Barrett Lowry Wallis 1999 Adolescent Self Esteem and Cognitive Schools Training School JChildFamilyStudies

7/28/2019 Barrett Lowry Wallis 1999 Adolescent Self Esteem and Cognitive Schools Training School JChildFamilyStudies

1/12

Journal of Child an d Family Studies, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1999. pp . 217-227

Adolescent Self-Esteem and Cognitive SkillsTraining: A School-Based InterventionPaula M. Barrett, Ph.D.,1,4 Hayley M. Webster, BBSc, BPSY(hons),2an d Jeffrey R. Wallis, M.C.P.3

W e developed an d evaluated a school-based psychosocial prevention program fo radolescents, focusing on self-esteem, negative cognitive processes, and peer isola-tion. Fifty-one tenth-grade students between the ages of 13-16 were recruited an drandomly allocated to one of three groups; Social Cognitive Training group (SCT),Attention Placebo Com parison Group (APC) and a W aitlist Control group (W L). Apre-post design using tw o types of measures: specific measures of the target skills(self-esteem, self-statements) an d impact measures (quality of peer relationships,acceptability of intervention fo r adolescents an d teachers) evaluated the e f f e c -tiveness an d social validity of the intervention. Multivariate Analyses of Varianceshowed significant improvements on measures of target skills for the SCT groupin contrast to the comparison conditions on reported self-esteem, and self state-men ts, however mixed results were found on the impact measures. W hile the SCTgroup was rated as highly acceptable an d useful by both adolescents an d teach-ers, student self report ratings of quality of peer relationships showed little changeacross the study period. W e discussed ou r findings in terms of the effectivenessof group based cognitive interventions in developing adolescent self-esteem an dsocial competence, and the ecological validity of implementing programs withinnaturalistic settings.

1Senior Lecturer School of Appl ied Psychology, Griff ith University, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia.2Psychologist, Griffi th University, School of Applied Psychology, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia.3Clinical Psychologist, School of Applied Psychology, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Queensland,Australia.4Correspondence should be directed to Paula Barrett, School of Applied Psychology, Gold CoastCampus , PMB 50, Gold Coast Mail Center, Queensland, 9726 A ustralia. Electronic Mail may be sentto [email protected].

KEY WORDS: adolescent; self esteem; cognitive; social skills; evalu ation.

2171062-1024/99/0600-0217$16.00/0 O 1999 Human Sciences Press, Inc.


2/12

The past two decades has witnessed increasing interest in the importanceof developing stable peer rela tionsh ips in yout h. As a re sult there has been agrowing acknowled gment that social in teract ion problems dur ing adolescence haveimplications for not only current adjustment bu t also fo r future psychological wel lbeing in terms of academic, o ccup ationa l, and personal funct ioning (Christopher,Nangle, & Hansen, 1993; Oglivy, 1994; Spence, in press).W hile much of thi s literature has focused on beha vior al aspects of socialskil l development, several researchers (Band ura, 1986; Bl on k, Prins, Sergent,& Ringrose, 1996; Delamater & McNamara, 1986; Gresham, 1986; Jupp, &Griffiths, 1990; Rub in, 1985) have directed their attention toward exam inatio nof the possible l ink between self-percep tion and social beha vior. Fin din gs fromthis body of research suggest th at even thou gh an indiv idual may possess appro-priate social skil ls to interact effectively wi th peers, feelings of i nsec urity result-in g from negative self-perception may inhib i t expression of prosocial behavior.Several stud ies have hig hlig hted that such inhibit ion of prosocial behavior is animportant determ inant of social withd raw al and increases the probab ility of peer re-jection (Cavell, 1990; Coie, Dodge, & Kupersmidt, 1990; McFarlane, Bellissimo,& Norman, 1995; Rosenberg, 1986). The relevance of self-esteem and the wayth e adolescent th ink s about him /her self in various situati on s is not restricted topeer relationship diff icult ies. Adolescents with lo w self esteem ar e more l ikelyto develop negative cognitive coping styles and are at increased risk for devel-oping depression an d suicid al tendencies (Kaz din , 1990; M cFarlane et al., 1995;Overholster, Adams, Lehnert, & Brinkman , 1995).

