Relations Between Perceived Competence,Importance Ratings,and Self-Worth Among African American School- Age Children

Abstract

The purpose of this research was to investigate how domain-specific importance ratings affect relations between perceived competence and self-worth among African American school-age children. Importance ratings have been found to affect the strength of the relationship between perceived competence and self-worth and have implications for motivation. Children were assessed on five perceived competence domains, on the importance of those domains, and on global self-worth. Five profiles reflecting relations between perceived competence and self-worth by importance ratings were assessed. Gender differences specific to scholastic competence/self-worth relations were also examined. It was hypothesized that at comparable levels of perceived competence, children ascribing more importance would evidence stronger relationships between perceived competence and self-worth. This was evident in some cases. Importance ratings were found to be pivotal in understanding relationships between perceived competence and self-worth. Gender differences in scholastic competence/self-worth relations were evidenced with certain profiles. Results were interpreted within a cultural context, and the implications for intervention were addressed.

Keywords

perceived competence self-worth African American school-age children

The purpose of this research was to investigate how domain-specific importance ratings affect relationships between perceptions of competence in specific areas (e.g., scholastic competence and behavioral conduct) and self-worth among African American school-age children. Self-worth has long been considered pivotal to well-being in children and has implications for psychological adjustment, including mood and motivation (e.g., Harter, 1987, 1999). Self-worth is distinguished from perceived competencies in that the latter pertains to children’s estimation of their competencies in specific domains. In contrast, self-worth (which is also commonly referred to as self-esteem) is a more global construct reflecting self-value and personal contentment (e.g., Harter, 1985, 1999).

During middle to late childhood, the emergence of several developmental skills promotes a more authentic sense of self-understanding and evaluation (e.g., Harter, 1999). These include (a) hierarchical reasoning ability that allows general statements about the self to be backed up with relevant evidence, (b) the ability to distinguish between various content domains (e.g., athletic vs. scholastic competence; academic vs. nonacademic) and evaluate them independently, (c) the capacity for comparative judgments regarding their abilities or status relative to others, and (d) perspective-taking abilities that sensitize children to the opinions of others. As such, self-perceptions become more comparable to assessments by adults (Harter, 1999). Hence, at this foundational developmental level, examining how relationships between perceived competence and self-worth are affected by importance ratings may aid in understanding and influencing trajectories of development.

Harter (1990, 1999) demonstrated that while perceived competencies in specific domains related to self-worth, the extent to which they did also depended on (a) how important said domains were to how children felt about themselves and (b) the extent to which children’s perceived level of competence matched their ascribed level of importance. When domains were rated as important, correlations between self-worth and said competence domain were strong. When domains were rated as unimportant to how children/adolescents felt about themselves, competence in these domains was less correlated to self-worth. As such, relations between perceived competence and self-worth have implications for children’s engagement in domain-related activities.

In interpreting the impact of perceived competence on self-worth by importance ratings, Harter (1999) employed a Jamesian discrepancy model (i.e., James, 1892). Here, competence in areas deemed important serves to enhance self-worth while competence in areas deemed unimportant has less of an impact. In addition, lower competence in areas deemed important detracts from self-worth. However, Harter’s (1985) samples were described as 90% Caucasian and no analyses were provided by ethnicity.

From an Africentric perspective, variation in the relationship between perceived competence and self-worth according to importance ratings may have additional significance. Grills (2004) articulated the Africentric principle of human authenticity, which reflects the inclination to be genuine. That is, to act and respond in ways that authenticate one’s true self. As importance ratings embody the centrality or significance children assign to competency areas (e.g., Osborne & Jones, 2011), it would be expected that perceived competencies in areas deemed important would correspond and contribute more strongly to self-worth. In contrast, perceived competencies in areas deemed less important would not be as useful toward authenticating one’s personhood.

Previous studies provide a link between African American children’s self-worth and a multitude of outcomes pertaining to substance use (e.g., Crump, Lillie-Blanton, & Anthony, 1997), substance use attitudes (e.g., Townsend & Belgrave, 2000), academic attitudes and classroom behavior (e.g., Thomas, Townsend, & Belgrave, 2003), academic achievement and scholastic competence (e.g., McMillian, Frierson, & Campbell, 2011), racial and ethnic identity (e.g., Smith, Levine, Smith, Dumas, & Prinz, 2009), obesity and perceptions about skin tone (e.g., Young-Hyman, Schlundt, Herman-Wenderoth, & Bozylinski, 2003), and family functioning and practices (e.g., Alessandri, 1992; Hughes, Witherspoon, Rivas-Drake, & West-Bey, 2009; Margolin, 2006; Murry & Brody, 1999; Wills et al., 2007). Higher self-worth/esteem was linked to more positive practices and outcomes. However, the relevance of importance ratings in affecting relations between perceived competencies and self-worth has not been addressed.

Indeed, cultural factors have been found to influence competence ratings and self-worth outcomes in other studies. Lindsey, Colwell, Frabutt, Chambers, and MacKinnon-Lewis (2008) for instance found that observed synchrony (i.e., mutual responsiveness) in the mother-child relationship was unrelated to the self-worth of African American 11- to 13–year-olds in contrast to Caucasian youth. Michaels, Barr, Roosa, and Knight (2007) in comparing the measurement equivalence of their revised version of Harter’s (1985) Self-Perception Profile for Children across four ethnic groups found that none of the subscales showed both factorial invariance and functional equivalence across all groups. For the measurements on three subscales (i.e., physical appearance, social acceptance, and behavioral conduct), it was not clear that the items were measuring the construct to the same degree in comparing African and Anglo American children. Twenge and Crocker (2002) as well as Gray-Little and Hafdahl (2000), in conducting comprehensive reviews of the literature on racial differences in self-worth, concluded that starting in middle childhood, African Americans begin to demonstrate higher self-worth relative to other groups, and group differences become more pronounced during adolescence. Both Twenge and Crocker (2002) and Gray-Little and Hafdahl (2000) suggested that cultural factors such as positive ethnic or within-group identification may bolster the self-worth of African Americans. That is, when ethnic identity is regarded as important and viewed positively, self-worth is enhanced.

