Psychosocial Adjustment and Sociometric Status in Primary Education: Gender Differences

psyg-11-607274 Decembe 4, 2020 Time: 13:2 # 1 ORIGINAL RESEARCH published: 08 Decembe 2020 doi: 10.3389/ psyg.2020.607274 Edi ed by: Rosa io Cabello, Uni e si y o G anada, Spain Re iewed by: Claudio Longoba di, Uni e si y o Tu in, I aly Adelinda A aujo Candeias, Uni e si y o E o a, Po ugal *Co espondence: Bá ba a Lo ence-La a [email p o ec ed] † † †ORCID: Alicia Muñoz-Sil a o cid.o g/0000-0001-8906-178X Bá ba a Lo ence-La a o cid.o g/0000-0001-6154-8852 Manuel Sanchez-Ga cia o cid.o g/0000-0003-3375-8347 ‡These au ho s ha e con ibu ed equally o his wo k Special y sec ion: This a icle was submi ed o De elopmen al Psychology, a sec ion o he jou nal F on ie s in Psychology Recei ed: 16 Sep embe 2020 Accep ed: 16 No embe 2020 Published: 08 Decembe 2020 Ci a ion: Muñoz-Sil a A, De la Co e de la Co e C, Lo ence-La a B and Sanchez-Ga cia M (2020) Psychosocial Adjus men and Sociome ic S a us in P ima y Educa ion: Gende Di e ences. F on . Psychol. 11:607274. doi: 10.3389/ psyg.2020.607274 Psychosocial Adjus men and Sociome ic S a us in P ima y Educa ion: Gende Di e ences Alicia Muñoz-Sil a1†‡, Cecilia De la Co e de la Co e1‡, Bá ba a Lo ence-La a2*†‡ and Manuel Sanchez-Ga cia3†‡ 1Depa men o Social, De elopmen al and Educa ional Psychology, Uni e si y o Huel a, Huel a, Spain, 2Depa men o De elopmen al and Educa ional Psychology, Uni e si y o Se illa, Se illa, Spain, 3Depa men o Clinical and Expe imen al Psychology, Uni e si y o Huel a, Huel a, Spain The accep ance o ejec ion o classma es is one o he mos widely ecognized de e minan s o wellbeing in childhood. This s udy analyses psychosocial adjus men and sociome ic s a us in p ima y educa ion pupils, and possible di e ences by gende . A c oss-sec ional su ey was unde aken in Huel a (Spain). The su eyed schools we e selec ed using a s a i ied andom sampling echnique wi h bo h public and p i a e elemen a y schools. Sample was composed o 247 4 h g ade s uden s. Da a e ealed gende di e ences in psychosocial adjus men , pa icula ly in e ms o p osocial beha io in gi ls and beha io al p oblems in boys. Popula and ejec ed s a uses p esen ed opposing adjus men p o iles, pa icula ly in hype ac i e symp oms and beha io al p oblems. When he sample was sepa a ed by gende , he di e ences be ween he ypes o s a us in emo ional symp oma ology and p osocial beha io disappea ed. In addi ion, he di e ences be ween s a uses we e g ea e in boys, and we e de ined mainly by hype ac i i y, whils o gi ls hese di e ences we e mo e appa en in beha io al p oblems. Keywo ds: sociome ic s a us, adjus men , beha io al p oblems, gende di e ences, educa ion INTRODUCTION Wo ldwide, 10–20% o child en and adolescen s su e om psychia ic diso de s, bu only one i h a e co ec ly diagnosed. Mo eo e , signi ican numbe s o o he child en and young people ha e psychosocial adjus men p oblems ha , whils no mee ing he diagnos ic c i e ia o a men al diso de , a e s ill a sou ce o su e ing and discom o , bo h o hemsel es and o he people a ound hem. These mino s mus also ecei e e alua ion and help (Asociación Española de Neu opsiquia ía, 2009;Mundy e al., 2017). Fu he mo e, he ea ly p esence o emo ional and/o beha io al p oblems inc eases he isk o de eloping a men al diso de in he la e s ages o de elopmen (Cos ello e al., 2003;Kim-Cohen e al., 2003;Widige e al., 2009). Conc e ely, in la e childhood — ou wo k is ocused on his de elopmen al s age — beha io al and/o emo ional diso de s a e pa icula ly p onounced (Na a o-Pa do e al., 2012). On he o he hand, he di e ences be ween boys and gi ls in hei psychological adjus men ha e been well s udied. In gene al, boys show a g ea e numbe o ex e nalizing diso de s han F on ie s in Psychology | www. on ie sin.o g 1Decembe 2020 | Volume 11 | A icle 607274 psyg-11-607274 Decembe 4, 2020 Time: 13:2 # 2 Muñoz-Sil a e al. Psychosocial Adjus men and Sociome ic S a us gi ls (Wena and Ke ig, 2000;Na a o-Pa do e al., 2012). Mo eo e , and wi hou igno ing he high p esence o beha io al p oblems in gi ls du ing childhood and adolescence ha has been ound in some s udies (Aláez e al., 2000), gi ls su pass boys in in e nalizing pa hologies such as dep essi e and anxie y diso de s (Rei z e al., 2005;Na a o-Pa do e al., 2012). I is no ewo hy ha hese gende di e ences can be seen in di e en coun ies and cul u es such as Aus alia, Belgium, China, Ge many, G eece, Is ael, Jamaica, Holland, Pue o Rico, Sweden, Thailand, and he Uni ed S a es (C ijnen e al., 1999). F om middle childhood o p eadolescence he school con ex has been shown decisi e o he psychosocial adjus men o child en. And in his con ex , he e a e wo de e mining ac o s: (a) he eache -s uden ela ionships and (b) he pee ela ionships. The quali y o eache -s uden ela ionships has been shown o be a p o ec i e ac o agains inc easing in e nalizing and/o ex e nalizing p oblems while s imula ing p osocial beha io in child en (Longoba di e al., 2019, 2020). In his sense, some wo ks poin ou ha eache s play an impo an media ion ole in con lic s be ween classma es by co ec ing some beha io s and encou aging o he s (Gas aldi e al., 2015). Simila ly, a good quali y eache -s uden ela ionship is a p o ec i e ac o agains he isk o ic imiza ion o exclusion om he g oup (Ma engo e al., 2018). The second ac o – pee ela ionships in school con ex and i s associa ion wi h psychosocial adjus men – is a cen al opic o his wo k. Rela ionships wi h pee s a hese ages play an impo an ole in unde s anding he emo ional and beha io al di icul ies o hese child en. Du ing hese ages, child en unc ion in he p esence o hei pee s o a la ge p opo ion o hei day, making he pee en i onmen e y impo an o hei de elopmen (S ou e e al., 2005;Rubin e al., 2015). In pa icula , he accep ance o ejec ion o pee s is one o he mos widely ecognized de e minan s o socio-pe sonal de elopmen and adjus men (Buhs and Ladd, 2001;Bie man, 2004;P ins ein and La G eca, 2004;B endgen e al., 2005;Rubin e al., 2006;Lau sen e al., 2007;M ug e al., 2012;Pla e al., 2013;Badenes-Ribe a e al., 2019). Thus, he accep ance o pee s is associa ed wi h g ea e