Despite research identifying self esteem an d cogni tions about self as impor tan tareas to target with adolescents experiencin g diff icult ies in i t ia t ing an d maintain ingpeer relationship s, few school based in terventions have specifically employed cog-nitive interventions which target these aspects of adolescent development (Jupp& Griffiths, 1990). Of the studies which have utilised cognitive interventions tomodify adolescent self esteem and cognitive coping patterns, a numb er have foundcognitive restructur ing to be high ly effective in modi fy ing negative self percep-tions an d improving self esteem (Blonk et al., 1996; Heimburg; 1989; Verduyn,Lord, & Forrest, 1990; Warren, McLellarn, & Ponzoha, 1988).

Despite these po sitive results, a number of lim itatio ns in previous researchrestrict the generalisation of their findings (for examp le Blo nk et al., 1996; E itzen,1975; Verduyn et al., 1990). A n impor tan t l imi tat ion of past research ha s been th eabsence of an attention placebo comparison group and/or a wait l ist control group.W h i l e the use of a wai t l i s t control group enables comparison between personswho were involved in the group process versus those w ho were not, Mannarino,Christy, Durlak, and Magnussen (1982) and Barrett (1995) highl ight that witho utan Attention Placebo group, (that is a group w ho receive a simil ar program butwithout the use of the specific skill development interven tions), it is not possibleto determine whether improvement in target variables were not due to the addedattention of being involved in a group process. Thus reporting that any specific

218 Barrett, W ebster, and W a l l i s


3/12

changes due to the intervention, above nonspecific factors is not possible. Further-more, a thorough evaluation of skills training programs requires measurement ofoutcomes which are socially valid, that is measures which answer the questionof whe ther changes in cognition translate to modi fication of behavior w hich thenmakes a difference in the individ ual ' s life (Kazdin, 1977; Tisdell & St Lawrence,1988; Wolf, 1978). Thus to evaluate th e effectiveness of social cognitive skil lstraining, measures of specific behavior and/or cognitions as well as measures ofchange in social behavior are required.

G iven the above research findings and the highligh ted shortcomings of a nu m-be r these studies, w e aimed to investigate whether social cognitive training ca nproduce imp rovements in adolescent self esteem, self related perceptions an d cog-nitions, and ul tima tely in adolescent peer relationship s. Furthermore, the presentstudy aims to build upon past findings by incorp orating attention placebo and wai t -list control group s so as to determine if changes in target variables are attribu tableto the specific in terven t ion.

METHODParticipants

The part icip ants were sampled from a Catholic High school in Logan City(Queensland, A ustral ia) , wh ich is a midd le to low socio-economic status area(Austra l ian Bureau of Statistics, 1995). The p artic ular school was selected giventh e high need fo r mental health services fo r chi ldren an d famil ies in thi s area an dthus was considered as an approp riate site for the imple me ntatio n of preven tivepsychosocial in tervent ions.

Fifty on e students (1 5 males and 36 fem ales ), aged 13-16 years, we re nom-inated by teachers and/or th e school counselor as experiencing lo w self esteemand/or difficulties in teract ing wi t h peers in social an d school environ men ts. Teacherratings of student self esteem an d peer relationships were utilised based uponfindings of Dadds, Spence, Holland, Barret t, an d Laurens, (1997) w ho identifiedteacher no min atio ns as a reliable source of data for identifying students l ikely to beat risk of experiencin g psycholo gical distress and/or disorders. S tudents were nom-inated based upon rating s on the dimensions of (a) student parti cipa tion wi t h peersin class and social ac tivities, and (b) teacher e valuation of student self confidence.Students scoring low on both dime nsions were inv ited to take part in the study.

Participants had to complete both pre- an d posttest measures in order to beincluded in the study.