Osborne and Jones (2011) also outlined how strong “domain identification,” which reflected the perceived importance or centrality of particular domains contained inherent benefits and risks. Individuals who were highly identified with domains tended to be more motivated, engaged and showed higher productivity within said domains. Osborne and Jones (2011) also reported on how high domain identification can result in frustration and disappointment when individuals do not achieve domain-related goals. Furthermore, individuals with higher levels of domain identification may be more vulnerable to the effects of negative stereotypes and disidentification with the domain (e.g., Osborne & Walker, 2006).

According to McMillian et al. (2011) and Morgan and Mehta (2004), devaluation of a domain precedes disidentification and is evidenced by a decreased relationship between perceived competence domains and self-worth. Yet Harter (1999) alleged that one has to consider both importance ratings (centrality), and children’s level of competence in understanding the relation between self-worth and perceptions of competence. It has been hypothesized that African American males were more susceptible to disidentification with the academic domain (e.g., Osborne, 1999), and its precursors such as a decreased relationship between academic self-concept and self-worth (e.g., McMillian et al., 2011). Hence, gender differences in the relationship between scholastic competence and self-worth may be evident when importance ratings are relatively high and perceived competence in this domain falls short of the ascribed importance. Children may experience both personal frustration with their perceived level of competence and sensitivity to negative stereotypes (e.g., Osborne & Jones, 2011).

In the current study, perceived competencies in five domains (i.e., scholastic competence, behavioral conduct, social acceptance, athletic competence, and physical appearance) were assessed with respect to their relevance to self-worth. Relations were assessed among children fitting five distinct profiles. This included children who perceived themselves as competent in specific domains but differed in their ascribed level of importance (i.e., high vs. low). It was hypothesized that at similar levels of perceived competence, relations to self-worth would be stronger when children ascribed high importance (i.e., centrality) to the domain. First, among children indicating high centrality with a high and congruent level of perceived competence, relations between competence and self-worth should be strong. These children rate themselves high in competence at a level equal or greater than corresponding high ratings of importance. Second, among children with low centrality amid high perceived competence, weak relations were predicted. Although these children rate themselves as competent, they do not ascribe importance to the domain. In other words, the domain is not central to their self-worth. Children in these two groups were subsequently referred to as those with (a) high centrality with congruent perceived competence and (b) low centrality amid high perceived competence, respectively. This follows from the pattern described by Harter (1999) and is consistent with the notion that achievements in important domains contribute to human authenticity (e.g., Grills, 2004), and therefore self-worth.

What is less clear is the relationship between perceived competence and self-worth when the domain is central to the self, yet high perceptions of competence fall short of even higher ratings of domain centrality. This pattern demonstrates what Harter (1999) referred to as a negative discrepancy between domain centrality and competence. Harter (1999) noted that when such discrepancies were large, this detracted from self-worth. Hence, competence/self-worth relations would be stronger. Yet how the relation between perceived competence and self-worth would be affected with a small negative discrepancy is less clear. It is conceivable that not attaining a competence level quite at the level of importance could suppress the relation between perceived competence and self-worth. The question is to what extent. Even though children perceive themselves as competent, achievements may not feel as gratifying or authentic. As such, perceived competencies may not be as associated with self-worth. This third group of children reflected those with incongruent high centrality and high perceived competence, where high importance ratings exceeded high levels of competence. Also, this is where gender differences in scholastic competence/self-worth relations may emerge. Osborne (1999) reviewed how African American boys were socialized to adopt a masculine persona that is devoid of emotion and attachment to academics in the context of their stigmatization. Wood, Kaplan, and McLoyd (2007) demonstrated that both teachers and parents had lower academic expectations of African American boys compared with girls. As such, African American boys, in spite of perceiving themselves as competent, may be more likely to devalue the domain in the face of adversity. This includes instances where their perceptions of competence fall short of domain centrality. Devaluation would be evidenced by a lack of relation between scholastic competence and self-worth in this condition (e.g., McMillian et al., 2011; Morgan & Metha, 2004; Nussbaum, & Steele, 2007).

Perceived competence by self-worth relations were also examined among children who did not perceive themselves as competent, yet differed in the centrality ascribed to the domain. As self-worth decreased with large negative discrepancies (Harter, 1999), it was expected that when low perceived competence coincided with high centrality, there would be stronger competence/self-worth relations, opposed to when low perceived competence coincided with low centrality. Hence, the fourth group of children had high centrality amid low perceived competence. This group of children would be expected to show stronger relationships between perceived competence and self-worth, as the importance of the domain had not been discounted (e.g., Harter, 1999; Osborne & Jones, 2011). Therefore, existing perceptions they had about their accomplishments should provide some sense of human authentication. Yet because of the social context, for African American boys fitting this profile, a suppressed scholastic competence/self-worth relation may also be evidenced. The fifth group was defined by low centrality and low perceived competence. Hence, no relation between perceived competence and self-worth was expected.

In summary, the formation of group profiles was guided by Africentric and Jamesian perspectives of perceived competence/self-worth relations (Grills, 2004; Harter, 1999). Here, perceived competencies in areas deemed important should be more authenticating to children’s personhood and therefore more tied to their self-worth. By holding perceived competence constant, the impact of domain centrality (i.e., high or low) on competence/self-worth relations could be assessed. It was hypothesized that at similar levels of perceived competence, relations between perceived competence and self-worth would be stronger amid high domain centrality. The findings may shed light on what types of conclusions are appropriate when looking at perceived competence, and relations between perceived competence and self-worth among African American children.

Method

Participants

A convenience sample of 186 African American fourth and fifth graders attending Title I schools in urban environments in and around Los Angeles were recruited for participation. Title I status is denoted by the percentage of children (60% or more) receiving free and reduced lunches. There were 73 fourth-grade and 113 fifth-grade children. The average age of fourth graders was 9.6 years and the average age of fifth graders was 10.6 years. There were 111 girls and 74 boys. One child did not identify himself or herself by gender. Parental consent and child assent were obtained for all children. The ethnicity of children was determined by self-selection. The intent to survey African American children for this study was clearly conveyed in the parental consent form and communicated to teachers, principals, and other school officials.

Measures

Two assessments were administered. This included Harter’s (1985) Self-Perception Profile for Children (SPPC). On the SPPC, five self-concept domains are assessed (i.e., scholastic competence, behavioral conduct, social acceptance, athletic competence, and physical appearance). A sixth subscale reflects global self-worth. A corresponding 10-item questionnaire developed by Harter (1985) was used to assess the importance of each domain to self-worth. Importance ratings in particular domains represent an aspired level of competence in which individuals are committed (see Harter, 1999).