sociabili y, sel - e icacy, and adequa e sel -es eem, while he absence o such ela ionships o con inued ejec ion a e ela ed o isola ion, dep ession, low sociabili y, poo p osociali y, and dis up i e beha io . In pa icula , he class oom g oup is usually he scena io pa excellence in which social ela ionships a e s udied a hese ages (Newcomb e al., 1993) and he e a e a ious s udies showing ha he deg ee o accep ance and ejec ion o pee s in he school en i onmen is also associa ed wi h he de elopmen o academic li e and schola ly compe ence (Buhs and Ladd, 2001; Gi o d-Smi h and B ownell, 2003;Wen zel, 2003). Gi en he impo an epe cussions o he accep ance o ejec ion o pee s, i is no su p ising ha nume ous in es iga ions ha e ocused on s udying he social s a us ha boys and gi ls occupy in class oom se ings. P ima ily because o child en du ing elemen a y school yea s a e embedded in an age s a i ied g oup o such a la ge po ion o hei ime (Hawley and Bowe , 2018). One o he mos widely employed ways o de e mining he accep ance o ejec ion o pee s is h ough he analysis o sociome ic s a us, s udied h ough a ious me hodologies, o which he sociome ic echnique de eloped in he 1930s by Mo eno is pa icula ly p ominen and is he mos widely chosen p ocedu e (Jiang and Cillessen, 2005). The applica ion o his echnique allows us o ob ain he ollowing p o iles: a e age, popula , ejec ed, neglec ed and con o e sial. A e age s a us g oup is composed by child en ecei ing a mode a e numbe o likes and dislikes and i is he e e ence g oup wi h whom he mo e ex eme g oups a e compa ed. Popula child en ha e high liking sco es and low disliking sco es. Rejec ed a e ac i ely disliked by hei pee s while neglec ed a e simply ba ely nomina ed by hei pee s as liked o disliked. Finally, con o e sial child en ecei e bo h high liking and disliking sco es (Coie e al., 1982). In Spain, he mos common sociome ic s a us in school child en is a e age, ollowed by neglec ed, ejec ed, popula , and con o e sial (Ga cía e al., 2013). The s abili y o his s a us o e he yea s was examined in he s udy o Jiang and Cillessen (2005), wi h he olde boys and gi ls showing mo e s abili y han he younge child en. The s abili y o sociome ic s a us o e ime is special ele an because s eng hen he po en ial o social s a us on child en ou comes (Geukes e al., 2018;Ilma inen e al., 2019). Simila ly, he associa ion be ween sociome ic s a us and pe sonal adjus men is well documen ed (Ges e al., 2001; Bie man, 2004;Geukes e al., 2018;Ilma inen e al., 2019). In his ega d, i is wo h no ing ha he e a e a g ea e numbe o s udies ha examine sociome ic s a us in ela ion o ex e nalizing p oblems as opposed o in e nalizing p oblems. In gene al, ejec ed child en, in con as wi h hei mo e popula pee s, p esen mo e un a o able indica o s o in e nal and ex e nal adjus men (Newcomb e al., 1993;LaFon ana and Cillessen, 2002) whils e en less p osociali y has been obse ed in child en wi h his s a us compa ed wi h hose o o he s a us ca ego ies (Wen zel, 2003;Plazas e al., 2010). An isocial mino s (Plazas e al., 2010) and hose wi h hype ac i e symp oms (M ug e al., 2012;Ros and G aziano, 2018) a e mo e ejec ed by hei pee s. Fo his eason, child en wi h hype ac i i y end o be mo e highly ep esen ed in he ejec ed ca ego y. The indings, howe e , a e no so clea when s udying agg essi eness, whe e i has been ound ha he s a us o agg esso s depends on he ype o agg ession ha is p edominan ly used when in e ac ing wi h hei pee s (Ka men and Te an, 2013). Rega ding in e nalizing p oblems, i has been shown ha anxious and/o dep essi e symp oma ology appea s o main ain and exace ba e social ejec ion (Newcomb e al., 1993;B endgen e al., 2005). Taken oge he , i appea s ha wo con lic ing s a uses can be obse ed acco ding o he adjus men cha ac e is ics o he child en: popula and ejec ed. Fu he , a e age, and e en neglec ed child en ha e ecei ed less a en ion because hese a e sociome ic p o iles wi h adjus men p oblems ha a e o ela i ely li le conce n. Finally, in spi e o he ac ha he e a e bo h simila i ies and di e ences be ween he cha ac e is ics o he ejec ed and con o e sial s a uses, he la e s a us is one o he leas s udied due o i s low ep esen a i eness in g oups and ins abili y o e ime (Newcomb e al., 1993). The high p e alence o psychosocial adjus men p oblems in childhood, oge he wi h i s link wi h sociome ic ypologies explains he in e es in hese ypes o s udies. Du ing p ima y F on ie s in Psychology | www. on ie sin.o g 2Decembe 2020 | Volume 11 | A icle 607274 psyg-11-607274 Decembe 4, 2020 Time: 13:2 # 3 Muñoz-Sil a e al. Psychosocial Adjus men and Sociome ic S a us educa ion, child en a e inc easingly conce ned abou hei own social s a us wi hin hei closes pee g oup, i.e., hei g oup- class. In addi ion, on he basis o de elopmen al psychology s udies i is known ha he e a e di e ences in he social adjus men o boys and gi ls a hese ages, and hese mus be aken in o accoun (LaFon ana and Cillessen, 2002). I is also known ha un il he adolescence, gende seg ega ion domina es he socializa ion o boys and gi ls (Pe ce , 2002). O he s udies ha e ound di e ences be ween boys and gi ls in e ms o he deg ee o accep ance o ejec ion hey ecei e om hei pee s, wi h boys being mos ep esen ed in he ejec ed s a us ca ego y (Plazas e al., 2010). Howe e , ela i ely ew s udies ha e examined whe he he associa ion be ween sociome ic s a us and emo ional and beha io al symp oma ology a ies acco ding o gende (B endgen e al., 2005;Escoba e al., 2010). Thus, he p esen esea ch speci ically aims o analyze he psychosocial adjus men o child en, hei sociome ic s a us, and he possible ela ionships be ween hese a iables in a sample o p ima y school s uden s, whils explo ing how his associa ion may a y acco ding o gende . The ul ima e goal o his wo k is o unde s and he ac o s which p edic he posi i e adap a ion o child en and adolescen s o hei school en i onmen s. This will, in u n, in o m he de elopmen o in e en ion p og ams ocused on he mos impo an ac o s o p omo ing he psychological wellbeing o pupils, bo h emo ionally and pe sonally as well as in e ms o social and pee ela ions. MATERIALS