ArticleAssessment2019
Formal Modeling of the Resistance to Peer Influence Questionnaire: A Comparison of Adolescent Boys and Girls With and Without Mild-to-Borderline Intellectual Disability.
Article in Assessment, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- The importance of parental knowledge in the association between ADHD symptomatology and related domains of impairment.European child & adolescent psychiatry · 2021Article
- Susceptibility to Ingroup Influence in Adolescents With Intellectual Disability: A Minimal Group Experiment on Social Judgment Making.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Article
- Risk Taking by Adolescents with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD): a Behavioral and Psychophysiological Investigation of Peer Influence.Journal of abnormal child psychology · 2020Article
- Article
- When Do those "Risk-Taking Adolescents" Take Risks? The Combined Effects of Risk Encouragement by Peers, Mild-to-Borderline Intellectual Disability and Sex.Journal of abnormal child psychology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Items of the Resistance to Peer Influence Questionnaire (RPIQ) have a tree-based structure. On each item, individuals first choose whether a less versus more peer-resistant group best describes them; they then indicate whether it is "Really true" versus "Sort of true" that they belong to the chosen group. Using tree-based item response theory, we show that RPIQ items tap three dimensions: A Resistance to Peer Influence (RPI) dimension and two Response Polarization dimensions. We then reveal subgroup differences on these dimensions. That is, adolescents with mild-to-borderline intellectual disability, compared with typically developing adolescents, are less RPI and more polarized in their responses. Also, girls, compared with boys, are more RPI, and, when high RPI, more polarized in their responses. Together, these results indicate that a tree-based modeling approach yields a more sensitive measure of individuals' RPI
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.