Both measures follow a similar format. Children are asked first to choose between positive versus less positive descriptions (e.g., feeling they are very good at their schoolwork vs. worrying whether they can do the schoolwork assigned to them; thinking that it is important to do well on schoolwork in order to feel good as a person vs. not thinking how well they do on schoolwork is that important). Hence, children first choose a side indicating whether they are confident in their ability on a given domain and view it as important or not. Second, children are asked to indicate whether their choice is sort of true or really true for them. Items are scored on a four-point scale. Consequently, scores of 3 or higher express more decided competence or importance with respect to a domain while scores of less than three express clear reservations about competence or importance. With both measures, some items were reversed scored so that high scores represented higher values of the constructs.

Harter (1985) reported acceptable levels of internal consistency across the six scales. In terms of validity, Harter (1985) reported a robust factor structure for the SPPC and noted that children who scored lower on scholastic competence tended to report lower behavioral conduct. Moreover, clusters of some subscales were more correlated (e.g., social and athletic competence and physical appearance). Muris, Meesters, and Fijen (2003) also demonstrated robust psychometric properties of the SPPC in a large sample of children aged 8 to 14 years. Confirmatory factor analysis indicated a reasonably good factor structure of the five SPPC perceived competency scales, and Cronbach’s alphas on all SPPC scales ranged from .73 to .80. Furthermore, Muris et al. (2003) provided evidence of the validity of SPPC subscales. Participants’ scores on the SPPC were examined with respect to other measures, including children’s self-reports of their psychological functioning (e.g., anxiety and neuroticism), parents’ reports of children’s emotional and behavioral difficulties, and teachers’ reports of children’s personality characteristics. Overall, SPPC scales were correlated with theoretically relevant constructs. Scholastic competence and behavioral conduct were more correlated with teacher ratings of children’s conscientiousness. Behavioral conduct was more correlated with children’s self-reports of social desirability and teacher reports of their agreeableness. Behavioral conduct was inversely related to teacher reports of children’s extraversion. Social acceptance was more correlated with children’s self-reports of extraversion and teacher reports of their emotional stability. Global self-worth was correlated with children’s self-reports of anxiety, depressive symptoms, and parental reports of internalizing and externalizing behaviors. Similarly, Cole, Jacquez, and Maschman (2001) assessed the degree to which third- through sixth-grade children’s perceived competency ratings corresponded with parallel ratings from their parents, teachers, and peers. Children’s self-reports of competence in each domain could be predicted by others’ ratings of their competencies.

Procedure

The measures were administered in one session consisting of small groups of usually four to eight children. The SPPC was administered followed by the 10-item questionnaire assessing importance ratings. The assessments were read aloud to children and administered by the author, an African American female. Administration of the surveys took less than 50 minutes.

Results

Reliability Analyses

Reliability analyses were conducted for each SPPC subscale. Reliabilities were calculated using Raykov’s (1997) estimation of composite reliability for congeneric measures. Reliabilities of the SPPC subscales ranged from .65 to .78. Only the social acceptance sub-scale was below .70.

Perceived Competence and Self-Worth Ratings by Gender

To assess any preexisting differences by gender, boys and girls were compared on competency domains and self-worth using Hotelling’s T. A significant effect was obtained T²(6, 142) = 2.33, p = .035. Boys (M = 3.10, SD = 0.71) rated themselves as more athletically competent than girls (M = 2.72, SD = 0.73), F(1, 148) = 10.36, p = .002. There were no other significant effects. Means and standard deviations by gender for each competence domain and self-worth are reported in Table 1.

Table 1.

Self-Concept and Self-Worth Ratings by Gender

	Male		Female
	Mean	SD	Mean	SD
Domains	N = 62		N = 87
Physical appearance	3.26	0.58	3.19	0.74
Behavioral conduct	2.94	0.71	3.08	0.66
Scholastic competence	3.02	0.61	2.93	0.74
Social acceptance	2.98	0.60	2.91	0.67
Athletic competence	3.10*	0.71	2.72	0.73
Global self-worth	3.37	0.54	3.34	0.62

Note: Some items were reverse coded such that high scores represent higher values of the constructs. The sample sizes represent children who completed all of the items in the survey.

p < .05.

Perceived Competence and Self-Worth Relations

A correlation matrix depicting the relationships between all the competency domains and global self-worth is provided in Table 2. Correlations with self-worth ranged from weak (athletic competence) to strong (physical appearance). Correlations were similar in magnitude across gender.

Table 2.

Correlation Matrix of Self-Concepts and Self-Worth by Gender

	1	2	3	4	5	6
1. Physical appearance
Total		.44**	.39**	.40**	.26**	.72**
Males	—	.45**	.44**	.33**	.43**	.64**
Females		.45**	.36**	.43**	.16	.75**
2. Behavioral conduct
Total		—	.40**	.17*	.07	.54**
Males		—	.43**	.24	.25*	.52**
Females			.40**	16	.01	.58**
3. Scholastic competence
Total				.39**	.28**	.48**
Males			—	.42**	.41**	.47**
Females				.37**	.20*	.49**
4. Social acceptance
Total					.41**	.42**
Males				—	.44**	.50**
Females					.39**	.38**
5. Athletic competence
Total						.27**
Males					—	.41**
Females						.20
6. Global self-worth
Total						—
Males
Females

Note: *p < .05. **p < .01.

Importance Ratings, Perceived Competence, and Self-Worth

Gender differences in importance ratings were also analyzed using Hotelling’s T. There were no significant effects. Means and standard deviations by gender are reported in Table 3. To ascertain the effects of importance attached to particular domains, correlations between each of the competency domains and global self-worth were compared among five distinct groups. Groups differed in perceived competence (high vs. low) and centrality (high vs. low).

Table 3.

Importance Ratings by Gender

	Male		Female
	Mean	SD	Mean	SD
Domains	N = 65		N = 101
Physical appearance	2.60	1.14	2.50	0.97
Behavioral conduct	3.50	0.74	3.46	0.79
Scholastic competence	3.56	0.79	3.54	0.76
Social acceptance	2.41	0.99	2.32	0.93
Athletic competence	2.77	0.98	2.64	0.87

Note: Some items were reverse coded such that high scores represent higher values of the constructs. The sample sizes represent children who completed all of the items in the survey.

