ISSN 0579-6431

45 1 2013 24-41
37.012:303.682 DOI: 10.2298/ZIPI1301024I

*
, ,

.
-
, ,
. -
,
, , ,
.
,
-
.

. ,

,
-
-
.
: , , -
, , -
.

o -
-
. -
: , -

-mail: marinailic@hotmail.rs
25

.
-
, , -

.

, .
. . , -
, Who Shall Survive? 1934. ,

, (Coie), (Dodge), -
(Coppotelli), (Kupersmidt), (Asher)
(Bukowski). -
.
(Vigotski, 1983; Piaget, 1960)
(Baucal i Jovanovi, 2008; Jovanovi i Baucal, 2007) -
.
, -
- (Rose-Krasnor, 1997, prema: Petrovi, 2007), -

. --

. , -
-
.

. -
, -
. -
(Petrovi, 2007; Petrovi i Zotovi, 2007). -
(2007) (
, /
)
.

. -
: ()
(Banur i
Potkonjak, 1996); () -
(Gifford-Smith
& Brownell, 2003); () -
(Krnjaji, 2002); ()
(Banur i Potkonjak, 1996);
 26

() -
, -
(Fajgelj, 2005); ()
,
(Fajgelj, 2005).

-
.
, . -

(Moreno, 1995: 682).

(rnjaji, 1981). , : ,
, , , -
.
, -
-
(Petrovi, 2007).

, , -

.
/
. -
-
,
.



.
: ()
; ()
-
; () -
; () , , ,
, (Moreno, 1978, 1995); () -
-
(Zettergren, 2007); ()
; ()
; ()
27

; () -

(Hupila et al., 1980).
-
, .
.

. (1978, 1995)

. , -
, -
.
.
-
(oreno,
1978, 1995).
,
.

. -
,
(Zettergren, 2007a).
, , -
(unji, 1995). , -

. , -
. -


. -

,
.
, .
,
-
(Fajgelj, 2005). ,
? .... -

(Fajgelj, 2005). ,
,
?, -

 28

. ,

.
.
,
(
,
),
-
,
.

-
, . (1978, 1995)
, -
, , , .
(1999) -
:
, .
(2007) (Zettergren, 2007a) -
, -
.
:
, .
-
,
-
.
-
(Gifford-Smith & Brownell, 2003; Krnjaji, 2002; Maassen
et al., 2005). -
(,
).
,
,
.
a (Bukowski
et al., 2000; prema: Rautiainen, 2009),
(, , -
, ),
, je -
29

a
(Maassen et al., 2005).

(Maassen et al., 2005). -
, .

. ,

-
(Rautiainen, 2009). M -

, -
,
(Krnjaji, 2007).
-

-
(Gifford-Smith & Brownell, 2003; rnjaji, 2002;
Maassen et al., 2005).
-
(Spasenovi, 2003). -
(Krnjaji, 2002;
Maassen et al., 2005; Rautiainen, 2009),
(Maassen, et al., 2004; Rautiainen, 2009),
e -
, . (Gifford-Smith
& Brownell, 2003)
-
(Maassen et al., 2004). .

(Gifford-Smith & Brownell, 2003; Maassen et al., 2005). -
, -
, o.
, , -
-
(Maassen et al., 2005). ,
,
(Maassen et al., 2005).
-
-
(Zettergren, 2007,
Krnjaji, 2007).
-
(, ).
 30

-
(Zettergren, 2007). -

(Zettergren,
2007).
, -

(Zettergren, 2007). ,
,
(Zettergren,
2007),

(rnjaji, 2007). ,


.
-
. -
, -
.
, -
.
(Moreno,
1953, prema: Krnjaji, 2007) , (Linzey & Borgalt, 1954;
prema: Hupila et al., 1980) (Gronlund, 1959, prema: Hupila et
al., 1980), -
. (1953, prema: Krnjaji, 2007)
(1954, prema: Hupila et al., 1980) -
: () ,
; ()
; ()
-
; ()
; ()

.

, .
,

.

.
. -
31

,
,
.
.
.
.
,
? -
. ,
. ,

. -

. , -
-
-
(Krnjaji, 1981, 2007). ,

-
(Krnjaji, 2007). -
.
-

. -
. ,

. , ,
.
.
, -
?
(.,
3 , 2
). ,
2 , 1 . -


(Starkweather, 1961).
-
.
(, , -
)
.
,
 32

(., , ...,
... , ...).
X
-
.
. -
(Walker &
Berthelsen, 2007).
.

, -

.
.
-
. -
-

. ,

-
.

.

.

.

.
.
-
.

, -
.

-
-

(Coie et al., 1982). -
33

,
, -
.
-
. -

(Coie & Dodge, 1983, prema: Maassen et al., 2005), -
(Newcomb & Bukowsi, 1983,
prema: Maassen et al., 2005)
, (Maassen et al., 1996,
prema: Maassen et al., 2005).
(Fajgelj, 2005; Zettergren, 2007).

