Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
A. Zander, J. Forward (1968)
Position in group, acheivement motivation, and group aspirations.Journal of personality and social psychology, 8 3
Calyampudi Rao (1965)
Linear statistical inference and its applications
R. Slavin, S. Sharan, S. Kagan, Rachel Hertz-Lazarowitz, C. Webb, R. Schmuck (1985)
Learning to cooperate, cooperating to learn
E. Cohen (1982)
EXPECTATION STATES AND INTERRACIAL INTERACTION IN SCHOOL SETTINGSReview of Sociology, 8
S. Swing, P. Peterson (1982)
The Relationship of Student Ability and Small-Group Interaction to Student Achievement, 19
L. Burstein, R. Linn (1982)
Analysis of Educational Effects from a Multilevel Perspective: Disentangling Between- and Within-Class Relationships in Mathematics Performance.
N. Webb (1982)
Student Interaction and Learning in Small GroupsReview of Educational Research, 52
E. Cohen, S. Sharan (1980)
Modifying Status Relations in Israeli YouthJournal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 11
L. Cronbach, N. Webb (1975)
Between-class and within-class effects in a reported aptitude * treatment interaction: Reanalysis of a study by G. L. Anderson.Journal of Educational Psychology, 67
J. Berger, B. Cohen, M. Zelditch, (1972)
Status Characteristics and Social Interaction
Julie Tammivaara (1982)
The Effects of Task Structure on Beliefs about Competence and Participation in Small Groups.Sociology Of Education, 55
N. Webb (1983)
Predicting learning from student interaction: Defining the interaction variablesEducational Psychologist, 18
L. Cronbach (1976)
Research on Classrooms and Schools: Formulation of Questions, Design and Analysis.
R. Strahan (1982)
Multivariate Analysis and the Problem of Type I Error.Journal of Counseling Psychology, 29
In this study we investigated how a natural status characteristic (grade level) and an experimentally induced status characteristic (ability) combine to affect group interaction and interpersonal perception in homogeneous and heterogeneous groups. Eighty male fifth and sixth graders were randomly assigned to groups of four that were made into homogeneous or heterogeneous “ability” groups on the basis of a bogus aptitude test. Their social interaction was videotaped as groups worked on a group consensus task. The data indicated that the two status characteristics (actual and induced) had a similar and significant effect on the social interaction in the groups. High-status students dominated group interaction, were more influential, and were more likely to be perceived as leaders. The data also indicated that differences in helping behavior may be due, in part, to the perceived status of the student and not only to the student's ability to give help.
Journal of Educational Psychology – American Psychological Association
Published: Dec 1, 1987
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.