Group I reflected children with high centrality amid congruent and high perceived competence. Children felt competent in the domain with a score of three or higher, rated the domain as important (i.e., with a rating of three or more), and had a zero to positive discrepancy between the perceived level of competency and the ascribed importance. In other words, these children perceived themselves as competent and their perceived level of competency met or exceeded their ascribed level of importance attached to the domain. Group II reflected children with low centrality amid high perceived competence. They rated themselves as competent in a particular domain (with a score of three or higher) but did not perceive the domain as particularly central to how they felt about themselves (with an importance score of less than three). Group III consisted of children with incongruent high centrality and high perceived competence. They rated themselves as competent and the domain as important (with scores on both of three or higher). However, they did not perceive themselves as highly as they rated the importance of the domain. Importance ratings were higher than ratings of competence. Group IV consisted of children with high centrality amid low perceived competence. Ratings of perceived competence were less than three while ratings of importance were three or more. Finally, Group V consisted of children with low centrality and low perceived competence. Ratings of importance and perceived competence were less than three.

In examining correlations between domain-specific competencies and self-worth by group classification, Thorndike’s Case 2 method for correcting correlations with restricted range (e.g., Wiberg & Sundström, 2009) was used. These correlations are presented in Table 4. For scholastic competence, the correlation with self-worth was strongest for children in Group I, r(24) = .89, p = .000; that is, among those with high centrality and high congruent competence. Alternatively, for competent children with low centrality (Group II), a strong negative correlation was evidenced r(11) = −.66, p = .027. Children with lower scholastic competence reported higher self-worth. Furthermore, the correlations between scholastic competence and global self-worth were compared for Groups I and II, and these correlations were significantly different (z = 5.33, p = .000). The scholastic competence/self-worth correlation for children in Group III (where high perceived competence was surpassed by even higher centrality) was moderate r(52) = .47, p = .000, and it was also significantly different from the correlation in Group I (z = 3.5, p = .00). The scholastic competence/self-worth correlation in Group IV (with low competence amid high centrality) was r(59) = .34, p = .008 and not significantly different from or stronger than the correlation in Group V (with low perceived competence and low centrality), r(18) = .56, p = .016.

Table 4.

Correlations Between Perceived Competence and Self-Worth by Group

Self-Concept Domain	Group I	Group II	Group III	Group IV	Group V
Scholastic competence	.89 (N = 24)**	−.66 (N = 11)*	.47 (N = 52)**	.34 (N = 59)**	.56 (N = 18)*
Behavioral conduct	.63 (N = 23)**	−.08 (N = 16)	.53 (N = 53)**	.62 (N = 46)**	.82 (N = 24)**
Social acceptance	.64 (N = 25)**	.68 (N = 48)**	.29 (N = 14)	−.35 (N = 18)	.25 (N = 55)
Athletic competence	.50 (N = 34)**	−.15 (N = 28)	.40 (N = 14)	.35 (N = 31)	.07 (N = 54)
Physical appearance	.79 (N = 30)**	.79 (N = 60)**	.72 (N = 15)**	.77 (N = 22)**	.37 (N = 36)*

Note: Sample sizes reflect children who answered all of the items within a subscale. Group I = High centrality and congruent competence (perceived competence matches or exceeds high level of importance attached to the domain); Group II = Low centrality amid high perceived competence (high perceived competence coupled with low importance attached to the domain); Group III = High centrality and high yet incongruent perceived competence (perceived competence level is less than higher importance rating); Group IV = Low perceived competence and high centrality; Group V = Low perceived competence and low centrality.

p < .05. **p < .01.

Gender patterns in correlations between scholastic competence and self-worth were analyzed for Groups III and IV. For girls in Group III, the correlation was significant, r(29) = .60, p = .001. For boys in Group III, the correlation was not significant, r(23) = .18. The difference in the correlations between scholastic competence and global self-worth for boys and girls in Group III approached significance in a two-tailed test (z = 1.7, p = .085). For Group IV, the correlation between scholastic competence and self-worth for girls was significant, r(34) = .47, p = .005. For boys, the correlation was not significant r(25) = −.15. The difference in the correlations between scholastic competence and global self-worth for boys and girls in Group IV was significant, (z = 2.38, p = .018). The number of boys in the remaining groups (i.e., Groups I, II, and V) was less than 10 and therefore correlations by gender were not examined within each group. However, correlations by gender could be compared by combining these remaining three groups. These uncorrected correlations between scholastic competence and self-worth were similar for girls, r(35) = .53, p = .001 and boys, r(18) = .49, p = .039.

For the behavioral conduct domain, the correlation with self-worth for children in Group I (high centrality and high and congruent perceived competence) was strong, r(23) = .63, p = .001, especially in comparison with Group II (low centrality, high perceived competence), r(16) = −.08. Moreover, the difference in correlations between behavioral conduct and global self-worth for Groups I and II was significant, (z = 2.31, p = .021). The behavioral conduct/self-worth correlation for children in Group III (where high perceived competence was surpassed by even higher centrality) was r(53) = .53, p = .001 and not significantly different from the behavioral conduct/global self-worth correlation in Group I. The behavioral conduct/self-worth correlation for children in Group IV (high centrality amid low perceived competence) was r(46) = .62, p = .001, and even less than the behavioral conduct/self-worth correlation for children in Group V (low centrality and low perceived competence), r(24) = .82, p = .001. The difference in correlations between behavioral conduct and global self-worth for Groups IV and V was not significant.

For the social acceptance domain, the correlations with self-worth for Groups I and II were comparable, r(25) = .64, p = .005 and r(48) = .68, p = .001, respectively. The correlations between social acceptance and global self-worth for Groups I and II were not significantly different from the correlation in Group III, r(14) = .29. The correlation between social acceptance and global self-worth was not significant for Groups III or IV, r(18) = −.35. The social acceptance/self-worth correlation for Group V, r(55) = .25 was marginally significant, p = .065. Furthermore, the correlations between social acceptance and global self-worth for Groups IV and V were significantly different (z = 2.61, p = .034).

For the athletic competence domain, the competence/self-worth correlation for Group I was r(34) = .50, p = .003 while the correlation in Group II was r(28) = −.15. Moreover, the correlations between athletic competence and global self-worth for Groups I and II were significantly different (z = 2.61, p = .009). The correlation in Group III was r(14) = .40 and not significantly different from the athletic competence/self-worth correlation in Group I. The athletic competence/self-worth correlation in Group IV was r(31) = .35 and marginally significant, p = .054. The athletic competence/self-worth correlation in Group V was r(54) = .07 and not significantly different from the athletic competence/self-worth correlation in Group IV.

