Assessing the (in-)consistency of same-sex and opposite-sex peer nominations among Turkish elementary-school children

Abstract

Nomination procedures for assessing peer behaviors are in wide use, and mixed-sex peer nominations are often utilized under the assumption that combined same-and opposite-sex nominations yield a representative picture of children's behaviors and relationships to other variables. Analyses of nominations made by 457 Turkish third and fifth graders for 14 peer behaviors and for liked-/disliked-a-lot illustrate the productiveness of separately assessing same-sex and opposite-sex nominations, showing that: (a) a bias toward more nominations for same-sex peers is not consistent over all behaviors; and (b) although same-sex and combined same-/opposite-sex nominations are strongly related, the agreement between same-and opposite-sex nominations is substantially Lower. The outcome is that (a) sociometric status classification depends on the nominating population and (b) the relationship between-peer-assessed behaviors and peer acceptance/peer sociometric status can differ; depending upon whether the reference group is same-or opposite-sex peers. Findings bring into question the routine use of mixed-sex nominations.