lOMoARcPSD|42517701
Sociometry Experiment by Dr. Bina Srivastava
Experimental Psychology - II (Amity University)
Scan to open on Studocu
Studocu is not sponsored or endorsed by any college or university
Downloaded by ANJALI SINGH (happyanjii753@gmail.com)
lOMoARcPSD|42517701
EXPERIMENT 1
AIM
To assess the interpersonal attraction amoung students with the
help of sociometry developed by Dr Bina srivastava which is a
adaptation of Morino Test
INTRODUCTION
SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY
Social psychology is the scientific study of how people's thoughts,
feelings, beliefs, intentions and goals are constructed within a social
context by the actual or imagined interactions with others.
It therefore looks at human behavior as influenced by other people
and the conditions under which social behavior and feelings occur.
SOCIOMETRY
Sociometry, measurement techniques used in social psychology,
in sociology, and sometimes in social anthropology and psychiatry
based on the assessment of social choice and interpersonal
attractiveness. The term is closely associated with the work of the
Austrian-born psychiatrist J.L. Moreno, who developed the method
as a research and therapeutic technique.A sociometric measure
assesses the attractions (or repulsions) within a given group. The
basic technique involves asking all group members to identify
specific persons within the group they would prefer (or would not
prefer) to have as partners in a given activity. Many variations on
this technique exist for studying different aspects of social
preference. For example, a group’s networking structure can be
exposed through the sociometric technique of recording all
interactions between group members. The technique can also be
applied on larger scale to reveal interorganizational networks by
treating organizations as individual units.
METHOD IN SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY
Social psychologists typically explain human behavior as a result of
the interaction of mental states and immediate, social situations.
Experimental methods involve the researcher altering a variable in
the environment and measuring the effect on another variable. An
example would be allowing two groups of children to play violent or
nonviolent videogames, and then observing their subsequent level
of aggression during free-play period.Co-relational methods examine
the statistical association between two naturally occurring variables.
For example, one could correlate the amount of violent television
children watch at home with the number of violent incidents the
children participate in at school. Observational methods are purely
Downloaded by ANJALI SINGH (happyanjii753@gmail.com)
lOMoARcPSD|42517701
descriptive and include naturalistic observation, contrived
observation, participant observation, and archival analysis. An
example would be to unobtrusively observe children on a
playground (with a video camera, perhaps) and record the number
and types of aggressive actions displayed. Whenever possible,
social psychologists rely on controlled experimentation. Controlled
experiments require the manipulation of one or more independent
variables in order to examine the effect on a dependent variable.
SOCIOGRAM
A sociogram is a diagram showing the structure of relationships
between people in a group. Sociograms are commonly constructed
by elementary or preschool teachers to illustrate peer relations in a
class and identify the popular children as well as those who are
disliked or isolated.For example, if Sally has 8 friend connections
and Billy has zero, then Sally is clearly more popular and influential
than Billy. This information can be used to target interventions for
specific children (such as social skills training for Billy) and provide
guidance on how to best arrange group projects or assigned seats.
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
1. Tschinkel , W.R (1991)- The study of social insects has proceeded
without adequate descriptive data on social insect attributes. The
term “sociometry” is proposed for the collection and analysis of the
physical and numerical attributes of social insect colonies and their
inhabitants. Sociometry can be seen as having 3 levels — the
compilation of data, the distribution patterns of the attributes
among species (comparative studies), and the detection of
relationships of the attributes to each other. Many sociometric
attributes may be linked, hence evolve under constraint from other
attributes. The study of social insects would benefit greatly through
the organized collection of sociometric data.
2. Bukowski, W. M., & Cillessen (1998)- Sociometry provides a
means by which peer group researchers can conceptualize and
measure the interpersonal forces of attraction and repulsion within
the peer group system. The literature on developmental psychology
has addressed the use of sociometric methods since the 1930s, and
researchers have used these methods extensively during the last 15
yrs. The application of sociometric methods presents challenges
that are both conceptual and psychometric. This volume discusses
Downloaded by ANJALI SINGH (happyanjii753@gmail.com)
lOMoARcPSD|42517701
the conceptual foundations of sociometry and recent
methodological advances in sociometric techniques. The goal of this
sourcebook is to show where sociometric methods and constructs
came from and where they are going.