For the physical appearance domain, the correlations for Groups I to IV were comparable. Correlations ranged from .72 to .79, and all were statistically significant, ps = .000 to .002. For Group V, the correlation between physical appearance and global self-worth was weak, r(36) = .37, p. = .026 and significantly different from the correlation in Group IV (z = 2.19, p = .029).

Consistencies in Group Profiles Across Domains

Harter (1985, 1999) reported that some domains were more intercorrelated than others. That is, scholastic competence and behavioral conduct tended to be correlated while the remaining domains of social acceptance, physical appearance, and athletic competence were correlated. In the current sample, the relationship between physical appearance and behavioral conduct was comparatively strong, in addition to the relationship between scholastic competence and behavioral conduct.

A series of chi-square analyses were conducted to determine if children were more likely than expected to be in the same group across intercorrelated domains. Across scholastic competence and behavioral conduct, the chi-square was significant, χ² (16, N = 164) = 46.48, p = .000. Children in Groups I and V tended to correspond. Children who were in Group I for scholastic competence were more likely than expected to also be in Group I for behavioral conduct. Children in Group V for scholastic competence were more likely than expected to be in Group V for behavioral conduct. For athletic competence and physical appearance, the chi-square was significant, χ² (16, N = 161) = 30.49, p = .016. Children who were in Group III for athletic competence were more likely than expected to be in Group III for physical appearance. For athletic competence and social acceptance, the chi-square was significant, χ² (16, N = 162) = 40. 97, p = .001. Children who were in Groups I to III for athletic competence were somewhat more likely than expected to be in these same groups for social acceptance. This trend was especially pronounced for Group I. No consistencies in group profiles were evident across social acceptance and physical appearance. No consistencies in group profiles were evident across behavioral conduct and physical appearance. Hence, although there were some consistencies in group profiles across intercorrelated domains, children did not tend to have the same profile.

Discussion

The findings of this study provide preliminary evidence that importance ratings affect the magnitude and direction of relations between perceived competence and self-worth among African American school-age children. With some domains, the patterns of findings supported the hypothesis that among children with comparable levels of competence, there would be stronger correlations between self-worth and perceived competence amid high centrality. However, in most domains, the results did not support the hypothesis. The pattern of findings suggested that in addition to domain centrality, cultural issues and context play a role.

For scholastic competence, there was considerable divergence in the patterns of relations with self-worth between Groups I and II (i.e., high perceived competence with more and less centrality). Both relationships were strong, yet there was an inverse relation for Group II. In Group II, children with lower scholastic competence evidenced higher self-worth. Overall, moderate relations were observed among children who (a) deemed themselves competent, yet evidenced higher ratings of centrality (Group III) and (b) did not deem themselves competent amid high centrality (Group IV).

Gender differences were also evidenced within Groups III and IV. Scholastic competence and self-worth relations were at least moderate for girls and virtually nonexistent for boys. Boys then may have been more likely to experience the downside of strong identification with a domain such as frustration, and less satisfaction with domain-related outcomes (e.g., Osborne & Jones, 2011; Osborne & Walker, 2006). As such, boys may be quicker to devalue the scholastic competence domain than girls when perceived competence falls short of domain centrality. This may be in part due to lower academic expectations among parents and teachers with respect to African American boys (e.g., Wood et al., 2007; Wood, Kurtz-Costes, Rowley, Okeke-Adeyanju, 2010), and other socialization forces that encourage their adoption of a masculine and detached persona (e.g., Osborne, 1999). Furthermore, Hughes, Hagelskamp, Way, and Foust (2009) reported that compared with other ethnic groups, African American mothers tended to convey more racial socialization messages regarding preparation for bias, and boys appeared especially attuned to these. This social context therefore may inhibit boys’ authentic expression and participation culminating in devaluation of the scholastic domain. However, such a disconnection between scholastic competence and self-worth may be beneficial (e.g., Nussbaum, & Steele, 2007) as high levels of centrality may provide some impetus to persist with domain-related tasks, even when competence falls short of aspired levels. The longevity of this pattern however is unclear.

Unexpectedly, moderate competence/self-worth relations were evident among children providing low ratings in both scholastic competence and domain centrality (Group V). Perhaps with low centrality, children could better appreciate existing scholastic competencies because of their lack of personal investment. The prominence of the academic context and any recognitions of individual achievement may have also contributed to this.

In summary, the hypothesis that at similar levels of scholastic competence, relations with self-worth would be stronger amid high centrality was not supported. Results from the current study suggested that scholastic competence would be most facilitative of self-worth (and perhaps engagement in domain-related activities) when perceptions of high competence meet or exceed high domain centrality. Such a combination may provide the most authenticating experience within the academic domain (Grills, 2004). The inverse relation among competent children ascribing less centrality (Group II) suggested that enhancing perceptions of scholastic competence without addressing importance could undermine well-being and be detrimental to learning engagement. This finding seems paradoxical and more research is needed on children who demonstrate this profile. Even though children may feel scholastically competent, factors that impede academic pursuits (e.g., experiences of inequity in the classroom and beyond, poor relations between teachers and parents, and/or feeling different or alienated from others) may lower centrality and explain the inverse relationship.

It should be noted that the majority of children (i.e., 72%) indicated high centrality for scholastic competence, and over half of children (i.e., 60%) fit within Groups III and IV, where perceived competence did not rise to the level of high centrality. This in combination with the vulnerability of African American school-age children to stereotype threat conditions (e.g., McKown & Weinstein, 2003) suggests that middle childhood may be an optimal time to facilitate outcomes tantamount to Group I, where high perceived competence and importance ratings were in sync amid a strong relation between perceived scholastic competence and global self-worth. Educational practices that boost academic performance and importance ratings in a culturally relevant manner would be appropriate. For African American children (especially boys) who feel less scholastically competent in relation to centrality, interventions that conveyed high expectations, emphasized their progress, encouraged utilization of relevant learning strategies, and highlighted an incremental view of ability (e.g., Dweck, 2007; Good, Aronson, & Inzlicht, 2003) would be useful. Similarly Freeman, Gutman, and Midgley (2002) found that for African American middle-school students, a mastery approach to learning could be useful in promoting self-efficacy and reducing self-handicapping strategies. A mastery approach (e.g., developing a substantive understanding of content and emphasizing progress) is also consistent with Grill’s (2004) notion of authenticity.

