Abstract
An improved peer-nomination procedure (training plus more votes) and the rating-scale were compared to assess the test-retest reliability, and the convergent validity of both methodologies for 23 preschoolers (4- to 5-yr.-old) and 41 kindergartners (5- to 6-yr.-old). Five testing periods with both procedures were scattered over the entire school year. The results indicate that the peer-nomination procedure and the rating-scale reach acceptable and comparable levels of reliability among kindergartners. However, among preschoolers the rating-scale works a little better, and reliability is moderate. Data on convergent validity show both methodologies assess quite similar aspects of the group structure in the two groups studied. While the use of the rating-scale is more appropriate among preschoolers, the improved peer-nomination technique is recommended among older children in terms of temporal reliability, validity, and flexibility of descriptive possibilities.