MeasuresThree measures were administered on e week prior and one week after th e

intervention phase of the study. Stude nts' self esteem w as assessed us ing th e

Adolescent Self-Esteem an d Cognitive Skills Training 219


4/12

Rosenberg Self Esteem Scale (RSE: Rosenberg, 1965) which is a 10 item mea-sure of global self esteem on which respondents rate their feelings of self accep-tance, self respect, and positive self evalu ation.

The RSE has been shown to have acceptable levels of rel iabil i ty an d validity,with test retest reliabili ty of .85 over a two week period and internal consistencyof .88 in adolescent po pu latio ns (see Hagborg, 1993, for a review). Moreoverthe RSE has been recommended by a number of researchers as a psychome-trically sound measure for use with school ag e chi ldren (Chui , 1988; G urney,1986).Participants' self related cognitions and perception of self were measuredby the Social In teraction Self Statem ent Test (SISST; G lass, Merluz z i , Beiver, &Larsen, 1982), which is a 30 item ques tionn aire. The SISST targets both positive(facilitative) an d negative (debilit ive) thoug hts about se lf in a number of situations.In examin ing the SISST G lass et al. (1982) found th e SISST to discr iminate wellbetween high and low anxious children an d adolescents, based on their responsesto the posit ive an d negative thought statements within th e ques t ionna i re . In addi -t ion, factor analys is supported th e proposed factor structure of the measure an daccounted fo r 91.5% of the total variance.To assess adolescents' perceptions of their peer relat ionships the Social Com-petence with Peers Quest ionnairePupil Version (SCPQ; Spence, in press) wasemploy ed. The SCPQ is a 10 item questio nnaire that asks respond ents to rate thequality of their relat ionships with peers. Spence (i n press) evaluate d th e psychome-tric properties of the SCPQ us ing 38 6 chi ldren an d adolescents. It was found thatth e SCPQ ha d acceptable internal consistency with an alpha of .75 and sp l i t halfrel iabil i ty of .77. The ch ild ren and adolescents' SCPQ also correlated with parentratings r = .54, teacher ratings r = .40, and to a lesser extent peer rating s r = .31of the child/adolescents ' social re la t ionships. Within th e present s tudy this ques-tionnaire w as used to assess th e social validity of the intervention. Th a t is , changesdue to social cognitive training produced improvement in peer re la t ionship s an dno t only on measures of self esteem an d cognit ions.There were two addi t ional measures used to access the social validity of theprogram post in tervent ionAcceptabi l i ty of the intervention fo r adolescents an dAcceptabi l i ty of the intervention for teachers. Both these measures were based onscales p reviou sly used an d experimental ly validated by Dadds et al. (1997).

ProcedureParticipants com pleted the RSE, SISST, and SCPQ prior to allocation to one of

the three groups the four session social cogn itive training group , the four sessionattention placebo group, or the wai t l i s t control group. Allo cation to a group w asbased on a process of matc hin g wh ereby each group w as equivalent on a num berof variables nam ely ; gender, age, an d scores on the RSE, SISST, an d SCPQ.

2 2 0 Barrett, Webster, an d Wallis


5/12

To ensure that groups w ere evenly matched on target variablespre-interventionchi-square tests and one way analyses of variance (ANOV As) com parin g the threegroups were performed. There was no significant differences between groupsfor gender, x 2(2 , N = 51) = .89, p > .05. (overall 36 females, 15 males) or age,F(2,48) = .34, p > .05 or between the conditions on the self report measuresat pre-intervention; (RSE): F(2,48) = 2.62, p > .05.; (SISST): F(2,48) = .45, p >.05.; (SCPQ): F(2,48) = .65, p > .05.; (SCQ): F(2,48) = 1.39, p > .01. Thus, allgroups began at a comparable level of functioning.