AND METHODS Pa icipan s The s udy popula ion was 4 h g ade p ima y school s uden s (a ound 9 yea s o age) in Huel a (Spain). The es s we e adminis e ed in six educa ional cen e s, wi h a inal sample o 247 s uden s composed o 112 boys (45.3%) and 135 gi ls (54.7%). The sample, he e o e, ep esen s 14.26% o he popula ion en olled in he 4 h yea o p ima y school in Huel a. We can assume ha he sample is ep esen a i e o he popula ion (1,732 s uden s) wi h a con idence le el o 95%, and maximum es ima ion e o o 5.7%, assuming an a e age e ec size and a powe o 99%. The age o he pa icipan s anged be ween 8 and 10 yea s, wi h an a e age o 9 yea s (SD = 0.343). The sample was selec ed using a s a i ica ion p ocedu e g ouping he schools acco ding o hei owne ship (public o p i a e). Wi hin each o he s a a we decided o apply he es s in as many cen e s as possible, using he ollowing c i e ia: - Pupils en olled in he ou h g ade o p ima y school (bo h gi ls and boys). - Accep ance o he esea ch by he educa ional cen e . - W i en in o med consen o he pa en s/gua dians o he child en. Table 1 shows he socio-demog aphic cha ac e is ics o he sample. Only child en who we e unable o a end any o he 2 days used o ieldwo k in each school cen e we e excluded om he sample. TABLE 1 | Socio-demog aphic cha ac e is ics o he sample (N= 247). Dis ibu ion Gende Boys 112 (45.3%) Gi ls 135 (54.7%) Owne ship o he cen e Public 120 (48.6%) P i a e 127 (51.4%) Age Mean (S.D.) = 9 (0.343) 8 yea s 15 (6.1%) 9 yea s 218 (88.3%) 10 yea s 14 (5.7%) Ins umen s Se e al in o man s pa icipa ed in his s udy. The s uden s o his s udy epo ed o hei sex, gende (socio-demog aphic da a), and sociome ic s a us; and he eache s in o med abou hese pupils’ psychosocial adjus men . Socio-Demog aphic Da a Age and gende o he pupils. Sociome ic S a us This was ob ained using he Pee -Nomina ion Ques ionnai e (Ga cía-Bace e, 2008). The ques ions asked we e: “Who a e he THREE membe s o you class ha you choose as BEST FRIENDS?,” and “Who a e he THREE membe s o you class ha you like LEAST AS FRIENDS?” F om hese wo i ems ou s anda dized sco es we e calcula ed o each pa icipan : To al nomina ions as “Bes iend,” To al nomina ions as “Wo s iend,” Social impac , and Social p e e ence. F om hese ou s anda dized sco es, pa icipan s we e ca ego ized in o he i e sociome ic s a us g oups al eady desc ibed (Coie e al., 1982): Popula , Rejec ed, Neglec ed, Con o e sial, and A e age. Psychosocial Adjus men This was e alua ed using he S eng hs and Di icul ies Ques ionnai e (SDQ-Cas; Goodman, 2001) a alida ed b ie men al heal h-sc eening ques ionnai e, designed o e alua e he beha io o child en and adolescen s be ween 3 and 16 yea s o age om he pe spec i e o pa en s and eache s. In his wo k we used he e sion o eache s in Spanish ( aken om1), which is composed o 25 i ems dis ibu ed in o i e subscales wi h i e i ems each: Emo ional P oblems (α= 0.66, in his sample), Conduc P oblems (α= 0.73), Hype ac i i y (α= 0.88), Pee p oblems (α= 0.69) and P osocial beha io (α= 0.84). Sco es on each one o he i ems a y be ween 0 “No ue” and 2 “Absolu ely ue.” Fo each o he i e scales he sco e can a y om 0 o 10. We also used he g ouping in o wo second-o de ac o s ha was implemen ed by he au ho s o he scale (Goodman e al., 2010), ob aining a dis inc sco e o in e nalizing symp oma ology (α= 0.88), which is composed o Emo ional P oblems and Pee P oblems, and ex e nalizing 1h p://www.sdqin o.o g/py/sdqin o/ 0.py F on ie s in Psychology | www. on ie sin.o g 3Decembe 2020 | Volume 11 | A icle 607274 psyg-11-607274 Decembe 4, 2020 Time: 13:2 # 4 Muñoz-Sil a e al. Psychosocial Adjus men and Sociome ic S a us symp oma ology (α= 0.77), composed o Hype ac i i y and Conduc P oblems. P ocedu e All p ocedu es pe o med in his s udy we e in acco dance wi h he e hical s anda ds o he ins i u ional and/o na ional esea ch commi ee and wi h he 1964 Helsinki decla a ion (p o ocol o Helsinky) and i s la e amendmen s o compa able e hical s anda ds. W i en in o med consen was ob ained om pa en s o all mino s pa icipan s included in he s udy a e ho oughly eading and ully unde s anding he in o ma ion. A copy o he signa u e page was e ained. No pa ien s we e included in his s udy and no e hics commi ee app o al was needed. The i s s ep in he p esen in es iga ion was o conduc an in e iew wi h he managemen eam o each school o explain he me hodology o he s udy. They we e gi en speci ic in o ma ion abou he objec i es o he esea ch, making clea ha he aim was o conduc a mo e in-dep h sea ch o a iables ha migh imp o e he social adap a ion o child en, hus a o ing he en i onmen and wel a e o he s uden s in he educa ional cen e s. They we e gi en a le e o mally eques ing collabo a ion wi h he s udy. A e ob aining he consen o he cen e , a le e was w i en o he pa en s o he s uden s whe e hey we e in o med ha a esea ch eam om he Uni e si y o Huel a had eques ed he assis ance o he school o conduc a s udy ha aimed o e alua e he adap a ion o child en in hei class ooms. In his le e , pa en s we e in o med ha he es s we e o be applied in he class oom and du ing school hou s, and he du a ion was speci ied. In he same le e , he signed au ho iza ion o he pa en s/gua dians was eques ed so ha hei child could be included in he s udy. Finally, each school appoin ed a 4 h g ade p ima y u o o be p esen in each class oom when he es s we e adminis e ed, accompanying he pe son who e alua ed he s uden s o ensu e ha p e-es ablished class ou ines, including b eak imes, we e espec ed. Da a Analysis All he s a is ical analyzes we e ca ied ou using SPSS . 