Sociometric status is a measurement that reflects the degree to which someone is liked or disliked by their peers as a group. While there are some studies that have looked at sociometric status among adults, the measure is primarily used with children and adolescents to make inferences about peer relations and social competence.
Developmental psychology
In developmental psychology, this system has been used to examine children's status in peer groups, its stability over time, the characteristics that determine it, and the long-term implications of one's popularity or rejection by peers.
The methodology
Generally, sociometric status is assessed through asking peers to rate an individual's status in the peer group. Two of the most widely used methods that are used for this are peer nomination and peer ratings. The peer ratings method asks the participants to assess, in numerical terms, how much they like the other peers in the group. The sociometric status is then calculated by taking an average of the ratings. The peer nomination technique, on the other hand, asks children to choose who they like and dislike most from the group. Then, the liked-most and liked-least ratings are interpreted to categorize children into sociometric variables. At first, researchers used only 2 categories: accepted and rejected children. However, Coie, Dodge and Coppotelli (1982) argued that such grouping doesn't capture the true complexity of sociometric status, as it fails to distinguish between two low-status groups – actively rejected children and socially neglected ones. They proposed that children be classified into 5 groups: Popular children: Children are designated as popular if they receive many positive nominations. Rejected children: Children are designated as rejected if they receive many negative nominations and few positive nominations. Neglected children: Children are designated as neglected if they receive few positive or negative nominations. These children are not especially liked or disliked by peers, and tend to go unnoticed. Average children: Children are designated as average if they receive an average number of both positive and negative nominations. Controversial children: Children are designated as controversial if they receive many positive and many negative nominations. They are said to be liked by quite a few children, but also disliked by quite a few. While peer ratings/nominations are the most commonly used method to assess sociometric status, they are often accompanied by teacher assessment, observations, or even self-assessment.
Descriptions of specific sociometric groups
Popular children
Popular children tend to display higher social skills than other groups, and they are often described as cooperators or leaders. They can easily think of effective ways to start interactions or resolve conflicts with their peers, and they can recognise other people's emotions better. Most studies find that they display less aggressive and disruptive behaviours than rejected or controversial children, but it has been suggested that this isn't an inherent characteristic. Some popular children have aggressive or antisocial traits but are still liked or even looked up to.
Rejected children
Rejected children score worse on social competence than popular children. While they approach their peers just as much, or even more than popular ones, their initiations of contact are usually turned down. Most studies show that they display more aggressive behaviours than other groups of children, and they tend to have lower communicative skills. They also perform worse academically, struggling to stay focused on their assigned academic tasks. Lastly, rejected children experience higher rates of anxiety and depression than other sociometric groups.
Neglected children
Neglected children are generally the least prosocial group, frequently described as shy. Because of this, they aren't particularly liked nor disliked by their peers. However, this doesn't translate into them being more lonely than average children. Furthermore, despite their low social skills, they manage to outperform others in academic achievements, having higher levels of motivation and independence.