(Maassen
et al., 2005; Zettergren, 2007).
. -
. -
: (SP)
(SI),

,
a. -
-
(-
, , , o ). 1

(1983, prema: Moncy et al., 2004: 320).
1:
(Coie & Dodge, 1983; prema: Monchy et al., 2004: 320)

>0 <0 >1
<0 >0 <-1
o >0 >0 >1
<0 <0 <-1
* * * *

. (*) .
. .
 34

-
, (Coie et al.,
1982),
-0.5 +0.5 -
.
( ) -
( o)
. -
-
-
(Maassen et al.,
2005). (2005)
(12-13%), (12-13%),
(6-7%), o (6-7%) (58-60%). -
,
, -
,
. ,
(Davis et al., 2002) (Frostad & Pijl, 2004)
12, 13% ,
, -
. ,

.
(2004) -
o -
.

,
-
(Newcomb & Bukowski, 1983; prema: Maassen et
al., 2005).
(Newcomb
& Bukowski, 1983; prema: Maassen et al., 2005) -
.
. -
,
,
.
-
. -
,
: () -
-
35

; ()
-
;
()
; () o
-
; () .
,
(Maassen et al., 1996, prema: Maassen et al.,
2005) .

(., ( 5
7) 1 3).
: -
. -
.
-

.
-
,
-
/ -
(Zettergren, 2007; Zettergren, 2007b). -
.

, ,
-
, -
, , -
. ,
(Frederickson & Furnham, 2004) -

.
-
-
. -


(Maassen et al., 2005). -

-
. -
, -
 36

. ,
-
.
, (2004) , (2005)
-
-
. -

(Walker, 2009).
, (
Walker
, 2009)

, -
, , -
, -
.
-
-
Maassen et al.,
( 2005), -
(Zettergren, 2007). -

(Zettergren, 2007b). -


,
(Zettergren, 2007b).
(2007b) -
, ,
(Coie et
al., 1982). ,
o .

,
, -
? je
-
.

-
, a -
, .
37

,
.

-
, , , -
.

, -
,
.
, -
.
, ,

.
-
-
. ,


,
-
. -
, -
,
-
.

Banur, V. i Potkonjak, N. (1996). Pedagoka istraivanja u koli. Beograd: Uiteljski fakultet
Centar za usavravanje rukovodilaca u obrazovanju.
Banur, V. i Potkonjak, N. (1999). Metodologija pedagogije. Beograd: Savez pedagokih dru-
tava Jugoslavije.
Baucal, A. i Jovanovi, V. (2008). Dijaloka Pisa: Razvijanje kompetencija kroz socijalnu
interakciju u razliitim kontekstima, Psihologija, Vol. 41, Br. 4, 523-537.
Vigotski, L. S. (1983). Miljenje i govor. Beograd: Nolit.
Gifford-Smith, M. E. & Brownell, C. A. (2003). Childhood Peer Relationships: Social Ac-
ceptance, Friendships, and Peer Networks. Journal of School Psychology, Vol. 41, No.
4, 235-284.
Davis, S., Howell, P. & Cooke, F. (2002). Sociodynamic Relationships Between Children who
Stutter and their Non-Stuttering Classmates. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychia-
try, Vol. 43, No. 7, 939-947.
Zettergren, P. (2007a). Childrens peer Status and their Adjustment in Adolescence and Adult-
hood, Developmental Issues in Sociometric Research (doctoral dissertation). Stock-
holm: Stockholm University.
 38

Zettergren, P. (2007b). Cluster Analysis in Sociometric Research: A Pattern-Oriented Ap-