For behavioral conduct, children in Group I (with high centrality and congruent-perceived competence) demonstrated a moderately strong relation to self-worth. For competent children who did not ascribe centrality to this domain (Group II), no relation with self-worth was evidenced. For competent children, whose high perceived competence was surpassed by higher ratings of centrality (Group III), a moderate relation between behavioral conduct and self-worth was evidenced. This suggests that among children who perceived themselves as competent in behavioral conduct, relations with global self-worth were facilitated by domain centrality. Holistically however, correlations between behavioral conduct and self-worth were stronger among children rating themselves as least competent. Moreover, the prediction that among less competent children, the correlation would be stronger among children in Group IV (who ascribed high centrality to the domain) opposed to Group V (who ascribed less centrality) was not supported. The correlation was in fact stronger among children in Group V. Overall then, the hypothesis that at similar levels of behavioral conduct, relations with self-worth would be stronger amid high domain centrality was only partially supported.

The pattern of results for behavioral conduct should be considered within a cultural context. First, irrespective of importance ratings, among the entire sample the correlation between global self-worth and behavioral conduct was beyond the range of Harter’s U.S. and international samples (see Harter, 1999). Second, behavioral conduct may have special relevance to the self-worth of African American children. The use of harsh (e.g., physical punishment) and controlling discipline has been reported to be more prevalent in African American families (e.g., Jackson-Newsom, Buchanan, & McDonald, 2008; Pinderhughes, Dodge, Bates, Pettit, & Zelli, 2000); albeit amid a context of parental warmth and proactive efforts to secure children’s well-being given inequitable circumstances and adverse consequences for their misbehavior (e.g., Tamis-LeMonda, Briggs, McClowry, & Snow, 2008; Whaley, 2000).

Indeed, disproportionate punishment of African American children in school was identified by McFadden, Marsh, Price, and Hwang (1992). Rocque (2010) found that African American elementary school children were more likely than children from other ethnic groups to receive an office referral, despite controlling for students’ externalizing behaviors, academic achievement, and school policy effects. Moreover, Jackson (2002) found ethnic differences regarding presenting problems on school counseling referral forms. Situational attributions regarding the influence of other persons were more likely for Caucasian children while for African American and Hispanic youth, situational attributions reflecting long-term characteristics of the environment (e.g., living situation, family circumstances) were more prevalent. This suggests that assignments of personal responsibility and expectations for behavioral improvements might also differ across groups. Finally, ethnic disparities in contexts such as the juvenile justice system may also affect how children’s perceived behavioral conduct correlates to self-worth (e.g., Brunson & Miller, 2006; Leonard, Pope, & Feyerherm, 1995).

Such findings might explain why relations were strongest for children who rated themselves as least competent, especially when conduct was less central to children’s self-worth. Children with low centrality and low perceived competence may have received consequences for misconduct disproportionately. They may have presented to adults as less willing to change and as lacking remorse. However, harsh and inequitable treatment perpetuates inauthentic experiences (Grills, 2004) and potentially undermines children’s ability and/or motivation to sufficiently gauge their behavioral conduct and improve.

These findings suggest that intervention efforts geared toward supporting an optimal relation between behavioral conduct and self-worth among African American children would involve taking special care to separate undesirable actions from personhood and encouraging appropriate yet high behavioral expectations. Statements and actions that (a) applied rules, expectations, and discipline in an equitable and sensitive manner, (b) conveyed what children were capable of even when it was not demonstrated, and (c) provided reasonable support and structure toward meeting behavioral expectations would help achieve this end. Part of reasonable support and structure should include community building efforts consistent with the Africentric value of communalism. Instilling in children a sense of “we” in the social context, where they felt interconnected to others may serve to enhance children’s sensitivity to how their behaviors affected others (e.g., Belgrave & Allison, 2006).

For social acceptance, the correlation with global self-worth among children with high centrality and congruent competence (Group I) was virtually identical in strength to social acceptance/self-worth relations among competent children who did not ascribe centrality to this domain (Group II). Among children with high centrality amid low competence (Group IV), the correlation between social acceptance and global self-worth was inverse, while the correlation among children with low centrality and low competence (Group V) was positive. Although both correlations (i.e., of Groups IV and V) were weak, they were significantly different. Hence, the hypothesis that at similar levels of perceived competence, relations between social acceptance and self-worth would be facilitated by high domain centrality was not supported.

Holistically, these patterns should be considered within a cultural context. That is, if or when social acceptance involves adhering to standards that conflict with core or cultural values (e.g., Boykin, Tyler, & Miller, 2005), or when children perceive inequities or high costs associated with social acceptance, authentic social experiences (e.g., where one feels comfortable and free to be genuine, or has sufficient reciprocity in relations) are undermined. As such, high centrality may be more frustrating (Osborne & Jones, 2011), with no benefit to global self-worth in comparison with lower centrality. Moreover, taking the domain less seriously could be beneficial. Low domain centrality may allow one to appreciate social relations and outcomes in a way that better honored and acknowledged competencies and circumstances.

For athletic competence, correlations with self-worth followed the predicted pattern. For children rating themselves as athletically competent, relations between perceived athletic competence and self-worth were stronger amid high centrality. For children ratings themselves as less competent, relations with self-worth were stronger when centrality was evidenced. Comparatively, this domain may be one where children’s competencies feel more authentic and self-affirming, when they deem athletic competence as important. Grills (2004) noted that authenticity is stagnated when others distort and determine one’s reality. One explanation for this finding therefore may be that athletic accomplishments are more concrete (e.g., making a basket or not), which supports school-age children’s ability to make inferences. As such, there is less need for others’ elucidation of their competencies. Moreover, the adulation of African American athletes across socialization contexts (e.g., Beamon, 2010) may have contributed to this outcome.

For physical appearance, strong correlations between competence and self-worth were evidenced with most groups. The exception was a weaker correlation when low perceived competence coincided with low centrality. Hence, when physical appearance competence was low, high centrality facilitated a stronger competence self/worth relation. Overall, this pattern of results is consistent with past research documenting strong relations between physical appearance and self-worth relations irrespective of importance ratings (e.g., Harter, 1999; Wu & Smith, 1997), which has been interpreted to reflect the high emphasis placed on the outward self in society, and the fact that one’s physical appearance is constantly exposed (unlike the other domains) with individuals being treated and responded to accordingly (see Harter, 1999). As such, there was only limited support for the hypothesis.