20.0. Fi s ly, we examined he p esence o missing da a, checked e oneous da a, and all ha is implied by he pu i ica ion o da a h ough his s a is ical p og am. Secondly, we compu ed desc ip i e s a is ics (i.e., mean and s anda d de ia ion) o he s udy a iables. The in e nal consis ency o he subscale sco es o he SDQ was also e i ied by C onbach’s alpha coe icien . We analyzed he ela ionships be ween psychosocial adjus men and gende ( - es ), and be ween psychosocial adjus men and sociome ic s a us (one-way ANOVAs). Fo hese analyzes, we es ima e he e ec size (Cohen, 1988, 1992): Cohen’s d alues om | 0.20| o | 0.49| ep esen small e ec sizes; hose anging om | 0.50| o | 0.79| e lec medium e ec sizes; and alues o | 0.80| o g ea e indica e la ge e ec sizes. E a-squa ed alues om | 0.01| o | 0.05| ep esen small e ec sizes; hose anging om | 0.06| o | 0.13| e lec medium e ec sizes; and alues o | 0.14| o g ea e indica e la ge e ec sizes. Finally, we used chi- squa e es o analyze he ela ionships be ween sociome ic s a us and gende . RESULTS Psychosocial Adjus men and Sociome ic S a us o P ima y Educa ion Pupils Table 2 shows he desc ip i e da a o each o he i s and second o de subscales ha make up he SDQ ins umen . In gene al, he pa icipan s show mo e ex e nalizing han in e nalizing p oblems [ (1,246)= 7; p<0.001; Cohen’s d= 0.45]. The sco es ob ained on he i s -o de subscales (emo ional p oblems, pee p oblems, conduc p oblems, hype ac i i y, and p osociali y) p esen a e ages ha all wi hin no mali y, as es ablished in he co ec ion o he scale (Goodman, 2001). The compa isons o means by gende e eal s a is ically signi ican di e ences in e ms o To al P oblems, hese being mo e equen in boys compa ed wi h gi ls (see Table 2). Speci ically, hese a e he ex e nalizing p oblems, wi h conduc p oblems being pa icula ly highligh ed in he boys. In con as , gi ls sco e highe han boys on he p osocial scale. The echnique o pee nomina ion allowed o iden i ying he social s a us o each child in his/he class oom g oup (see Table 3). The pe cen age o pupils wi h a e age s a us exceeds 50% o he o al sample, whils he s a uses o neglec ed, ejec ed, TABLE 2 | Desc ip i e S a is ics o he SDQ Subscales by Gende . To al Boys Gi ls d M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) To al p oblems 7.53 (6.83) 8.46 (7.13) 6.75 (6.50) 1.97*0.25 In e nalizing p oblems 2.91 (3.12) 3.15 (3.04) 2.72 (3.17) 1.08 0.14 Emo ional p oblems 1.59 (1.85) 1.76 (1.89) 1.44 (1.80) 1.33 0.17 Pee p oblems 1.33 (1.75) 1.39 (1.72) 1.27 (1.78) 0.53 0.07 Ex e nalizing p oblems 4.61 (4.57) 5.31 (5.05) 4.03 (4.05) 2.21*0.28 Conduc p oblems 1.36 (1.85) 1.67 (2.11) 1.10 (1.55) 2.44*0.31 Hype ac i i y 3.26 (3.11) 3.64 (3.31) 2.93 (2.90) 1.79 0.23 P osociali y 8.52 (1.93) 8.20 (2.16) 8.79 (1.68) −2.40*0.31 *p <0.05; = S uden ’s - es ; d = absolu e alue o Cohen’s d e ec size. F on ie s in Psychology | www. on ie sin.o g 4Decembe 2020 | Volume 11 | A icle 607274 psyg-11-607274 Decembe 4, 2020 Time: 13:2 # 5 Muñoz-Sil a e al. Psychosocial Adjus men and Sociome ic S a us TABLE 3 | Compa ison o he pe cen ages o pupils in each s a us ca ego y acco ding o gende . To al N(%) Boys % (Z) Gi ls % (Z) Popula 32 (13.0%) 14.3 (0.6) 11.9 (−0.6) Rejec ed 36 (14.6%) 17.9 (1.3) 11.9 (−1.3) Neglec ed 42 (17.0%) 22.3 (2.0) 12.6 (−2.0) Con o e sial 10 (4.0%) 2.7 (−1.0) 5.2 (1.0) A e age 127 (51.4%) 42.9 (−2.5) 58.5 (2.5) Pea son Chi-squa e = 9.02, deg ees o eedom = 4; p = 0.059; Z = s anda dized esiduals. and popula all s and ou o a lesse ex en , wi h he con o e sial s a us being he leas ep esen ed ca ego y. The Pea son Chi-squa e s a is ical echnique — used o compa e he pe cen ages o pupils gi en each sociome ic s a us acco ding o gende — ailed o e eal a s a is ically signi ican alue, al hough i is e y close o signi icance. Fo his eason, he s anda dized esiduals (co ec ed o he es ) we e in e p e ed. I is obse ed ha in gi ls he a e age s a us ype was eco ded mo e equen ly han in boys. In he o he hand, he neglec ed s a us was mo e p edominan in boys bu no in gi ls. Psychosocial Adjus men and I s Rela ionship Wi h Sociome ic S a us Acco ding o Gende In his sec ion we examine he associa ion be ween he indica o s o psychosocial adjus men o he SDQ and he di e en ypes o sociome ic s a us o he en i e sample (see Table 4). Fo hese analyzes, hose pupils wi h a con o e sial s a us we e no aken in o accoun , gi en hei low numbe in he g oup. In gene al, da a e ealed ha he e a e wo opposing g oups in e ms o adjus men : popula e sus ejec ed. In addi ion, he child en in he ejec ed g oup show he poo es adjus men sco es in compa ison wi h hose in he emaining sociome ic s a us ca ego ies, wi h hese di e ences being mo e ma ked o ex e nalizing p oblems (conduc p oblems and hype ac i i y). The child en in he neglec ed s a us g oup p esen ed a simila p o ile o hose in he popula and a e age ca ego ies, excep o emo ional p oblems, whe e he e we e no di e ences om hose in he ejec ed ca ego y. These analyzes we e eplica ed acco ding o he gende o he pupils. The compa isons o boys and gi ls, espec i ely, a e p esen ed in Tables 5,6. When he sample was sepa a ed by gende , he di e ences be ween he ypes o s a us in emo ional symp oma ology and p osocial beha io disappea ed. Fo bo h gende s, di e ences we e ound be ween he ou ypes o s a us o hype ac i i y, conduc p oblems, and pee p oblems, wi h boys and gi ls in he ejec ed g oups p esen ing mo e adjus men p oblems han he es o he g oups, and wi h ejec ed boys exceeding he no mal alues es ablished by he scale o hype ac i i y and conduc p oblems (Goodman, 2001). As well, he di e ences be ween ypes o s a us in boys we e o g ea e magni ude han in gi ls and we e de ined mainly by hype ac i i y, whils o gi ls he la ges di e ences we e e iden in e ms o conduc p oblems ollowed by hype ac i i y. DISCUSSION Fi s ly, ou s udy p o ides e idence o gende di e ences wi h espec o he psychosocial adjus men o pupils. Thus, gi ls s and ou o ha ing highe sco es on p osocial beha io s, a inding ha is compa ible wi h hose o p e ious s udies (Plazas e al., 2010). In addi ion, boys ha e a g ea e numbe o conduc p oblems, which is in line wi h o he in e na ional s udies (Ka eman e al., 2009;Chen, 2010), and hose wi hin ou coun y (Aláez e al., 2000;Na a o-Pa do e al., 2012). Howe e , ou da a di e om hose o he la e s udies in ha we obse e ha ex e nalizing p oblems a e g ea e han in e nalizing p oblems in bo h boys and gi ls, as opposed o he inding ha in e nalizing p oblems a e mo e p e alen in gi ls. This inding could be explained by i ue o he ac ha compa a i e s udies o en co e a wide age ange — including adolescen s — and in e nalizing p oblems each highe le els (and a e