Therapists w ere rando mly assigned to one of the two i nterventio n groupssocial cognitive training or the attention placebo groupand sessions were con-ducted on a weekly basis with each session lasting 90 minutes. Five postgraduatepsychology students and one Cli nical Psychologist w ere trained over a period offour weeks to serve as therapists in the study . Train ing consisted of familiarisat ionwi th program manu als an d materials, and a series of role plays in which feedbackregarding adherence to m anu al protocol and group process was provided.While it has been suggested that group sizes of less that 12 part ic ipants aremost effective (Bierman & Fu rma n, 1984; Bu lkel y & Cramer, 1990), we ran groupsof up to 17 students due to demand for the program within th e educational sett ing.To offset the increased number of particip ants three therapists were allocated toeach group. It was considered that with a 6:1 student to therapist ratio that eachstudent wou ld receive adequate attention.

Social Cognitive Training InterventionThe p rogram focused on developing k nowled ge and skil ls relevant to the

issues of self esteem, self talk an d modif ication of negative th inking, the use ofmore positive thinking, commun ication, problem solving, and perception. Theprogram encouraged individuals to work on personally relevant situations an dissues through indiv idual and group processes. Processesof instruction, coaching,modeling, rehearsal, self observation, group trainer an d peer feedback, an d praisewere widely utilised to shape an d reinforce new and improved skills. In addit ionto in-session processes all particip ants completed w eekly homework assignmentsrelevant to the weekly topic so as to reinforce skills developed in the group an dincrease g eneralisation of learning.

Th e Attention Placebo Comparison InterventionTh is group covered the same content to the social co gni tive training interven-

tion group, how ever the content w as delivered in a lecture format, includ ing videosan d large group discussions. Therapists took a non-directive role in these sessionsan d there were no attempts to develop solutions to the problems discussed.

Adolescent Self-Esteem an d Cognitive Skills Training 221


6/12

222 Barrett, W ebster, and WallisRESULTS

Prior to data analysis, all dependent variables were examined for accuracy ofdata entry, missing values and fit between their distribution and the assumptionsof mu ltivari ate analyses. The total num ber of 52 cases was reduced to 51 with th edeletion of a case missing a score on the post measure of self esteem. The resultsof checks of homogeneity of variance, normality, l inearity an d multicoll inear i tyidentified no violat ions of assumptions.

Examinat ion of changes in scores on each of the dependent measures frompre to post program highl ights an improvement in self esteem, self related cogni-tions and perceptions, and perceptions of peer relationship s for the social cognitiveintervention group. Furthermore, significant differences between th e social cogni-tive intervention and the two other conditions were observed on two of the threemeasures at post intervention. Table 1 presents the means and standard deviationsfo r the self report measures at pre and post intervention for the three cond itions .Responses on the four dependent variables were submitted to a 2 (phase:pre- vs. post-treatment) x 3 (cond ition: Intervention, attentio n placebo and w ait-l ist) multivar ia te analysis of variance (MAN OV A) to determ ine whether the aboveeffects were significant at the mult ivar ia te level, prior to further examination ofth e univaria te results. Where a significant interac tion occurred between treatmentan d time, time effects were examined with in each group, an d treatment conditionswere compared at the relevant time. Given that all the hypotheses in the present

Table 1. Means and Standard Deviations of Adolescent Self-Report Measures for theThree G roup Condit ions , Pre-Intervention and Post-Intervention

MeasureSE ScaleMSDSISSTMSDSCPQMSDSkills Q.MSD

Pre-InterventionIntervention(N = 19)

26.45.689.313.015.74.334.54.7

AP C(N = 16)

23.35.385.515.914.62.932.25.3

W L(N = 16)

22.55.285.99.014.53.232.62.7

Post-InterventionIntervention(N = 19)

19.6ab4.076.5ab7.714.13.327.8ab4.3

A PC(N = 16)

23.4a5.081.6a15.814.42.432.9a5.0

W L(N = 16)23.6b3.584.6b9.914.43.431.8b3.8

Note: On all measures a reduction in score is indicative of impro vement.Means with the same subscripts (a,b) are different from each other using Tukey's HSD testat p < .0125.


