Big-fish–little-pond effect

The big-fish–little-pond effect (BFLPE) is a frame of reference model introduced by Herbert W. Marsh and John W. Parker in 1984. According to the model, individuals compare their own self-concept with their peers and equally capable individuals have higher self-concepts when in a less capable group than in a more capable group.[1][2] For example, it is better for academic self-concept to be a big fish in a little pond (gifted student in regular reference group) than to be a big fish in a big pond (gifted student in gifted reference group). High achieving and gifted students are just as susceptible to the effect as are less talented students indicating that the effect depends only on the achievement of the reference group.[3] Malcolm Gladwell publicized the BFLPE in his 2013 book David and Goliath: Underdogs, Misfits, and the Art of Battling Giants.

Higher academic self-concept (ASC) has been shown to predict future performance and achievement. Marsh and O'Mara (2008) demonstrated that academic self-concept among 10th graders was a better predictor of their educational attainments five years after high school graduation than their school grades, standardized test scores, intelligence, and socioeconomic status.[4][5] Liem, Marsh, Martin, McInerney, and Yeung (2004) showed that positive academic self concepts were associated with better educational outcomes 10 years later—evidence that ASC can have long lasting effects.[5] ASC has also been tied to decision-making in educational settings. It is a predictor of course choice in high schools, major choice in college, and career path after school. In other words, ASC plays a crucial role in both educational outcomes and career aspirations. As such, the question of how self-perceptions develop and change is a genuinely important research question that has serious implications for education systems.[3]

Theory

According to the BFLPE it is better for academic self-concept (ASC) to be a high achiever in a reference group of relative low achievers than it is to be a high achiever in a reference group of high achievers. The BFLPE is thought to be produced by two opposing social comparison effects, assimilation and contrast effects. An assimilation effect is when the individual's self-concept is pulled toward the comparison target, leading to a positive relationship between self-concept and the comparison group. A contrast effect is when the individual's self-concept is pushed away from the comparison target, leading to a negative relationship between self-concept and the comparison group. According to Schwarz and Bless's (1992) inclusion/exclusion model of judgment, assimilation effects occur when the target of comparison is included in the mental representation of the self or viewed as similar to the self.[6][7] Conversely, contrast effects occur when the target of comparison is excluded from the mental representation of the self or viewed as distinct from the self.[6][7] Since academic self-concept tends to be negatively related with group achievement, it is assumed that the contrast process is stronger than the assimilation process.[8]

Class average achievement vs. friend average achievement

When forming academic self-concept (ASC), the question arises of classroom friend achievement or class achievement having a larger effect. One hypothesis suggests that friend average achievement has the larger effect. This is known as the friend dominance hypothesis and is consistent with the local dominance effect model.[9] The local dominance effect model posits that people tend to rely on the most local comparison source when there are multiple comparison sources available. Friends are considered a more local source for comparison than classmates, so this indicates that friends should have a larger effect on ASC than classmates.

An alternative hypothesis suggests that class-average achievement has a larger effect on ASC than friend-average achievement. Several studies support this hypothesis. The first showed that individuals showed stronger assimilation effects toward their comparison target when they were part of a group or when they focused on emotional bonding.[7] Huguet et al. (2009) supported the idea that friends may induce smaller contrast effects than classmates in addition to inducing larger assimilation effects than classmates.[10][11]

The hypothesis that class-average achievement has the larger effect has garnered the most support. Wouters, Colpin, Van Damme, De Laet, and Verschueren (2013) compared the effects of friend-average achievement and class-average achievement on global academic, math, and language self-concept.[8] The study found that the negative effect of class-average achievement was always greater than the negative effect of friend-average achievement. In some cases, the effect of friend average achievement was not even statistically significant. These findings do not support the local dominance effect model.[8]

Moderators

Personality factors

The BFLPE is moderated by several personality factors. Students who are higher in narcissism or lower in neuroticism experienced a weaker BFLPE on their math self-concept.[12] This suggests that the assimilation process might be stronger for these individuals.[8] Jonkmann (2013) also found that students who are engaged academically experience stronger BFLPE, regardless of whether they were mastery or performance oriented.