3. Ojanen, T., Grönroos, M., & Salmivalli, C. (2005)-The
objective of the present research was to develop an assessment
model for children's social goals. The aims were (a) to fit children's
social goals to a circumplex model and to examine links between
goals and peer-reported social behaviors (aggression, withdrawal,
and prosocial behavior) in a sample of 276 participants (134 girls,
11- to 12-year-olds) and (b) to replicate these findings and examine
whether social behavior mediates the relationship between goals
and sociometric status in an independent cross-validation sample of
310 participants (143 girls, 11- to 13-year-olds). Results showed a
satisfactory fit to the circumplex model and adequate psychometric
properties of the goal scales of the new measure, the Interpersonal
Goals Inventory for Children. Other findings included significant and
meaningful relations between goals and peer-reported behavior.
Social behavior mediated the relations between goals and
sociometric status.
4. Newcomb, A. F., Bukowski, W. M., & Pattee, L. (1993)-Two-
dimensional sociometric models have had a critical role in the
investigation of children's peer relations in the past decade. In a
meta-analysis, fitting categorical models (L. V. Hedges, 1982),
sociometric group differences on behavioral and information source
typologies were assessed. The broadband behavioral analysis
showed that popular children's array of competencies makes them
likely recipients of positive peer nominations, whereas high levels of
aggression and withdrawal and low levels of sociability and
cognitive abilities are associated with rejected peer status. A
consistent profile marked by less sociability and aggression
emerged for neglected status. Controversial children had higher
aggressive behavior than rejected children but compensated for it
with significantly better cognitive and social abilities. The moderator
effects of narrow-band behavioral categories and information source
were also examined.
5. Deković, M., & Janssens, J. M. (1992)-Examined relationships
between parents' childrearing style, the child's prosocial behavior,
and the child's sociometric status. The sample consisted of 112
children (6–11 yrs of age) and both their parents. Parental behavior
in the interaction with the child was observed at home when parents
and child worked together in 2 structured tasks. Factor analyses of
parental behavior revealed that 2 factors, Authoritative/Democratic
and Authoritarian/Restrictive, can be found in the subsamples of
mothers and fathers. These 2 dimensions of maternal and paternal
Downloaded by ANJALI SINGH (happyanjii753@gmail.com)
lOMoARcPSD|42517701
behavior appeared to be predictive of both the child's prosocial
behavior and sociometric status. Results are discussed in terms of
the possible link between parent and peer systems.
METHODOLOGY
A. Material Required
Pen and paper
B. Subject Preliminery
The following subjects were choosen from AIPS (clinical
psychology) , Second year -
S.NO NAME AGE GENDER
1 Ms. R 19 yrs Female
2 Mr . S 19 yrs Male
3 Ms. T 19 yrs Female
4 Ms. U 19 yrs Female
5 Mr. V 19 yrs Male
6 Ms. W 19 yrs Female
7 Ms. X 19 yrs Female
8 Mr. Y 19 yrs Male
9 Ms. Z 19 yrs Female
10 Mr. A 19 yrs Male
C. Procedure
Downloaded by ANJALI SINGH (happyanjii753@gmail.com)
lOMoARcPSD|42517701
The class of 97 students were divided into groups of ten students of
each. The students were assigned randomly. Each member of group
were told to select with whom they would like to work with, These
prefernce were given one person and the prefernces were kept
confidential from other members. Once preference given a table
was created and each individual were given a code. With the help of
table sociogram was created.,
D. Instructions
The following instruction was given to the subjects-
1. Please pick three people from your group and rate them them
1, 2, 3 with whom you would like to work with.
2. All the replies must be given to one member and anonymity
should be maintained from other members.
3. Once all the members have given their replies a table should
be made
4. Each individual should be given a code.
E. Precaution
1. It is important that the instruction are clear to the subjects.
2. All the replies should be kept anonymous from other members.
F. Introspective Report
S.NO NAME INTROSPECTIVE REPORTS
1. Ms. R This was an interesting method of
learning the social interaction of people in
the group. I was a little confused about my
preferences but I imagined myself working
with my preferences professionally and
chose them on the basis of how
comfortable I am with them and they are
with me. I got to learn more about the
dynamics of my group and integrated
bonds among the group.