o g ea e equency) in la e childhood and du ing adolescence, pa icula ly in gi ls (Jau eguiza e al., 2012). On he o he hand, his esul may be explained by he ac ha child en, pa en s, and eache s usually only epo ex e nalizing p oblems as adjus men p oblems, as hese a e ega ded as annoying beha io s o o he s as opposed o in e nalizing p oblems ha a e no conside ed as adjus men p oblems in child en o hese ages (Del Rocío and Palos, 2005). The dis ibu ion o he s uden s ac oss he sociome ic s a us g oups was as expec ed, wi h he majo i y being posi ioned in he a e age s a us g oup and he mino i y in he con o e sial s a us g oup (Ga cía-Bace e, 2008). Wi h ega d o gende , al hough his was a non-signi ican di e ence, we obse ed ha boys we e ep esen ed mo e in he neglec ed g oup compa ed wi h he gi ls who we e ep esen ed mo e in he a e age g oup. Unlike p e ious s udies (Plazas e al., 2010), we did no ind ha mo e boys we e ep esen ed in he ejec ed g oup compa ed wi h gi ls. Finally, i should be no ed ha he low numbe o s uden s in he con o e sial s a us g oup, as well as he p oblem o ins abili y o e ime de ec ed in p e ious s udies (Newcomb e al., 1993), led us o exclude he da a om hese boys and gi ls in subsequen analyzes. The associa ion be ween sociome ic s a us and psychosocial adjus men was also con i med in his esea ch. Fi s ly, he ejec ed s a us g oup p esen ed an adjus men p o ile opposi e o hose in he popula s a us g oup. Fu he mo e, and in line wi h M ug e al. (2012), ejec ion by pee s was mo e s ongly co ela ed wi h adjus men indica o s han accep ance. Thus, we ound ha hose in he ejec ed g oup di e ed om hose in he es o he sociome ic s a us g oups in almos all o he p oblems ca ego ies, wi h no such di e ences being ound be ween he membe s o he emaining s a us g oups. These di e ences we e pa icula ly ma ked o ex e nalizing di icul ies, F on ie s in Psychology | www. on ie sin.o g 5Decembe 2020 | Volume 11 | A icle 607274 psyg-11-607274 Decembe 4, 2020 Time: 13:2 # 6 Muñoz-Sil a e al. Psychosocial Adjus men and Sociome ic S a us TABLE 4 | Sociome ic s a us. Means (S anda d De ia ions) and F es o means based on SDQ measu emen s o he sample. Popula Rejec ed Neglec ed A e age Fη2 M(SD)M(SD)M (SD) M (SD) Emo ional p oblems 0.94 (1.13)a2.58 (1.95)b1.48 (1.95)a,b1.57 (1.88)a4.96** 0.060 Conduc p oblems 0.41 (0.91)a3.00 (2.60)b0.90 (1.68)a1.28 (1.60)a15.07*** 0.162 Hype ac i i y 1.47 (2.14)a6.47 (3.10)b2.60 (2.89)a3.02 (2.85)a21.05*** 0.213 Pee p oblems 0.84 (1.17)a2.61 (2.61)b1.02 (1.59)a1.25 (1.52)a8.17*** 0.095 P osociali y 9.16 (1.17)a7.61 (2.14)b8.64 (2.07)a,b8.55 (1.94)a,b3.96** 0.048 **p <0.01; ***p <0.001; η2= e a-squa ed e ec size. The di e en supe sc ip s (a, b) indica e s a is ically signi ican di e ences. Tes : Fac o ial ANOVA. Pos hoc compa isons: Sche é. No supe sc ip s indica e ha he e a e no s a is ically signi ican di e ences be ween g oups. TABLE 5 | Sociome ic s a us. Means (S anda d De ia ions) and F es o he compa ison o means acco ding o he SDQ measu es o he sample o boys. Popula Rejec ed Neglec ed A e age Fη2 M(SD)M(SD)M (SD) M (SD) Emo ional p oblems 1.06 (1.24) 2.70 (1.95) 1.56 (1.85) 1.81 (1.99) 2.53 0.067 Conduc p oblems 0.69 (1.20)a3.45 (2.74)b1.12 (1.81)a1.60 (1.85)a7.49*** 0.176 Hype ac i i y 1.44 (1.86)a7.15 (3.08)b2.64 (2.87)a3.60 (2.97)a14.46*** 0.292 Pee p oblems 0.63 (0.96)a2.55 (2.82)b0.92 (1.15)a1.50 (1.34)a,b5.26** 0.131 P osociali y 9.13 (1.36) 7.20 (2.48) 8.24 (2.42) 8.21 (2.02) 2.46 0.066 **p <0.01; ***p <0.001; η2= e a-squa ed e ec size. The di e en supe sc ip s (a, b) indica e s a is ically signi ican di e ences. Tes : Fac o ial ANOVA. Pos hoc compa isons: Sche é. No supe sc ip s indica e ha he e a e no s a is ically signi ican di e ences be ween g oups. TABLE 6 | Sociome ic s a us. Means (S anda d De ia ions) and F es o he compa ison o means acco ding o he SDQ measu es o he sample o gi ls. Popula Rejec ed Neglec ed A e age Fη2 M(SD)M(SD)M (SD) M (SD) Emo ional p oblems 0.81 (1.05) 2.44 (2.00) 1.35 (2.15) 1.42 (1.81) 2.28 0.052 Conduc p oblems 0.13 (0.34)a2.44 (2.37)b0.59 (1.46)a1.08 (1.39)a7.34*** 0.151 Hype ac i i y 1.50 (2.45)a5.63 (3.01)b2.53 (3.01)a2.67 (2.74)a6.79*** 0.141 Pee p oblems 1.06 (1.34)a2.69 (2.41)b1.18 (2.10)a,b1.10 (1.61)a3.74*0.083 P osociali y 9.19 (0.98) 8.13 (1.54) 9.24 (1.25) 8.76 (1.88) 1.54 0.036 *p <0.05; ***p <0.001; η2= e a-squa ed e ec size. The di e en supe sc ip s (a, b) indica e s a is ically signi ican di e ences. Tes : Fac o ial ANOVA. Pos hoc compa isons: Sche é. No supe sc ip s indica e ha he e a e no s a is ically signi ican di e ences be ween g oups. especially hype ac i e symp oma ology. In his ega d, a numbe o s udies, as e ealed by he me a-analysis ca ied ou by Ros and G aziano (2018), show ha child en wi h ADHD expe ience a highe a e o ejec ion by hei pee s, which may be ela ed o p oblems in he p ocessing o social in o ma ion, as well as di icul ies in he sel - egula ion o bo h emo ions and beha io . We mus also men ion ha he child en in he neglec ed s a us g oup p esen ed a simila p o ile o hose in he popula and a e age ca ego ies, excep o emo ional symp oma ology, whe e hey do no di e om hose in he ejec ed ca ego y. The da a ob ained in his wo k also poin o he possibili y ha he ela ionships be ween psychosocial adjus men and sociome ic s a us should be analyzed di e en ly o boys and gi ls, since he pa e n o esul s ound he e di e acco ding o whe he we conside he sample as a whole o conduc sepa a e analyses acco ding o gende . This conclusion is consis en wi h o he s udies ha ha e examined he mode a ing ole o gende in he ela ionship be ween sociome ic s a us and socio-emo ional adjus men (B endgen e al., 2005;Escoba e al., 2010). Despi e i s s eng hs, he cu en wo k is no wi hou limi a ions. Fi s ly, his is a c oss-sec ional s udy in which he ieldwo k was conduc ed a a speci ic poin in ime. And whils his has allowed us o analyze he a iables conside ed in his wo k and he possible ela ionships be ween hem, his ype o design does no allow o es ablishing causal ela ionships ha con i m he di ec ionali y o he ela ionships ound, i.e., whe he he adjus men p oblems de e