Motivation

Motivation moderates the BFLPE. More highly motivated students typically experience stronger BFLPE. Whether the student's motivation was extrinsic or intrinsic does not matter. The BFLPE is typically more pronounced for students who are more intelligent, who are more highly anxious, who have a cooperative orientation, or who use memorization as a learning strategy.[13] However, the moderating effects of these variables are relatively small.

Goal setting

Goal setting moderates the BFLPE. Individuals who set higher achievement goals, regardless of the specific nature of the goals, typically experience a stronger BFLPE.[14]

Classroom practices

Several classroom practices were explored as possible moderators of the BFLPE, including the use of individualized assessment tasks, criterion and self-referenced feedback, and reinforcement of peer identification. The size of the effect of each of these moderators was found to be either small or non-significant across many studies. Chang and Lam (2007) manipulated students so that they were either in direct competition with each other or working together in groups to accomplish a common task. Direct competition with classmates increased the BFLPE while working with other classmates in a group to achieve a goal attenuated the BFLPE.[15]

Self-construal

Self-construal has been shown to have moderating effects on social comparison. Researchers hypothesized that individuals with highly independent self-construals would experience accentuated contrast effects while individuals with highly interdependent self-construals would experience strengthened assimilation effects. This hypothesis was based on Schwarz and Bless's 1992 inclusion/exclusion model of judgment. The results of the experiment supported Kemmelmeier and Oyserman's hypothesis, demonstrating that self-construal moderates social comparison effects like the BFLPE.[7]

Emotional and social integration

Emotional and social integration have been shown to moderate the BFLPE. The BFLPE is stronger in individuals who are well integrated into their school but not well integrated with their peers. Such students have high emotional integration and low social integration. This result was replicated in students with mild intellectual disability attending segregated and non-segregated schools.[16]

Summary

Overall, there are few moderators of the BFLPE, and they mostly have small effect sizes. They have only been shown to alter the strength of the BFLPE, not to reverse its direction. However, moderators of the BFLPE continue to be an active area of research because of their theoretical implications. Identifying moderators may help to discover the psychological mechanism underlying the BFLPE. From a practical perspective, a more thorough understanding of the moderators of the BFLPE could lead to the development and implementation of educational policies that less the negative impacts or enhance the positive effects of the BFLPE.[17]

Generalizability

The BFLPE has been intensely studied across different countries, cultural contexts, and school systems, and it appears to be generalizable across each.[18][19] In fact, it has been so generalizable that Marjorie Seaton referred to it as a panhuman theory. The BFLPE appears to be generalizable across most age groups too. Roy, Guy, and Valois (2015) showed the BFLPE in a group of 8 to 12-year-old students.[20] Marsh and Hau (2003) found the effect in 26 different countries, thus demonstrating the cross-cultural generalizability of the effect.[18] The countries were: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Korea, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Russia, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom, and United States.

Seaton, Marsh, and Craven (2009) expanded this list to 41 countries, including both collectivist and individualist cultures.[19]

The effects of academic self-concept (ASC) on career aspirations appear to generalize across many countries as well. Nagengast and Marsh (2011) showed that science career aspirations were significantly affected by science self-concept in 57 countries. In this study there was also some evidence that the effect might be larger in more economically and socially developed countries.[21][22]

Researchers initially hypothesized that the BFLPE would be moderated by socioeconomic status. However, SES does not appear to moderate the BFLPE despite students from higher SES backgrounds having slightly higher math self-concepts in a 2010 study conducted by Seaton, Marsh, and Craven.[13] The association found was relatively weak considering the large sample size used in the study. Overall, the study provided evidence that the BFLPE generalizes broadly over different levels of SES and is not moderated by SES. In other words, the BFLPE affects students from all economic backgrounds.