2. Mr . S In starting i was little bit confused but I
chose my preferences based on previous
interaction with other participants in the
grp. It’s a fun experiment overall I
enjoyed it
Downloaded by ANJALI SINGH (happyanjii753@gmail.com)
lOMoARcPSD|42517701
3. Ms. T I had fun doing this experiment, also it was
interesting and i chose my preferences
based on my previous interaction with
other participants in the grp .
4. Ms. U I had some good times doing this trial,
likewise it was fascinating and I picked my
inclinations dependent on my past
connection with different members in the
gathering.
5. Mr. V It was a really fun experiment. I got to
interact and learn about my group. The
preferences I chose were based on my
previous experience with them.
6. Ms. W In the beginning, I faced a little difficulty in
giving the preference due to online
modality but otherwise the task given was
quite simple and I enjoyed it.
7. Ms. X I had fun doing this experiment. The
preferences which I chose were based on
my previous working experience with
them. Initially I was a little confused but
then everything worked out well. It was a
fun experience overall
8. Mr. Y This was an interesting way to learn about
group dynamics.I was unsure of my
preferences, but imagined working with
them professionally and chose them based
on how comfortable I am with them.
9. Ms. Z It was a pretty fun experiment. I chose my
preferences based on my previous
interactions and experiences with other
participants in the group. Overall, I
enjoyed it and found it very interesting.
10. Mr. A This was an interesting way to learn about
group dynamics.I was unsure of my
preferences, but imagined working with
them professionally and chose them based
on how comfortable I am with them.
Downloaded by ANJALI SINGH (happyanjii753@gmail.com)
lOMoARcPSD|42517701
G. Observational Report
It was seen that all the participants/subjects were calm and
collected.
RESULT
CHOSEN
R S T U W X Y Z V A
CHOSERS R 3(1 2(2 1(3
) ) )
S 3(1 1(3 2(2
) ) )
T 1(3 2(2 3(1
) ) )
U 2(2 3(1 1(3
) ) )
V 2(2 1(3 3(1
) ) )
W 1(3 2(2 3(1
) ) )
X 2(2 3(1 1(3
) ) )
Y 3(1 1(3 2(2
) ) )
Z 2(2 1(3 3(1
) ) )
A 3(1 2(2 1(3
) ) )
CHOICE I 2 0 0 1 0 5 0 2 0
II 3 0 1 0 2 3 0 1 0
III 2 3 0 0 0 1 1 1 1
score 15 0 3 2 3 4 22 1 10 1
Downloaded by ANJALI SINGH (happyanjii753@gmail.com)
lOMoARcPSD|42517701
SOCIOGRAM BASED ON THE TABLE MENTIONED ABOVE -
Star of the group - X
2nd star of the group - R
Isolater- S
DISCUSSION
As the results suggested “X” was the star and “S” is isolated as
indicated in the sociogram, but this might be influenced by factor
that maybe “X” is more popular and also as the the conduction was
done online it might be biased . Also it can also be indicated that “Y”
and “A” have the same score.
Downloaded by ANJALI SINGH (happyanjii753@gmail.com)
lOMoARcPSD|42517701
CONCLUSION
It can be concluded that “x” is the star of the group and “s” is the
isolater of the group.
REFERENCES
Bukowski, W. M., & Cillessen, A. H. (Eds.). (1998). Sociometry then
and now: Building on six decades of measuring children's
experiences with the peer group. Jossey-Bass.
Deković, M., & Janssens, J. M. (1992). Parents' child-rearing style
and child's sociometric status. Developmental Psychology, 28(5),
925–932. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.28.5.925
Newcomb, A. F., Bukowski, W. M., & Pattee, L. (1993). Children's
peer relations: A meta-analytic review of popular, rejected,
neglected, controversial, and average sociometric
status. Psychological Bulletin, 113(1), 99–
128. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.113.1.99
Tschinkel, W.R. Insect sociometry, a field in search of data. Ins.
Soc 38, 77–82 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01242715.
Ojanen, T., Grönroos, M., & Salmivalli, C. (2005). An Interpersonal
Circumplex Model of Children's Social Goals: Links With Peer-
Reported Behavior and Sociometric Status. Developmental
Psychology, 41(5), 699–710. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-
1649.41.5.699
Downloaded by ANJALI SINGH (happyanjii753@gmail.com)