Overall, the results from this study reflected the notion that importance ratings (i.e., domain centrality) have implications for the relationship between perceived competence and self-worth, and that limitations exists when only considering the relation between perceived competence and global self-worth (e.g., Harter, 1999). Assessing domain centrality enhances the interpretability of perceived competencies and the relations to self-worth. Yet cultural issues and contextual factors should also be considered in interpreting relations between perceived competence and self-worth.

Grills (2004) noted that the impact of inauthentic experiences on African American mental health was unclear, and an issue that Africentric psychology would have to disentangle. Hence, domain centrality may be most facilitative of competence/self-worth relations among African American children, when the domains are experienced or perceived as genuine (e.g., culturally sensitive, compatible, and equitable). Without authentic experiences, the utility of domain centrality for enhancing well-being due to perceived competence may be constrained.

A limitation of this study was the sample characteristics. The sample size was relatively small, which limited group stratification on the measures (e.g., high, medium, low). Also, participants were recruited from one part of the United States (i.e., southern California) and their socialization experiences may have been different from children in other parts of the country. As only African American children were surveyed, no direct comparisons could be made with other ethnic groups. Therefore, the findings and interpretations are speculative. In addition, questions have been raised about the extent to which the SPPC fully captures notions of perceived competence among African American children (e.g., Michaels et al., 2007). Further research with larger and diverse samples that incorporated measures to understand why children fit various profiles (e.g., parent and teacher surveys) would better discern how cultural and contextual issues affect relationships between perceived competence and self-worth among African American children.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank all participating schools, children, and families. The author would like to thank George Marcoulides and Daniel Soper for their assistance with data analysis. The author would also like to thank Sandra Graham for her contributions to this article.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This research was supported in part by a California State University Junior/Senior Faculty Research award.

References

Alessandri

S. M.

(1992). Effects of maternal work status in single-parent families on children’s perception of self and family and school achievement. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 54, 417-433. doi:10.1016/0022-0965(92)90028-5

Beamon

K. K.

(2010). Are sports overemphasized in the socialization of African American males? A qualitative analysis of former collegiate athletes’ perception of sports socialization. Journal of Black Studies, 41, 281-300. doi:10.1177/0021934709340873

Belgrave

F. Z.

Allison

K. W.

(2006). African American psychology: From Africa to America. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Boykin

A. W.

Tyler

K. M.

Miller

(2005). In search of cultural themes and their expressions in the dynamics of classroom life. Urban Education, 40, 521-549. doi:10.1177/0042085905278179

Brunson

R. K.

Miller

(2006). Gender, race, and urban policing. The experience of African American youth. Gender & Society, 20, 531-552. doi:10.1177/0891243206287727

Cole

D. A.

Jacquez

F. M.

Maschman

T. L.

(2001). Social origins of depressive cognitions: A longitudinal study of self-perceived competence in children. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 25, 377-395. doi:10.1023/A:1005582419077

Crump

R. L.

Lillie-Blanton

Anthony

J. C.

(1997). The influence of self-esteem on smoking among African American school children. Journal of Drug Education, 27, 277-291. Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com.lib-proxy.fullerton.edu

Dweck

C. S.

(2007). The perils and promises of praise. Educational Leadership, 65, 34-39. Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com.lib-proxy.fullerton.edu

Freeman

K. E.

Gutman

L. M.

Midgley

(2002). Can achievement goal theory enhance our understanding of the motivation and performance of African American young adolescents? In Midgley

(Ed.), Goals, goal structures and patterns of adaptive learning (pp. 175-204). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

10.

Good

Aronson

Inzlicht

(2003). Improving adolescents’ standardized test performance: An intervention to reduce the effects of stereotype threat. Applied Developmental Psychology, 24, 645-662. doi:10.1016/j.appdev.2003.09.002

11.

Gray-Little

Hafdahl

A. R.

(2000). Factors influencing racial comparisons of self-esteem: A quantitative review. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 26-54. doi:10.1037//0033-2909.126.1.26

12.

Grills

C. T.

(2004). African psychology. In Jones

R. L.

(Ed.), Black psychology (4th ed., pp. 243-260). Hampton VA: Cobb & Henry.

13.

Harter

(1985). Manual for the self perception profile for children. Unpublished manuscript.

14.

Harter

(1987). The determinants and mediational role of global self-worth in children. In Einsenberg

(Ed.), Contemporary topics in developmental psychology (pp. 219-242). New York, NY: Wiley.

15.

Harter

(1990). Causes, correlates and the functional role of global self worth: A life-span perspective. In Sternberg

Kolligan

Jr. (Eds.), Competence considered (pp. 67-98). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

16.

Harter

(1999). The construction of the self: A developmental perspective. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

17.

Hughes

Hagelskamp

Way

Foust

M. D.

(2009). The role of mothers’ and adolescents’ perceptions of ethnic-racial socialization in shaping ethnic-racial identity among early adolescent boys and girls. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 38, 605-626. doi:10.1007/s10964-009-9399-7

18.

Hughes

Witherspoon

Rivas-Drake

West-Bey

(2009). Received ethnic-racial socialization messages and youths’ academic and behavioral outcomes: Examining the mediating role of ethnic identity and self-esteem. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 15, 112-124. doi:10.1037/a0015509

19.

Jackson

S. A.

(2002). A study of teacher perceptions of youth problems. Journal of Youth Studies, 5, 313-323. doi:10.1080/1367626022000005992

20.

Jackson-Newsom

Buchanan

C. M.

McDonald

R. M.

(2008). Perceived parental maternal warmth in European American and African American adolescents. Journal of Marriage and Family, 70, 62-75. Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com.lib-proxy.fullerton.edu

21.

James

(1892). Psychology: The briefer course. New York, NY: Henry Holt (as cited in Harter, 1999).

22.

Leonard

K. K.

Pope

C. E.

Feyerherm

W. H.

(Eds.). (1995). Minorities in juvenile justice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

23.

Lindsey

E. W.

Colwell

M. J.

Frabutt

J. M.

Chambers

J. C.

MacKinnon-Lewis

(2008). Mother-child dyadic synchrony in European American and African American families during early adolescence. Merrill Palmer Quarterly, 54, 289-315. doi:10.1353/mpq.0.0003

24.