Limitations

Few longitudinal studies have focused on the BFLPE. Becker and Neumann (2016) examined contextual effects on the BFLPE. A group of fourth grade students was studied during their transition into their first year middle school, here defined as fifth grade. The investigators found that the BFLPE was present both in elementary school and middle school. However, one year after the transition to middle school they found that the elementary school BFLPE had diminished and was no longer discernible.[3]

Marsh and O'Mara (2008) demonstrated that once within a stable educational setting, BFLPEs persist or even increase over time.[4] This supports the idea that current academic context has the most influence over academic self-concept (ASC), although past academic environments can have effects on a student's ASC that could last up to a year. Despite potentially lingering effects of past environments, this study was encouraging because it showed that simply changing contexts can drive changes in self-perception.[3]

However, Becker and Neumann (2016) showed that ASC in the senior year of high school had a significant effect on academic adjustment to and success in higher education. This finding highlights the potentially serious affects ASC can have on educational outcomes as those who experience difficulty adjusting to the rigors of higher education are more likely to drop out of school than those who adjust more readily.[3]

Variations

The degree of availability of comparison information influenced the visibility of BFLPEs in different school system structures. The BFLPE was most pronounced in school systems in which students of different ability levels were separated into different school tracks. The German school system is an example. In school systems in which students were grouped by ability within one school, the BFLPE was still present, but increased positive assimilation effects counterbalanced negative contrast effects.[23]

In sports psychology, physical self-concept is considered both a valued outcome variable and a mediating variable that facilitates the attainment of other valued outcomes like physical skills, health-related physical fitness, physical activity, exercise adherence in non-elite settings, and improved performance in elite sports. Marsh, Morin, and Parker (2015) demonstrated that the BFLPE exists with regard to physical concept. The study showed that class-average physical ability in physical fitness was negatively associated with physical self-concept.[24]

Relative year in school effect

The relative year in school effect (RYiSE) is a frame-of-reference effect analogous to the big-fish-little-pond effect. Both the RYiSE and the BFLPE suggest that academic self-concept are formed in relation to those of other students in the school. While the BFLPE demonstrates specifically that class-average achievement is negatively related to academic self-concept (ASC), the RYiSE shows the effects of being one or more years ahead, or one or more years behind same-age classmates. The social comparison theoretical models underlying the BFLPE seem to underlie the RYiSE too. In line with this model the effects of acceleration (starting early or skipping grades) on ASC should be negative while the effects of retention (starting late or repeating grades) on ASC should be positive. Marsh (2016) was the first to provide empirical support for the RYiSE as analogous to the BFLPE, based on the same underlying social comparison theory and frame-of-reference effects. The study showed that the RYiSE seems to be similarly generalizable too, reporting generalizability across 41 countries and across a host of individual student characteristics considered possible moderators of the RYiSE.[25]

Motivation theory

Academic self-concepts (ASCs) are also a factor in motivation theory. Two leading motivation theorists include ASC as one of their principles of motivation.[26][27] Competence beliefs have been shown to affect the value people assign to tasks. If a person is good at a particular task, he or she is more likely to enjoy it than they would be if they were not competent.

