Do older children with disruptive behaviour exhibit positive illusory bias and should oral language competence be considered in research?

Linda J. Graham*, Naomi Sweller, Penelope Van Bergen

*Corresponding author for this work

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    1 Citation (Scopus)

    Abstract

    Research suggests that children with behavioural difficulties exhibit “positive illusory bias” (PIB), in which they overestimate their competencies leading to a perception of self that is more positive than the perceptions held by their peers, parents or teachers. However, research to date has focused on children of elementary school age and none has examined the potential role of oral language competence. This study investigates whether children aged 9–16 years with a history of disruptive behaviour exhibit PIB when compared to students with no such history, and whether there are differences between groups in expressive and receptive vocabulary. We found significant differences between groups in expressive vocabulary, but minimal differences between children’s, parents’, and teachers’ ratings of child behaviour. Differences were also found in self-descriptions: participants with disruptive behaviour were less likely to describe themselves positively than participants without. Our research finds no evidence of PIB among older children with disruptive behaviour and suggests that language competence should be considered more closely in future research.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)752-769
    Number of pages18
    JournalEducational Review
    Volume72
    Issue number6
    Early online date6 Dec 2018
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - Nov 2020

    Keywords

    • positive illusory bias
    • disruptive behaviour
    • oral language competence
    • special educational settings

    Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Do older children with disruptive behaviour exhibit positive illusory bias and should oral language competence be considered in research?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this