7/12

Adolescent Self-Esteem an d Cognitive Skills Training

study are directional, the reported p values are one tailed . Addit ionally, the levelof significance was reduced to .0125 in l ine w ith Bonferroni corrections.Using W ilks' statistic, a significant interaction was found between group an dtime (Phase: pre-Post), F(8,90) = 8.42, p < .001, with an effect size of n) = .428. A

significant main effect was found for time F(4,45) = 9.24, p < .001 on all depen-dent variables (effect size n = .451), but not for group F(8,90) = .37, p > .01. Asummary of the multivariate analysis of variance results are presented in Table 2.More specifically, analyses of self esteem across inter venti on typ e revealeda significant group x time (pre-post) interaction, F(2,48) = 31.3, p < .001. Thatis , participants in the interven tion group show ed im proved self esteem across thestudy period when compared to both the attention placebo an d waitlist groupswhose scores re main relati vely stable across tim e.Further examination of the interactionvia a one-way ANOV A with Tukey'sHonestly Significant Difference (HSD) an d paired sam ple t-testsrevealed a sig-nificant difference between the three groups at post in terven tion F(2,48) = 4.92,p < .0125 and with T ukey's H SD test confirming that the intervention group ha dsignificantly lower scores than both the comparison conditions.A main effect fo r time was also found, F(l ,48) = 16.3, p < .001,howeverpaired samp le t-test o nly revealed a significant difference pre to post for the inter-vention group t(18) = -7.16, p < .001.The MAN OV A examinatio n of adolescents' self cognitions and p erceptionsacross the study period revealed a significant interaction between group x time,F (2,48) =9 .64, p < .001. The interaction highlights that adolescents in the inter-vention group reported using fewer negative self statements and had an improvedself perception after the program w hereas adolescents in the APC and WL groupsreported no change in self statements used or in perception of themselves.Univariate tests high lighted the significant difference between the three groupsat post intervention F(2,48) = 4.59, p < .0125 on the SISST. The post hoc Tukey'sH SD test confirmed that at post intervention, the intervention group had signifi-cantly lower scores than both the comparison conditions. A main effect fo r timewas also found, F(l,48) = 15.8, p < .001, he paired sample t-test revealed a sig-nificant difference between p re to post intervention for the intervention group onlyt(18) = -6.25, p < .001.

223Table 2. Summary of the Results From 2 (Phase: Pre- vs.Post Intervention) x 3 (Condition: Intervention, Attention

Placebo and Waitlist) MANOVA ProcedureSource

GroupTimeGroup x Time

df8,904,458,90

F Ratio.37.549.327

F Prob..466.000*.000*

*p < .001.


8/12

Examination of adolescents' perceptions regard ing changes in peer relation-ships across the study period, and adolescent and teacher pe rceptions of the useful-ness of the program were uti lise d to assess the social validity of the social cog nitivetraining program.Examination of changes in peer relationships resulting from social cogni-tive training, using MANOVA, revealed a significant group x t ime interactionF(2,48) = 4.95, p < .0125. It appeared that th e interventio n group's scores on theSCPQ have slightly increased over time, in comparison to the attention placeboan d waitlist group which appear to have remained relatively stable. It is of note thatan increase in SCPQ scores is reflective of an increase in perceived interpersonaldifficulties with peers.Addit ional social validity results come from the acceptability scales. Adoles-cents reported that they found th e social cognitive program to be highly relevantan d acceptable as indicated by the M = 59.68, (max imum score possible = 68),and SD = 6.24. In comparison, adolescents in the APC group score on the accept-ability measure w as M = 41.19, SD = 7.94. T he acceptability of the interventionfor th e teachers w as also high, with a M = 9.88, SD = 2.10 (possible maximumscore = 12).