mine he s a us o he child en, o ice e sa. Secondly, wi h ega d o he pa icipan s, we did no use a clinical sample o child en diagnosed wi h ex e nalizing o in e nalizing p oblems, so he esul s migh di e i a clinical and non- popula ion sample was used. As well, i would be con enien o inc ease he size and he ep esen a i eness o he sample o e i y whe he he same esul s could be ound in his case. Thi dly, we used sel - epo es s, in which he s uden s F on ie s in Psychology | www. on ie sin.o g 6Decembe 2020 | Volume 11 | A icle 607274 psyg-11-607274 Decembe 4, 2020 Time: 13:2 # 7 Muñoz-Sil a e al. Psychosocial Adjus men and Sociome ic S a us hemsel es p o ided he in o ma ion, whils he eache s also comple ed a ques ionnai e. As demons a ed in he esul s o o he s udies, i would ha e been in e es ing o complemen his e alua ion wi h o he ques ionnai es comple ed by he amily. In his ega d, and inso a as his is possible, i would be ex emely use ul o employ he same ins umen s o he pupils, pa en s/gua dians, and eache s, in o de o compa e he di e en pe cep ions held by all pa ies on, o example, adjus men p oblems. Finally, and o add ess hese limi a ions, i would be in e es ing i u u e esea ch could employ longi udinal designs ha collec da a h oughou se e al educa ional s ages, he eby allowing o an analysis o changes in he a iables o e ime and o es ablish causal ela ionships be ween hem. Also, some p e ious in es iga ions ha e shown he he e ogenei y ha exis s in some ypes o s a us (Ga cía-Bace e, 2008;Ka men and Te an, 2013). So, i would be use ul o iden i y di e en p o iles o sub ypes o each s a us, o know mo e in dep h which p o iles o each s a us a e bes ela ed wi h indica o s o pe sonal and schola ly wellbeing. In summa y, as a inal conclusion, he s udy p o ide e idence o sugges ha ejec ion o accep ance by he pee g oup has impo an implica ions o he psychosocial adjus men o school age child en, highligh ing he need o de elop in e en ions ha could imp o e he social clima e in he class oom (Ga cía-Bace e, 2008;Ca asco e al., 2015;Jus icia-A áez e al., 2015) and always being clea abou he decisi e ole o eache s in his ma e (Longoba di e al., 2019, 2020). Such in e en ions migh be mo e e ec i e a younge ages, gi en ha , in compa ison wi h olde child en, sociome ic nomina ions a e signi ican ly less s able in younge child en (Jiang and Cillessen, 2005). P ac ical Implica ions Despi e he p udence wi h which he esul s o a c oss-sec ional s udy a e o be aken, ou da a poin o he need o wo k wi h he class oom g oup in p ima y educa ion o imp o e he wellbeing o child en. So, he s udy highligh s he suppo needs o boys and gi ls wi h a p ominen p o ile in beha io al p oblems — and pa icula ly hose wi h hype ac i e symp oms — o help wi h hei in eg a ion and abili y o adap socially o hei classma es. Taking in o accoun he ac ha his g oup is highly ulne able o pee ejec ion, along wi h all he consequences ha his en ails o hei de elopmen , i is essen ial o implemen in e en ion p og ams ocused on imp o ing he sociome ic s a us o hese pupils (Mikami e al., 2013a). The p og am de eloped by hese au ho s also had a signi ican impac on he pee s o child en wi h ADHD, since his in e en ion also dec eased hei social p oblems, imp o ed hei sociome ic s a us, and allowed hem o achie e g ea e ecip oci y in hei iendships. Mo eo e , hese e ec s we e mo e signi ican o hose child en wi h highe le els o dis up i e beha io (Mikami e al., 2013b). Taken oge he , all o his con i ms he use ulness o hese ypes o p og ams o imp o ing coexis ence in he class ooms and he subsequen psychological wellbeing o all he pupils, bu pa icula ly o hose wi h psychosocial adjus men p oblems. In his sense, we mus unde line he impo an ole o eache s, since a ious s udies ha e highligh ed he p o ec i e ole o he eache -s uden ela ionship wi h espec o psychological symp oms, in addi ion o p omo ing p osocial beha io s, academic ou comes, school adjus men and gene al psychological well-being o hei s uden s (Longoba di e al., 2019, 2020). Fo all he abo e men ioned, and in ag eemen wi h o he au ho s (Sale no, 2016;Mundy e al., 2017) we ocus he need o connec ion be ween educa ion policy and awa eness and p omo ion o men al heal h in p ima y school child en. Basically, h ough p og ams ha emphasize social and emo ional skills o he p e en ion o bo h academic ailu e and school disengagemen as mo e se ious men al heal h p oblems in adolescence and adul hood. DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT The aw da a suppo ing he conclusions o his a icle will be made a ailable by he au ho s, wi hou undue ese a ion, o any quali ied esea che . ETHICS STATEMENT E hical app o al was no p o ided o his s udy on human pa icipan s because no pa ien s we e included in his s udy and no e hics commi ee app o al was needed. W i en in o med consen o pa icipa e in his s udy was p o ided by he pa icipan s’ legal gua dian/nex o kin. AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS All au ho s lis ed ha e made a subs an ial, di ec and in ellec ual con ibu ion o he wo k, and app o ed i o publica ion. REFERENCES Aláez, M., Ma ínez-A ias, R., and Rod íguez-Su il, C. (2000). P e alencia de as o nos psicológicos en niños y adolescen es, su elación con la edad y el géne o. Psico hema 12, 525–532. Asociación Española de Neu opsiquia ía (2009). In o me Sob e la Salud Men al de Niños y Adolescen es. Mad id: Minis e io de Sanidad y Polí ica Social. Badenes-Ribe a, L., Fab is, M. A., Gas aldi, F. G. M., P ino, L. E., and Longoba di, C. (2019). Pa en and pee a achmen as p edic o s o Facebook addic ion symp oms in di e en de elopmen al s ages (ea ly adolescen s and adolescen s). Addic . Beha . 95, 226–232. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2019. 05.009 Bie man, K. L. (2004). Pee Rejec ion: De elopmen al P ocesses and In e en ion S a egies. New Yo k, NY: Guil o d P ess. B endgen, M., Wanne , B., Mo in, A. J. S., and Vi a o, F. (2005). Rela ions wi h pa en s and wi h pee s, empe amen , and ajec o ies o dep essed mood du ing ea ly adolescence. J. Abno m. Child Psychol. 