Margolin

(2006). African American youths with internalizing difficulties: Relation to social support and activity involvement. Children & Schools, 28, 135-144. Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com.lib-proxy.fullerton.edu

25.

McFadden

A. C.

Marsh

G. E.

Price

B. J.

Hwang

(1992). A study of race and gender bias in the punishment of handicapped school children. The Urban Review, 24, 239-251. doi:10.1007/BF01108358

26.

McKown

Weinstein

(2003). The development and consequences of stereotype consciousness in middle childhood. Child Development, 74, 498-515. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.7402012

27.

McMillian

M. M.

Frierson

H. T.

Campbell

F. A.

(2011). Do gender differences exist in the academic identification of African American elementary school-aged children? Journal of Black Psychology, 37, 78-98. doi:10.1177/ 0095798410366709

28.

Michaels

M. L.

Barr

Roosa

M. W.

Knight

G. P.

(2007). Assessing measurement equivalence in a multiethnic sample of youth. Journal of Early Adolescence, 27, 269-295. doi:10.1177/0272431607302009

29.

Morgan

S. L.

Mehta

J. D.

(2004). Beyond the laboratory: Evaluating survey evidence for the disidentification explanation of Black-White differences in achievement. Sociology of Education, 77, 82-101. doi:10.1177/00380407040700104

30.

Muris

Meesters

Fijen

(2003). The self-perception profile for children: Further evidence for its factor structure, reliability and validity. Personality and Individual Differences, 35, 1791-1802. doi:10.1016/S0191-8869(03)00004-7

31.

Murry

V. M.

Brody

G. H.

(1999). Self-regulation and self-worth of Black children reared in economically stressed, rural, single mother-headed families: The contributions of risk and protective factors. Journal of Family Issues, 20, 458-484. doi:10.1177/019251399020004003

32.

Nussbaum

D. A.

Steele

C. M.

(2007). Situational disengagement and persistence in the face of adversity. Journal of Experimental and Social Psychology, 43, 127-134. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2005.12.007

33.

Osborne

J. W.

(1999). Unraveling academic achievement among African American boys from an identification with academics perspective. Journal of Negro Education, 68, 555-565. doi:10.2307/2668154

34.

Osborne

J. W.

Jones

B. D.

(2011). Identification with academics and motivation to achieve in school: How the structure of the self influences academic outcomes. Educational Psychology Review, 23, 131-158. doi:10.1007/s10648-011-9151-1

35.

Osborne

J. W.

Walker

C. W.

(2006). Stereotype threat, identification with academics, and withdrawal from school: Why the most successful students of colour might be most likely to withdraw. Educational Psychology, 26, 563-577. doi:10.1080/01443410500342518

36.

Pinderhughes

E. E.

Dodge

K. A.

Bates

J. E.

Pettit

G. S.

Zelli

(2000). Discipline responses: Influences of parents’ socioeconomic status, ethnicity, beliefs about parenting, stress and cognitive-emotional processes. Journal of Family Psychology, 14, 380-400. doi:10.1037//0893-3200.14.3.380

37.

Raykov

(1997). Estimation of composite reliability for congeneric measures. Applied Psychological Measurement, 21, 173-184. doi:10.1177/01466216970212006

38.

Rocque

(2010). Office discipline and student behavior: Does race matter? American Journal of Education, 116, 557-581. doi:10.1086/653629

39.

Smith

C. O.

Levine

D. W.

Smith

E. P.

Dimas

Prinz

R. J.

(2009). A developmental perspective of the relationship of racial-ethnic identity to self-construct, achievement, and behavior in African American children. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 15, 145-157. doi:10:1037/a0015538

40.

Tamis-LeMonda

C. S.

Briggs

R. D.

McClowry

S. G.

Snow

D. L.

(2008). Challenges to the study of African American parenting: Conceptualization, sampling, research approaches measurement and design. Parenting: Science and Practice, 8, 319-358. doi:10.1080/15295190802612599

41.

Thomas

D. E.

Townsend

T. G.

Belgrave

F. Z.

(2003). The influence of cultural and racial identification on the psychosocial adjustment of inner-city African American children in school. American Journal of Community Psychology, 32, 217-228. doi:10.1023/B:AJCP.0000004743.37592

42.

Townsend

T. G.

Belgrave

F. Z.

(2000). The impact of personal identity and racial identity on drug attitudes and use among African American children. Journal of Black Psychology, 26, 421-436. doi:10:1177/0095798400026004

43.

Twenge

J. M.

Crocker

(2002). Race and self-esteem: Meta-analyses comparing Whites, Blacks, Hispanics, Asians and American Indians and comment on Gray-Little and Hafdahl (2000). Psychological Bulletin, 128, 371-408. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.128.3.371

44.

Whaley

A. L.

(2000). Sociocultural differences in the developmental consequences of the use of physical discipline during childhood for African Americans. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 6, 5-12. doi:10.1037/1099-9809.6.1.5

45.

Wiberg

Sundstrom

(2009). A comparison of two approaches to correction of restriction of range in correlational analysis. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 15, 1-9. Retrieved from http://pareonline.net/pdf/v14n5.pdf

46.

Wills

T. A.

Murry

V. M.

Brody

G. H.

Gibbons

F. X.

Gerrard

Walker

Ainette

(2007). Ethnic pride and self-control related to protective and risk factors: Test of the theoretical model for the strong African American families program, Health Psychology, 26, 50-59. doi:10.1037/0278-6133.26.1.50

47.

Wood

Kaplan

McLoyd

V. C.

(2007). Gender differences in the educational expectations of urban low-income African American youth: The role of parents and the school. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 36, 417-427. doi:10.1007/s10964-007-9186-2

48.

Wood

Kurtz-Costes

Rowley

S. J.

Okeke-Adeyanju

(2010). Mothers’ academic gender stereotypes and education related beliefs about sons and daughters in African American families. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 521-530. doi:10.1037/a0018481

49.

Y. J.

Smith

D. E.

(1997). Self-esteem of Taiwanese children. Child Study Journal, 27, 1-19. Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com.lib-proxy.fullerton.edu

50.

Young-Hyman

Schlundt

D. G.

Herman-Wenderoth

Bozylinski

(2003). Obesity, appearance, and psychosocial adaptation in young African American children. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 28, 463-472. doi:10.1093/jpepsy/jsg037