations • Social attraction score: 23 • Adjusted social distance: 2.96

10. Stars of the class (continued) • Girls • Student 12 -6 positive nominations • Social attraction score: 27 • Adjusted social distance: 2.72 • Student 21 -5 positive nominations • Social attraction score: 24 • Adjusted social distance: 2.92

11. Rejected Students • Student 17 -0 positive nominations • Social attraction score: 6 • Adjusted social distance: 3.36 • Student 24 -0 positive nominations • Social attraction score: 4 • Adjusted social distance: 3.16

12. Controversial Student • Student 24 • Not being chosen • Personal distance score: 1 • Adjusted social distance score of 3.16 • Social attraction score: 4

13. Choices • Mutual choice pairs: 59.2% • 9 and 11, 25 and 2, 27 and 4 etc. • Social Triangles • Students 8, 16, and 7 • Students 15, 25, 2 • Social Circles • Students 11, 9, 6, 22 • Students 23, 16, 7, 8 • Islands • Students 27, 4, 24

14. Self esteem for popular and rejected students • Student 12 • Coopersmith Inventory Score: 23 • Student 9 • Score: 20 • Student 17 • Score: 20 • Student 24 • Score: 12

15. Locus of control for popular and rejected students • Student 12 • 113.91 • Student 9 • 105.56 • Student 17 • 116.69 • Student 24 • 119.47

16. Academic Question Jinyu Xia

19. Mutual choice chains • Boy 9 and boy 6; • Boy 22 and boy 6; • Boy 25 and boy 15; • Boy 26 and boy 18; • Girl 7 and girl 16; • Girl 12 and girl 13.

20. Chains pattern • Boy 12, boy 11, boy 9 and boy 6; • Boy 25, boy 2, boy 20 and boy 15

21. Academic Popularity • Girl 13 picked by 7 girls; • Girl 7 picked by 5 girls; • Girls 12 picked by 5 girls; • Girl 16 picked by 4 girls; • Girl 23 picked by 4 girls; • Girl 3 picked by 3 girls and 1 boy; • Boy 6 picked by 5 boys; • Boy 25 picked by 4 boys.

22. Correlation Between Adjusted Social Distance And Social Attraction Score • Negatively, statistically correlated with each other.

23. Social Attraction Score and Academic Popularity • Positively correlated

24. Ghost Student • Boy 27 • Girl 1 • Girl 8

25. Negative Question Who do you like the least?

26. Students Worth a Second Look • Student 26 • Student 17 • Student 18 • Student 5

29. Student 26 • Male • Adjusted Social Distance = 4.04 • Personal Social Distance = 1 • Social Attraction Score = 16 • Locus of Control Score = 105.5

31. Student 26 • Received 15 negative nominations. More than double the next closest student. • Negative nominations from over 57% of the class • 3/5 of the negative nominations come from females (9 females). 70% females in the class picked student 26. • Received only 6 positive nominations, 5 of those come from students 17 & 18

32. Student 17 • Male • Adjusted Social Distance = 3.36 • Personal Social Distance = 1 • Social Attraction Score = 6 • Locus of Control Score = 116.69

34. Student 17 • Received 7 negative nominations, the second most of the class . • Nominations from 4 females and 3 males • Selected student 26 on the lunch and movie questions.

35. Student 18 • Male • Adjusted Social Distance = 3.44 • Personal Social Distance = 1 • Social Attraction Score = 11 • Locus of Control Score = NA

36. Student 18 • Received 4 negative nominations. • Nominations from 2 males and 2 females. • Selected student 26 on all three positive nominations, and all choices were mutual choices.

37. Student 5 • Female • Adjusted Social Distance = 2.8 • Personal Social Distance = 2 • Social Attraction Score = 3 • Locus of Control Score = 80.53

38. Student 5 • Received no negative nominations from the class. • Received only 3 positive nominations from all three questions, all of them third choices. • “Invisible student”

39. Conclusion

40. Gender lines • Were not crossed among 3 positive question sociograms • Exceptions • Movie: girl 8 chose boy 6 • Academic: boy 17 chose girls 3 and 14 • Rejection: 70% of girls chose boy 26

41. Similarities • Students 16 and 7 mutual choice • Students 26 and 18 mutual choice • Social circle with 25, 2, 15, and 20 • Student 1- ghost • Similar choices with academics and 2 social questions

42. Differences • Gender and lunch question • Gender and rejection question

43. Social Distance and Social Attraction • Student 1 (ghost) • Social distance: 3.44 • Social attraction: 0 • Student 12 (popular) • Social distance: 2.56 • Social attraction: 27

44. Concerns… • Academic question and 2 social questions • Suggestions… • 3 questions social • 3 questions academic