proach to Identifying Temporally Stable Peer Groups of Girls. Journal of Early
Adolescence,Vol. 27, No. 1, 90-114.
Jovanovi, V. i Baucal, A. (2007). Konstrukcija i ko-konstrukcija u kognitivnom razvoju.
Psihologija, Vol. 40, Br. 2, 191-209.
Koster, M., Pijl, S. J., Nakken, H. & Houten, E. V. (2010). Social Participation of Students with
Special Needs in Regular Primary Education in the Netherlands. International Journal
of Disability, Development and Education, Vol. 57, No. 1, 59-75.
Krnjaji, S. (1981). Sociometrijski status uenika, psiho-socijalni inioci. Beograd: Institut za
pedagoka istraivanja i Prosveta.
Krnjaji, S. (2002). Socijalni odnosi i obrazovanje. Beograd: Institut za pedagoka istraiva-
nja i Via kola za obrazovanje vaspitaa Vrac.
Krnjaji, S. (2007). Pogled u razred. Beograd: Institut za pedagoka istraivanja.
Maassen, G. H., Steenbeek, H. & Geert, P. (2004). Stability of Three Methods for Two-Di-
mensional Sociometric Status Determination Based on the Procedure of Asher, Single-
ton, Tinsley and Hymel. Social Behavior and Personality, Vol. 32, No. 6, 535-550.
Maassen, G. H., van Boxtel, H. W. & Goossens, F. A. (2005). Reliability of Nominations and
Two-Dimensional Rating Scale Methods for Sociometric Status Determination. Applied
Developmental Psychology, Vol. 26, No. 1, 51-68.
Monchy, M de., Pijl, S. J. & Zandberg, T. (2004). Discrepancies in Judging Social Inclusion
and Bullying of Pupils with Behaviour Problems. European Journal of Special Needs
Education, Vol. 19, No. 3, 317-330.
Moreno, J. L. (1978). Who Shall Survive? Foundations of Sociometry, Group Psychotherapy
and Sociodrama. Beacon: Beacon House Inc.
Moreno, J. L. (1995). Osnovi sociometrije. U B. Peji (prir.), Metodologija empirijskog na-
unog istraivanja (str. 673-692). Beograd: Univerzitet u Beogradu, Defektoloki fa-
kultet.
Petrovi, D. J. (2007). Emocionalni temelji socijalne kompetencije. Beograd: Zadubina An-
drejevi.
Petrovi, J. i Zotovi, M. (2007). Prihvaenost u grupi vrnjaka i emocionalna kompetencija
dece preadolescentnog uzrasta. Psihologija, Vol. 40, Br. 3, 431-445.
Piaget, J. (1960). The Moral Judgment of the Child. London: Routledge.
Rautiainen, V. (2009). Peer Relationships of Children with and without Individualized Edu-
cational Plans in Co-teaching and Mainstream Settings (masters thesis). Jyvskyl:
University of Jyvskyl.
Spasenovi, V. (2003). Vrnjaka prihvaenost/neprihvaenost i kolsko postignue. Zbornik
Instituta za pedagoka istraivanja, Br. 35, 267-288.
Starkweather, E. K. (1961). A Comparison of Two Techniques for Measuring Sociometric
Status among Nursery School Children. Social Sciences, 199-205.
Fajgelj, S. (2005). Metode istraivanja ponaanja. Beograd: Centar za primenjenu psiholo-
giju.
Frederickson, N. L. & Furnham, A. F. (2004). Peer-Assessed Behavioural Characteristics and
Sociometric Rejection: Differences between Pupils who have Moderate Learning Dif-
ficulties and their Mainstream Peers. British Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol.
74, No. 3, 391-410.
Frostad, P. & Pijl, S. J. (2007). Does Being Friendly Help in Making Friends? The Relation Be-
tween the Social Position and Social Skills of Pupils with Special Needs in Mainstream
Education. European Journal of Special Needs Education, Vol. 22, No. 1, 15-30.
Hupila, L., Moller, K. & Starr, C. (1980). Classroom Social Status of Children with Cleft Pal-
ates. Human Communication, Vol. 5, No. 3, 151-162.
Coie, J. D., Dodge, K. A. & Coppotelli, H. (1982). Dimensions and Types of Social Status: A
Cross-Age Perspective. Developmental Psychology, Vol. 18, No. 4, 557-570.
39

unji, . (1995). Sociometrijska metoda. U B. Peji (prir.), Metodologija empirijskog na-

unog istraivanja (str. 703-709). Beograd: Defektoloki fakultet.
Walker, S. & Berthelsen, D. C. (2007). The Social Participation of Young Children with De-
velopmental Disabilities in Inclusive Early Childhood Programs. Electronic Journal of
Inclusive Education, Vol. 2, No. 2, 1-28.
Walker, S. (2009). Sociometric Stability and the Behavioral Correlates of Peer Acceptance in
Early Childhood. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, Vol. 170, No. 4 , 339-358.

15.03.2013; 17.05.2013.
 40

Marina Ili
SOCIOMETRIC RESEARCH IN PEDAGOGY
Abstract
The use of sociometric research in pedagogy implies consideration of methodologi-
cal demands pertaining to the selection and formulation of sociometric criteria, the
selection of sociometric techniques, instruments and sociometric group classifica-
tion methods. Various authors agree that sociometric criteria are basic relevant ac-
tivities of the group they refer to and that they should be meaningful, understandable
to every group member and clearly and precisely formulated. The selection of the
appropriate sociometric technique and instrument has to be adjusted with the goal
of sociometric research, along with the consideration of the advantages and short-
comings of different sociometric techniques and instruments. The existing research
provides very divergent results on the adequacy of different classification methods in
identifying stable sociometric groups. Still, the majority of studies have confirmed
that the two-dimensional rating scale method yields more stable classifications than
the classification methods based on peer nominations, as well as that it is meth-
odologically more justifiable to use cluster analysis in identifying stable sociometric
status groups than the traditional classification methods.
Key words: sociometric criteria, sociometric techniques, sociometric instruments,
sociometric classification methods, sociometric research.
41

-
-
, ,
.
,
, , ,
, ,
. -


.
-
. -
,
, ,
, ,

,
.
: , ,
, ,
.