33, 579–594. doi: 10.1007/s10802-005- 6739-2 F on ie s in Psychology | www. on ie sin.o g 7Decembe 2020 | Volume 11 | A icle 607274 psyg-11-607274 Decembe 4, 2020 Time: 13:2 # 8 Muñoz-Sil a e al. Psychosocial Adjus men and Sociome ic S a us Buhs, E. S., and Ladd, G. W. (2001). Pee ejec ion as an an eceden o young child en’s school adjus men : an examina ion o media ing p ocesses. De . Psychol. 37, 550–560. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.37.4.550 Ca asco, C., Ala cón, R., and T ianes, M. V. (2015). E ec i eness o an in e en ion p og amme based on social clima e, school iolence and sociome ic es s in p ima y educa ion. Re . Psicodidác . 20, 247–262. doi: 10. 1387/Re Psicodidac .13206 Chen, J. J. (2010). Gende di e ences in ex e nalising p oblems among p eschool child en: implica ions o ea ly childhood educa o s. Ea ly Child De . Ca e 180, 463–474. doi: 10.1080/03004430802041011 Cohen, J. (1988). S a is ical Powe Analysis o he Beha io al Sciences. Mahwah, NJ: Law ence E lbaum Associa es. Cohen, J. (1992). A powe p ime . Psychol. Bull. 112, 155–159. doi: 10.1037/0033- 2909.112.1.155 Coie, J. D., Dodge, K. A., and Coppo elli, H. (1982). Dimensions and ypes o social s a us: a c oss-age pe spec i e. De . Psychol. 18, 557–570. doi: 10.1037/0012- 1649.18.4.557 Cos ello, E. J., Mus illo, S., E kanli, A., Keele , G., and Angold, A. (2003). P e alence and de elopmen o psychia ic diso de s in childhood and adolescence. A ch. Gen. Psychia y 60, 837–844. doi: 10.1001/a chpsyc.60.8.837 C ijnen, A. A. M., Achenbach, T. M., and Ve huls , F. C. (1999). P oblems epo ed by pa en s and child en in mul iple cul u es: The child beha io checklis synd ome cons uc s. Am. J. Psychia y 156, 569–574. doi: 10.1176/ajp.156. 4.569 Del Rocío, V. G., and Palos, P. A. (2005). Validez del you h sel epo pa a p oblemas de conduc a en niños mexicanos. In . J. Clin. Heal h Psychol. 5, 499–520. Escoba , M., T ianes, M. V., Fe nández-Baena, F. J., and Mi anda, J. (2010). Relaciones en e acep ación sociomé ica escola e inadap ación socioemocional. Es és co idiano y a on amien o. Re . La inoam. Psicol. 42, 469–479. Ga cía, B. F. J., Jiménez, L. I., Muñoz, T. M. V., Monjas, C. M. I., Su eda, G. I., Fe à, C. P., e al. (2013). Aulas como con ex os de acep ación y apoyo pa a in eg a a los alumnos echazados. Apun . Psicol. 31, 145–154. Ga cía-Bace e, F. J. (2008). Iden i icación de sub ipos sociomé icos en niños y niñas de 6 a 11 años. Re . Mex. Psicol. 25, 209–222. Gas aldi, F. G. M., Longoba di, C., Quaglia, R., and Se anni, M. (2015). Pa en – eache mee ings as a uni o analysis o pa en – eache in e ac ions. Cul . Psychol. 21, 95–110. doi: 10.1177/1354067X15 570488 Ges , S. D., G aham-Be mann, S., and Ha up, W. W. (2001). Pee expe ience: common and unique ea u es o numbe o iendships, social ne wo k cen ali y, and sociome ic s a us. Soc. De . 10, 23–40. doi: 10.1111/1467-9507. 00146 Geukes, K., an Zalk, M., and Back, M. D. (2018). Unde s anding pe sonali y de elopmen : an in eg a i e s a e p ocess model. In . J. Beha . De . 42, 43–51. doi: 10.1177/0165025416677847 Gi o d-Smi h, M., and B ownell, C. A. (2003). Childhood pee ela ionships: social accep ance, iendships, and pee ne wo ks. J. Sch. Psychol. 41, 235–284. doi: 10.1016/S0022-4405(03)00048-7 Goodman, A., Lamping, D. L., and Ploubidis, G. B. (2010). When o use b oade in e nalising and ex e nalising subscales ins ead o he hypo hesised i e subscales on he s eng hs and Di icul ies ques ionnai e (SDQ): da a om B i ish pa en s, eache s and child en. J. Abno m. Child Psychol. 38, 1179–1191. doi: 10.1007/s10802-010-9434-x Goodman, R. (2001). Psychome ic p ope ies o he s eng hs and di icul ies ques ionnai e (SDQ). J. Am. Acad. Child Adolesc. Psychia y 40, 1337–1345. doi: 10.1097/00004583-200111000-00015 Hawley, P. H., and Bowe , A. R. (2018). “E olu ion and pee ela ions: conside ing he unc ional oles o agg ession and p osociali y,” in Handbook o Pee In e ac ions, Rela ionships, and G oups, 2nd Edn, eds W. M. Bukowski, B. Lau sen, and K. H. Rubin (New Yo k, NY: Guil o d Publica ions), 106–122. Ilma inen, V. J., Vainikainen, M. P., Ve kasalo, M., and Lönnq is , J. E. (2019). Pee sociome ic s a us and pe sonali y de elopmen om middle childhood o p eadolescence. Eu . J. Pe s. 33, 606–626. doi: 10.1002/pe . 2219 Jau eguiza , J., Be na as, E., Ibabe, I., and Sa asa, M. (2012). Schola , clinical and emo ional maladjus men in 8-12 school-age child en: adap a ion o he sel - epo e sion o he beha io assessmen sys em o child en (BASC-S2) o he basque-speaking popula ion. Re . Psicodidác . 17, 415–439. doi: 10.1387/Re . Psicodidac .2982 Jiang, X. L., and Cillessen, A. H. N. (2005). S abili y o con inuous measu es o sociome ic s a us: a me a-analysis. De . Re . 25, 1–5. doi: 10.1016/j.d .2004. 08.008 Jus icia-A áez, A., Picha do, M. C., and Jus icia, F. (2015). Longi udinal s udy o he e ec s o he ap ende a con i i p og am on child en’s social compe ence. Re . Psicodidac . 20, 263–283. doi: 10.1387/Re Psicodidac .13313 Ka men, D., and Te an, S. (2013). A quan i a i e me a-analysis o he associa ion be ween sub ypes o ag ession and sociome ic s a us in P ima y School Child en. Thansyl anian J. Psychol. 14, 149–172. Ka eman, A., an Tuijl, C., an Aken Ma cel, A. G., and Deko i´ c, M. (2009). P edic ing young child en’s ex e nalizing p oblems: in e ac ions among e o ul con ol, pa en ing, and child gende . Me ill Palme Q. 55, 111–134. doi: 10.1353/mpq.0.0020 Kim-Cohen, J., Caspi, A., Mo i , T. E., Ha ing on, H., Milne, B. J., and Poul on, R. (2003). P io ju enile diagnoses in adul s wi h men al diso de : de elopmen al ollow-back o a p ospec i e-longi udinal coho . A ch. Gen. Psychia y 60, 709–717. doi: 10.1001/a chpsyc.60.7.709 LaFon ana, K. M., and Cillessen, A. H. N. (2002). Child en’s pe cep ions o popula and unpopula pee s: a mul ime hod assessmen . De . Psychol. 38, 635–647. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.38.5.635 Lau sen, B., Bukowski, W. M., Aunola, K., and Nu mi, J. (2007). F iendship mode a es’ p ospec i e associa ions be ween social isola ion and adjus men p oblems in young child en. Child De . 78:1395. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007. 