Peer Support Perception Scale for gifted students: a scale development study

Abstract

The academic success of an gifted student at the junior high school level is contingent upon the peer support they receive. Peer support has a crucial role in enhancing the learning passion and concentration of gifted students on academic assignments. The development of the peer support perception scale aimed to evaluate the establishment of friendships that contribute to individuals' emotional and social development. These friendships are characterized by voluntary interactions that involve affection, the sharing of positive experiences, and mutual reciprocity. The four dimensions of the peer support perception scale encompass informational support, instrumental support, companionship support, and esteem support. The Likert approach was employed in the construction of the peer support perception scale. The primary aim of this study is to construct a peer support perception scale that demonstrates good validity and reliability. The employed methodology involved the utilization of Rasch analysis. The participants in this study consisted of 255 junior high school students who were identified as gifted. Validity instrument shown by data fit with Rasch model, the unidimensionality of the instrument is 39.8% and 20 item fit order. Reliability shown by Cronbach's alpha is 0.88, person reliability is 0.87, and item reliability is 0.98. Overall, it can be concluded that peer support perception scale have good valid and reliability so that it can be used to measure the peer support perception among gifted students of junior high school.

Keywords

• peer support scale
• peer support
• gifted student

References

1. Baker, J. Grant, S., & Morlock, L.(2008). The teacher–student relationship as a developmental context for children with internalizing or externalizing behavior problems. School Psychology Quarterly, 23(1), 3–15. https://doi.org/10.1037/1045-3830.23.1.3
2. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
3. Bandura, A. (1999). A social cognitive theory of personality. In L. Pervin & O. John (Ed.), Handbook of personality (2nd ed., pp. 154–196). New York: Guilford Publications. (Reprinted in D. Cervone & Y. Shoda (Ed.), The coherence of personality. New York: Guilford Press.)
4. Benson, M. J., McWey, L. M., & Ross, J. J. (2006). Parental attachment and peer relations in adolescence: A meta-analysis. Research in Human Development, 3(1), 33–43. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15427617rhd0301_4
5. Berndt, T.J. (2004). Children's friendships: Shifts over a half-century in perspectives on their development and effects. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 50 (3), 206-223
6. Bond, T. G., & Fox, C. M. (2015). Applying the Rasch Model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences (3rd ed.). Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.
7. Cattell, R. B. (1946). Description and measurement of personality. World Book Company.
8. Cross, J. R. (2016). Gifted children and peer relationships. In M. Neihart, S. I. Pfeiffer, & T. L. Cross (Ed.), The social and emotional development of gifted children: What do we know? (pp. 41–54). Prufrock Press Inc.

9. DeVon, H. A., Block, M. E., Moyle-Wright, P., Ernst, D. M., Hayden, S. J., Lazzara, D. J. et al. (2007). A Psychometric Toolbox for Testing Validity and Reliability. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 39 (2), 155–164.
10. Distin, K. (2006). Gifted children: A guide for parents and professionals. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
11. Eisenberg, N., Fabes, R. A., & Spinrad, T. L. (2006). Prosocial Development. In N. Eisenberg, W. Damon, & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Social, emotional, and personality development (pp. 646–718). John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
12. Fischer, G. (1997). Unidimensional linear logistic Rasch models. In W. van der Linden & R. Hambleton (Ed.), Handbook of modern item response theory (pp. 225–243). New York: Springer.
13. Gallardo, L.O., Barrasa, A. & Guevara-Viejo, F. (2016). Positive peer relationships and academic achievement across early and mid-adolescence. Social Behavior and Personality, 44, 1637–1648. Hill, J. (2005). Understanding underachievement of gifted student: Insights and implications. USA: University of Georgia
14. Hinkin, T.R. (1995). A review of scale development practices in the study of organizations. J Manag, 21 (5), 967–988. doi: 10.1016/0149-2063(95)90050-0
15. Kidron, Y., & Fleischman, S. (2006). Promoting Adolescents’ Prosocial Behavior Educational Leadership. Research Matters, 63, 90-91
16. Mawson, J. (2002). Gifted education: Why does it matter?. A Peer Reviewed Journal, 4, 1-4
17. Reis, S.M., & McCoach, D.B., (2000). The underachievement of gifted students: What do we know and where do we go? Gift Child Quarterly, 44 (3), 152-170
18. Rimm, S. (2002). Peer pressures and social acceptance of gifted students. In M. Neihart, S. M. Reis, N. M. Robinson, & S. M. Moon (Eds.), The social and emotional development of gifted children: What do we know? (pp. 13–18). Prufrock Press Inc.
19. Rubin, K. H., Bukowski, W. M., & Parker, J. G. (2006). Peer Interactions, Relationships, and Groups. In N. Eisenberg, W. Damon, & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Social, emotional, and personality development (pp. 571–645). John Wiley & Sons, Inc
20. Sumintono, B & Widhiarso, W. (2015). Aplikasi pemodelan rasch pada assessment pendidikan (Application of Rasch modeling to educational assessment). Cimahi: Trim Komunikata Publishing House