{"title":"对探索社会情绪学习、学校氛围和社会网络分析的修正","authors":"","doi":"10.1002/jcop.23036","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Maria Xu, Marisa MacDonnell, Angela Wang, Maurice J. Elias. <i>Journal of Community Psychology</i>, 51, 84–102.</p><p>The authors of Xu et al. (<span>2023</span>) have supplied the following correction to their article.</p><p>The paper stated that Hypothesis 1 (Peer leaders will increase in Closeness and Indegree centrality) and that Hypothesis 2 (Students overall will increase in Closeness and Indegree centrality) were supported while Hypothesis 3 (Peer leaders will have greater centrality values than students overall at the end of the year) was not. This was an incorrect reporting of the conclusions. Hypothesis 1 was not supported while Hypothesis 2 and Hypothesis 3 were supported. The resulting change is reflected below in the corrected paragraph.</p><p>Hypothesis 2 and Hypothesis 3 were supported by the paired permutation <i>t</i>-tests and permutation <i>t</i>-tests. Hypothesis 1 was not. It makes sense that Ambassadors and students would have significantly different scores between them at the beginning of the intervention as well as the end of the intervention because Ambassadors were chosen by their peers to be student leaders. To be chosen as a student leader suggests that they were already influential students. Students over all did increase in influence as suggested by our theory of diffusion, but Ambassadors did not increase in influence overall. This may be due to a ceiling effect where student leaders could have not grown more in influence because they were already near the top of influence in the first place. The maintenance of higher influence suggests that even though they did not grow in influence, Ambassadors still maintained a critical role within the community even at the end of the year.</p><p>The authors sincerely apologize for this error.</p>","PeriodicalId":15496,"journal":{"name":"Journal of community psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10479969/pdf/JCOP-51-2319.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Correction to Exploring social-emotional learning, school climate, and social network analysis\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/jcop.23036\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Maria Xu, Marisa MacDonnell, Angela Wang, Maurice J. Elias. <i>Journal of Community Psychology</i>, 51, 84–102.</p><p>The authors of Xu et al. (<span>2023</span>) have supplied the following correction to their article.</p><p>The paper stated that Hypothesis 1 (Peer leaders will increase in Closeness and Indegree centrality) and that Hypothesis 2 (Students overall will increase in Closeness and Indegree centrality) were supported while Hypothesis 3 (Peer leaders will have greater centrality values than students overall at the end of the year) was not. This was an incorrect reporting of the conclusions. Hypothesis 1 was not supported while Hypothesis 2 and Hypothesis 3 were supported. The resulting change is reflected below in the corrected paragraph.</p><p>Hypothesis 2 and Hypothesis 3 were supported by the paired permutation <i>t</i>-tests and permutation <i>t</i>-tests. Hypothesis 1 was not. It makes sense that Ambassadors and students would have significantly different scores between them at the beginning of the intervention as well as the end of the intervention because Ambassadors were chosen by their peers to be student leaders. To be chosen as a student leader suggests that they were already influential students. Students over all did increase in influence as suggested by our theory of diffusion, but Ambassadors did not increase in influence overall. This may be due to a ceiling effect where student leaders could have not grown more in influence because they were already near the top of influence in the first place. The maintenance of higher influence suggests that even though they did not grow in influence, Ambassadors still maintained a critical role within the community even at the end of the year.</p><p>The authors sincerely apologize for this error.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15496,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of community psychology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10479969/pdf/JCOP-51-2319.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of community psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jcop.23036\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of community psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jcop.23036","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
Maria Xu, Marisa MacDonnell, Angela Wang, Maurice J. Elias。社会心理学杂志,51,84-102。Xu等人(2023)的作者对他们的文章进行了以下更正。该论文指出,假设1(同伴领导者将增加亲密度和Indegree中心性)和假设2(学生整体将增加亲密度和Indegree中心性)得到支持,而假设3(在年底同伴领导者将比学生整体具有更大的中心性值)则不被支持。这是对结论的错误报道。假设1不被支持,而假设2和假设3被支持。修改后的段落如下所示。假设2和假设3得到配对排列t检验和排列t检验的支持。假设1不是。在干预开始和干预结束时,大使和学生之间的分数会有显著差异,这是有道理的,因为大使是由同龄人选为学生领袖的。被选为学生领袖表明他们已经是有影响力的学生。正如我们的扩散理论所表明的那样,总体而言,学生的影响力确实有所增加,但大使的影响力总体上没有增加。这可能是由于天花板效应,学生领袖的影响力不可能增加,因为他们一开始就接近影响力的顶端。保持较高的影响力表明,尽管他们的影响力没有增长,但即使在年底,大使仍然在社区中保持关键作用。作者真诚地为这个错误道歉。
Correction to Exploring social-emotional learning, school climate, and social network analysis
Maria Xu, Marisa MacDonnell, Angela Wang, Maurice J. Elias. Journal of Community Psychology, 51, 84–102.
The authors of Xu et al. (2023) have supplied the following correction to their article.
The paper stated that Hypothesis 1 (Peer leaders will increase in Closeness and Indegree centrality) and that Hypothesis 2 (Students overall will increase in Closeness and Indegree centrality) were supported while Hypothesis 3 (Peer leaders will have greater centrality values than students overall at the end of the year) was not. This was an incorrect reporting of the conclusions. Hypothesis 1 was not supported while Hypothesis 2 and Hypothesis 3 were supported. The resulting change is reflected below in the corrected paragraph.
Hypothesis 2 and Hypothesis 3 were supported by the paired permutation t-tests and permutation t-tests. Hypothesis 1 was not. It makes sense that Ambassadors and students would have significantly different scores between them at the beginning of the intervention as well as the end of the intervention because Ambassadors were chosen by their peers to be student leaders. To be chosen as a student leader suggests that they were already influential students. Students over all did increase in influence as suggested by our theory of diffusion, but Ambassadors did not increase in influence overall. This may be due to a ceiling effect where student leaders could have not grown more in influence because they were already near the top of influence in the first place. The maintenance of higher influence suggests that even though they did not grow in influence, Ambassadors still maintained a critical role within the community even at the end of the year.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Community Psychology is a peer-reviewed journal devoted to research, evaluation, assessment and intervention, and review articles that deal with human behavior in community settings. Articles of interest include descriptions and evaluations of service programs and projects, studies of youth, parenting, and family development, methodology and design for work in the community, the interaction of groups in the larger community, and criminals and corrections.