DISCUSSIONFindings of the present study provide further evidence that group social cog-

nitive training with adolescence facil i tates impro vemen ts in self esteem an d cog-nitions regarding one's self perception. W hile previous studies (for example; Ladd& Mize, 1983; McLellarn, & Ponzoha, 1988; Spence, in press; Verduyn et al.,1990) have also reported improvements in chi ldren an d adolescents' self esteeman d use of positive thinking pat terns fol low ing a social skills or cognitive inter-vention, our study utilised comparison groups so as to provide addition al evidencethat changes w ere directly related to the interventio n and not to nonspecific factorssuch as involvement in a grou p process. The finding that th e specific interventionwas related to greater improvem ents in self esteem and the use of adap tive cogni-tive patterns when compared to the APC group is further evidence that th e specificskill develop ment processes produced chang e in target variab les. Th is is espe ciallyso given that the difference between the social cognitive intervention and the APCgroups was the use of specific skill development processes and procedures.

Resu lts of the data on the social validity of the social cognitive program, thatis whether ado lescents reported a perceived chan ge in their social interac tions, an dwhether they found the program to be useful to their l ives, was m ixed. A nalysis ofadolescents self reported peer interaction competence pre to post showed a slightincrease in perceived interpersonal difficulties. Our finding of lit t le to no changein social behavior after cognitive tra ini ng is similar to the findings of La G recaan d Santagrossi (1980) who found that no changes in socially valid outcomes

2 24 Barrett, Webster, an d Wallis


9/12

were evident follow ing skills training, despite improvements being reported on anumber of outcome measures such as self esteem.

While their is a need to evaluate social skills an d social cognitive traininginterventions against measures such as changes in social behavior (Hughes &Sullivan, 1988) the measures employed need to be sensitive to change, an d includeratings no t only of the participant bu t also of peers, family and/or teachers. A s seenin the measurement of child and adolescent behavior, self report or teacher reportor child report alone may not be the most accurate measure of specific behaviorswhich occur across settings (Achenbach, 1991).

Another possible explanation for these findings could be that altho ugh skillstraining may facilitate positive changes in cognitions and/or targeted social inter-action skills within the program, other specific intervention strategies may need tobe incorporated in order to produce changes in social behavior in the adolescent'snatural environment. Moreover, perhaps these results indicate that negative selfperceptions do not play such a central role in changing social behavior as hasbeen suggested (e.g., Bandura, 1986; Blonk et al., 1996; Delamater & McNamara,1986; Gresham, 1985; Jupp & Griffiths, 1990; Rubin, 1985). W hil e self perceptionsabout one's ability to interact successfully in various social situations may mod-erate behavior, it may be suggested that a more fun dam ental factor in pro duc ingchange in social behavior lies in developing interventions w hich also alter the widersocial environment. T hat is , interventions may need to be more systemic in their ap -proach. For examp le, for an adolescent to displ ay an increase in prosocial behavior,reinforcement for such behavior must be forthcoming from his/her peer group.The findings of the present study that adolescents rated the social cognitiveprogram as useful and relevant to their lives is important in terms of develop-in g programs in which drop out rates are low. Furthermore, the data highl ight ingthat teachers also saw the program as useful and relevant is encouraging not onlybecause it is important that teachers understand the benefits of preventive inter-ventions, but also in terms of teachers reinforcing the validity of the interventionto students and other staff, as well as reinforcing efforts and gains made by stu-dents. As highlighted by Jupp and Griffiths ' (1990) study, interventions need tobe delivered in a proximal area to the population an d also be seen as relevant tostudents an d teachers fo r drop out rates to be decreased. Therefore, findings onthe present social cognitive program's usefulness an d relevance provide supportfor continual development and implementation of such programs within schoolsettings.

The results from this study ca n also be seen as important in terms of fillinga noticeable gap within both the cognitive skills and social skills literature asthe majority of studies have ignored issues of social validity and interventionacceptability, despite this being a vital ingredient in the success of an intervention(Christopher et al., 1993).