01072.x Longoba di, C., Se anni, M., Lin, S., and Fab is, M. A. (2020). S uden – eache ela ionship quali y and p osocial beha iou : he media ing ole o academic achie emen and a posi i e a i ude owa ds school. B i . J. Educ. Psychol. (Ea ly iew). doi: 10.1111/bjep.12378 Longoba di, C., Se anni, M., P ino, L. E., Fab is, M. A., and Ma engo, D. (2019). S uden s’ psychological adjus men in no ma i e school ansi ions om kinde ga en o high school: in es iga ing he ole o eache -s uden ela ionship quali y. F on . Psychol. 10:1238. doi: 10.3389/ psyg.2019.01238 Ma engo, D., Junge , T., Io i, N. O., Se anni, M., Tho nbe g, R., and Longoba di, C. (2018). Con lic ual s uden – eache ela ionship, emo ional and beha io al p oblems, p osocial beha io , and hei associa ions wi h bullies, ic ims, and bullies/ ic ims. Educ. Psychol. 38, 1201–1217. doi: 10.1080/01443410.2018. 1481199 Mikami, A. Y., G iggs, M. S., Le ne , M. D., Emeh, C. C., Reuland, M. M., Jack, A., e al. (2013a). A andomized ial o a class oom in e en ion o inc ease pee s’ social inclusion o child en wi h a en ion-de ici /hype ac i i y diso de . J. Consul . Clin. Psychol. 81, 100–112. doi: 10.1037/a0029654 Mikami, A. Y., Reuland, M. M., G iggs, M. S., and Jia, M. (2013b). Colla e al e ec s o a pee ela ionship in e en ion o child en wi h a en ion de ici hype ac i i y diso de on ypically de eloping classma es. Sch. Psychol. Re . 42, 458–476. doi: 10.1080/02796015.2013.12087466 M ug, S., Molina, B. S. G., Hoza, B., Ge des, A. C., Hinshaw, S. P., Hech man, L., e al. (2012). Pee ejec ion and iendships in child en wi h a en ion- de ici /hype ac i i y diso de : con ibu ions o long- e m ou comes. J. Abno m. Child Psychol. 40, 1013–1026. doi: 10.1007/s10802-012-9610-2 Mundy, L. K., Can e o d, L., Tucke , D., Baye , J., Romaniuk, H., Sawye , S., e al. (2017). Academic pe o mance in p ima y school child en wi h common emo ional and beha io al p oblems. J. Sch. Heal h 87, 593–601. doi: 10.1111/ josh.12531 Na a o-Pa do, E., Mo al, J. C. M., Galán, A. S., and Bei ia, M. D. S. (2012). Child and adolescen de elopmen : common men al diso de s acco ding o age and gende . Psico hema 24, 377–383. Newcomb, A. F., Bukowski, W. M., and Pa e, L. (1993). Child en’s pee ela ions: a me a-analy ic e iew o popula , ejec ed, neglec ed, con o e sial, and a e age sociome ic s a us. Psychol. Bull. 113, 99–128. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.113.1.99 Pe ce , J. A. M. M. (2002). Explo ing he Causes o Child en’s Gende Seg ega ion: Beha io al Compa ibili y Ve sus Gende Ca ego iza ion (O de No. AAI3040056). Ph.D. disse a ion, S and o d Uni e si y, S and o d, CA. F on ie s in Psychology | www. on ie sin.o g 8Decembe 2020 | Volume 11 | A icle 607274 psyg-11-607274 Decembe 4, 2020 Time: 13:2 # 9 Muñoz-Sil a e al. Psychosocial Adjus men and Sociome ic S a us Pla , B., Cohen, K., and Lau, J. (2013). The ole o pee ejec ion in adolescen dep ession. Dep ess. Anxie y 30, 809–821. doi: 10.1002/da.22120 Plazas, E. A., Mo ón, M. L., San iago, A., Sa mien o, H., A iza, S. E., and Da ío, C. (2010). Relaciones en e iguales, conduc a p osocial y géne o desde la educación p ima ia has a la uni e si a ia en Colombia. Uni . Psychol. 9, 357–369. doi: 10.11144/ja e iana.upsy9-2. icp P ins ein, M. J., and La G eca, A. M. (2004). Childhood pee ejec ion and agg ession as p edic o s o adolescen gi ls’ ex e nalizing and heal h isk beha io s: a 6-yea longi udinal s udy. J. Consul . Clin. Psychol. 72, 103–112. doi: 10.1037/0022-006X.72.1.103 Rei z, E., Deko ic, M., and Meije , M. (2005). The s uc u e and s abili y o ex e nalizing and in e nalizing p oblem beha io du ing ea ly adolescence. J. You h Adolesc. 34, 577–588. doi: 10.1007/s10964-005-8947-z Ros, R., and G aziano, P. A. (2018). Social unc ioning in child en wi h o a isk o a en ion de ici /hype ac i i y diso de : a me a-analy ic e iew. J. Clin. Child Adolesc. Psychol. 47, 213–235. doi: 10.1080/15374416.2016.1266644 Rubin, K. H., Bukowski, W. M., and Bowke , J. C. (2015). “Child en in pee g oups,” in Handbook o Child Psychology and De elopmen al Science: Ecological se ings and p ocesses, eds M. H. Bo ns ein, T. Le en hal, and R. M. Le ne (Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc), 175–222. Rubin, K. H., Bukowski, W. M., and Pa ke , J. G. (2006). Pee In e ac ions, Rela ionships, and G oups. Handbook o Child Psychology: Social, Emo ional, and Pe sonali y De elopmen , 6 h Edn, Vol. 3. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 571–645. Sale no, J. P. (2016). E ec i eness o uni e sal school-based men al heal h awa eness p og ams among you h in he uni ed s a es: a sys ema ic e iew. J. Sch. Heal h 86, 922–931. doi: 10.1111/josh.12461 S ou e, L. A., Egeland, B., Ca lson, E. A., and Collins, W. A. (2005). The De elopmen o he Pe son: The Minneso a S udy o Risk and Adap a ion om Bi h o Adul hood. New Yo k, NY: Guil o d P ess. Wena , C., and Ke ig, P. (2000). De elopmen al Psychopa hology. F om In ancy Th ough Adolescence, 4 Edn. Singapu : McG aw-Hill In e na ional. Wen zel, K. R. (2003). Sociome ic s a us and adjus men in middle school: a longi udinal s udy. J. Ea ly Adolesc. 23, 5–28. doi: 10.1177/0272431602239128 Widige , T. A., De Cle cq, B., and De F uy , F. (2009). Childhood an eceden s o pe sonali y diso de : an al e na i e pe spec i e. De . Psychopa hol. 21, 771–791. doi: 10.1017/S095457940900042X Con lic o In e es : The au ho s decla e ha he esea ch was conduc ed in he absence o any comme cial o inancial ela ionships ha could be cons ued as a po en ial con lic o in e es . Copy igh © 2020 Muñoz-Sil a, De la Co e de la Co e, Lo ence-La a and Sanchez- Ga cia. This is an open-access a icle dis ibu ed unde he e ms o he C ea i e Commons A ibu ion License (CC BY). The use, dis ibu ion o ep oduc ion in o he o ums is pe mi ed, p o ided he o iginal au ho (s) and he copy igh owne (s) a e c edi ed and ha he o iginal publica ion in his jou nal is ci ed, in acco dance wi h accep ed academic p ac ice. No use, dis ibu ion o ep oduc ion is pe mi ed which does no comply wi h hese e ms. F on ie s in Psychology | www. on ie sin.o g 9Decembe 2020 | Volume 11 | A icle 607274