While the social cognitive program found that adolescent self esteem an d selfcognitions improved subsequent to the intervention, results from the present study

Adolescent Self-Esteem and Cognitive Skills Training 225


10/12

need to be considered in l ight of several methodological shortcomings. Firstly, theadolescents involved in the study w ere from a sample of convenience. Hence gen-eralisation from this sampl e to other groups of adolescents needs to be considered.Secondly, the small num ber of adolescents w ho were inv olve d in each treatmentgroup mus t be acknowledged as a limita tion , especially given the data analysesconducted. T hirdly, th e lack of further follow-up data restricts th e abil i ty of thestudy determining w hether th e intervention effects were du rable.Desp ite the aforementioned limitations, this study builds upon previous stud-ie s notably by the inclusion of the attention placebo an d wait l ist control groups.In finding significant improvements in target variables which were attributableto the specific skills component of the social cognitive program ou r study pro-vides support fo r imp leme nting adolescent self esteem an d cognit ive skills train-in g more wid ely in school environm ents. Furthermore, considering th e re la t ionshipbetween low self esteem and depression (K ing, Nay lor, Segal, Evans , & Shain ,1993; Maxwell, 1992; Smart, & Walsh, 1993) development of interventions whichai m to ameliorate the detrimental impact of low self esteem during the period ofadolescence are of vital importance.

REFERENCES

Achenbach , T.M. (1991) . Manual for the Youth Self Report an d 1991Profile. Burlington: Universi tyof Vermont Depar tment of Psychiatry.Austral ian Bureau of Statistics (1996). D irectory of Census Statistics. Canberra, Austral ia: Common-weal th Government Publ ishing.Bandura , A . (1986). Th e explanatory an d predictiv e scope of self efficacy theory.Journal of Social andClinical Psychology, 4, 359-373.Barrett, P.M. (1995). Social skills training in a high school setting. Griffith Univers i ty , Gold Coast,Austral ia: Unpublished Manuscr ip t .Bierman, K.L., & Furman, W . (1984). T he effects of social skil ls training an d peer involvem ent on thesocial adjustmen t of preadolescents. Child D evelopment, 55, 151-162.Blonk, R.W .B., Prins, P.J.M., Sergent, J.A ., & Ringrose, J. (1996). Cognitive-behavioral group therapyfo r socially incompetent children: short term an d maintenance effects with a clinical sample.Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 25 , 215-224.Bulkeley, R., & Cramer, D. (1990). Social skil ls training with youn g adolescence. Journal of Youthan d Adolescence, 19, 451-463.Cavell . , T.A.(1990). Social adju stment, social performance, an d social sk i l ls : A tr i-component modelof social competence. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 19, 1 1 1 - 1 2 1 .Christopher, J.S., Nangle, D.W., & Hansen, J. (1993). Social skil l intervent ions with adolescentscurrent issues and procedures. Behaviour Modification, 17 , 314-338.Chui , L. (1988). Measures of self-esteem fo r school ag e chi ldren. Journal of Counseling and D evel-opment, 66, 298-301.Coie, J.D., Dodge, K.A & Kupersmidt , J. (1990). G roup behaviour an d social status. In S.R.Asher &J.D. Coie (Eds.), Peer Rejection in Childhood (pp. 17-59). Cambridge: Cambridge Univers i ty

Press.Dadds, M., Spence, S.H.,Holland , D ., Barrett, P.M., & Laurens, K . (1997). Prevention an d early inter-vention for anxie ty disorders: A controlled trial. Journal of Consulting an d Clinical Psychology,65, 527-635.Delamater, R.J. & McNam ara, J .R. (1986) . T he social impact of assertiveness: research findings andclinical implications. Behavioural Modification, 10 , 139-158.

226 Barrett, Webster, an d Wallis


11/12

Eitzen, D.S. (1975). The effects of behaviour modification on the attitude of delinquents. BehaviourResearch an d Therapy, 13 , 295-299.Glass, C.R., M erluz zi, T.V., Biever, J.L., & Larsen, K.H . (1982). Cognitive assessment of social anxiety:Development and validation of a self statement questionnaire. Cognitive Therapy an d Research,

6, 37-55.Gresham, P.M. (1985). Utility of cogni tive behaviou ral procedures for the social ski lls training wit hchildren: A review. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 13, 411-423.Gurney, P. (1986). Self esteem in the classroom. School Psychology International, 7, 199-209.Hagborg, W . (1993). The Rosenberg self esteem scale an d Hatter's self perception profi le fo r adoles-cents: A concurrent valid ity study. Psychological Review, 30 , 132-136.Heimberg. R.G . (1989). Cognitive restructuring methods in the treatment of social phobia. CognitiveTherapy and Research, 9, 436-445.Hughes, J.W., & Sullivan , K.A . (1988). Outcome assessment in social skills training with children: Areview. Journal of School Psychology, 26, 167-183.Jupp, J.J. , & Griff iths, M.D. (1990). Self concept changes in shy, socially isolated adolescents fol lowingsocial skills training emphasizing role plays . Australian Psychologist, 25 , 165-177.Kazdin, A.E., (1990). Childhood depression. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 31, 121-160.King, C., Nay lor, M., Segal, H., Evans, T. & Shain, B. (1993). G lobal self w orth, specific self perceptionsof competence an d depression in adolescents. Journal of American Academy of Child AdolescentPsychiatry, 32, 745-752.Ladd, G.W & Mize. J. (1983). A cognitive Social Learning Model of Social skills Training. Psycho-logical Review, 90 , 127-157.LaGreca, A .M. & Santagrossi, D .A. (1980). Social skills training with elementary school students. Abehavioural group approach. Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 48, 220-227.Man narino , A.P., Christy, M. Durlak, J . A . ,& Magnussen, M.G . (1982). Evaluation of social competencetraining in the schools. Journal of School Psychology, 20, 11-18.Maxwel l , B.E. (1992). Hosti l i ty, depression, an d self esteem among troubled an d homeless adolescentsin crisis. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 21, 139-150.McCarthy & Hoge (1982). Analys i s of age effects in longi tud inal studies of adolescent self-esteem.Developmental Psychology, 18 , 372-379.McFarlane, A .H., Bellissimo., A., & Norma n., G .R. (1995). The role of family and peers in social self-efficacy: Link s to depression in adolescence. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 65, 402-410.Oglivy, C.M. (1994). Social skil ls training with children an d adolescents: A review of the evidence oneffectiveness. Educational Psychology, 14 , 73-83.Overholster, J.C., Adams, D .M., Lehnert K.L., & Brinkman, D.C. (1995). Self esteem deficits and suici-da l tendencies among adolescents. Journal of American Academy of Child Adolescent Psychiatry,34, 919-928.Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the Adolescent self-image. Princeton, N J: Princeton University.Rosenberg, M. (1986). Conceiving the self. Melbourne, FL: Krieger.Smart, R.G . & Wa lsh, G.W . (1993). Predictors of depression in street youth. Adolescence, 28 , 41-53.Spence, S.H. (i n press). Enhancing social competence with children an d adolescence. Windsor : NFERNelson .Tisdell, D.A., & St. Lawrence, J.S. (1988). Adolescent interpersonal problem solving skil l t raining:Social v alidation and generalisation. Behaviour Therapy, 19, 171-182.Verduyn, C.M., L ord, W., & Forrest, G.C. (1990). Social skills training in schools: An evaluation study.Journal of Adolescence, 13 , 3-16.Warren, R., McLellarn, R.W. & Ponzoha, C. (1988). Rational emotive therapy vs general cognitive be-havioural therapy in the treatment of low self esteem and related emotional disturbances. CognitiveTherapy & Research, 12 , 21-37.Wolf, M.M. (1978). Social validity: the case for subjective measurement or how applied behaviouranalysis is finding it's heart. Journal of Applied Behaviour Analysis, 11 , 203-214.

Adolescent Self-Esteem and Cognitive Skills Training 227


12/12

Reproducedwithpermissionof thecopyrightowner. Further reproductionprohibitedwithoutpermission.

Documents

Barrett Lowry Wallis 1999 Adolescent Self Esteem and Cognitive Schools Training School JChildFamilyStudies