References
  1. Perry, Clark Jr.; Marsh, Herbert W. (2000-01-01). "Listening to Self-Talk, Hearing Self Concept". In Andersen, Mark B. (ed.). Doing Sport Psychology. Human Kinetics. pp. 64–65. ISBN 9780736000864.
  2. Marsh, Herbert W.; Parker, John W. (July 1984). "Determinants of student self-concept: Is it better to be a relatively large fish in a small pond even if you don't learn to swim as well?". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 47 (1): 213–231. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.47.1.213.
  3. Becker, M.; Neumann, M. (2016). "Context-related changes in academic self concept development: On the long-term persistence of big-fish-little-pond effects" (PDF). Learning and Instruction. 45: 31–39. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.06.003.
  4. Marsh, H. W.; O'Mara, A. (2008). "Reciprocal Effects Between Academic Self-Concept, Self-Esteem, Achievement, and Attainment Over Seven Adolescent Years: Unidimensional and Multidimensional Perspectives of Self-Concept". Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 34 (4): 542–552. doi:10.1177/0146167207312313. PMID 18340036. S2CID 27946915.
  5. Liem, G. A. D.; Marsh, H. W.; Martin, A. J.; McInerney, D. M.; Yeung, A. S. (2012). "The Big-Fish-Little-Pond Effect and a National Policy of Within-School Ability Streaming: Alternative Frames of Reference". American Educational Research Journal. 50 (2): 326–370. doi:10.3102/0002831212464511. S2CID 146161209.
  6. Schwarz, N.; Bless, H. (1992). "Assimilation and Contrast Effects in Attitude Measurement—An Inclusion Exclusion Model". Advances in Consumer Research. 19: 72–77.
  7. Kemmelmeier, M.; Oyserman, D. (2001). "The ups and downs of thinking about a successful other: self-construals and the consequences of social comparisons" (PDF). European Journal of Social Psychology. 31 (3): 311–320. doi:10.1002/ejsp.47. hdl:2027.42/34568.
  8. Wouters, S.; Colpin, H.; Van Damme, J.; De Laet, S.; Verschueren, K. (2013). "Early adolescents' academic self-concept formation: Do classmates or friends matter most?". Learning and Individual Differences. 27: 193–200. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2013.09.002.
  9. Zell, E.; Alicke, M. D. (2010). "The Local Dominance Effect in Self-Evaluation: Evidence and Explanations". Personality and Social Psychology Review. 14 (4): 368–384. doi:10.1177/1088868310366144. PMID 20435806. S2CID 5992647.
  10. Hamm, J. V. (2000). "Do birds of a feather flock together? The variable bases for African American, Asian American, and European American adolescents' selection of similar friends". Developmental Psychology. 36 (2): 209–219. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.499.337. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.36.2.209.
  11. Huguet, P.; Dumas, F.; Marsh, H.; Régner, I.; Wheeler, L.; Suls, J.; Seaton, M.; Nezlek, J. (2009). "Clarifying the role of social comparison in the big-fish–little-pond effect (BFLPE): An integrative study". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 97 (1): 156–170. doi:10.1037/a0015558. PMID 19586246. S2CID 14874520.
  12. Jonkmann, K.; Becker, M.; Marsh, H. W.; Lüdtke, O.; Trautwein, U. (2012). "Personality traits moderate the Big-Fish–Little-Pond Effect of academic self-concept". Learning and Individual Differences. 22 (6): 736–746. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2012.07.020.
  13. Seaton, M.; Marsh, H. W.; Craven, R. G. (2009). "Big-Fish-Little-Pond Effect: Generalizability and Moderation--Two Sides of the Same Coin". American Educational Research Journal. 47 (2): 390–433. doi:10.3102/0002831209350493. S2CID 145774488.
  14. Wouters, S.; Colpin, H.; Van Damme, J.; Verschueren, K. (2013). "Endorsing achievement goals exacerbates the big-fish-little-pond effect on academic self-concept". Educational Psychology. 35 (2): 252–270. doi:10.1080/01443410.2013.822963. S2CID 144544607.
  15. Cheng, R. W. Y.; Lam, S. F. (2007). "Self-construal and social comparison effects". British Journal of Educational Psychology. 77 (1): 197–211. doi:10.1348/000709905x72795. PMID 17411495.
  16. Szumski, G.; Karwowski, M. (2015). "Emotional and social integration and the big-fish-little-pond effect among students with and without disabilities". Learning and Individual Differences. 43: 63–74. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2015.08.037.
  17. Cheng, R. W. Y.; McInerney, D. M.; Mok, M. M. C. (2014). "Does big-fish–little-pond effect always exist? Investigation of goal orientations as moderators in the Hong Kong context". Educational Psychology. 34 (5): 561–580. doi:10.1080/01443410.2014.898740. S2CID 145601182.
  18. Marsh, H. W.; Hau, K. T. (2003). "Big-Fish--Little-Pond effect on academic self-concept: A cross-cultural (26-country) test of the negative effects of academically selective schools". American Psychologist. 58 (5): 364–376. doi:10.1037/0003-066x.58.5.364. PMID 12971085.
  19. Seaton, M.; Marsh, H. W.; Craven, R. G. (2009). "Earning its place as a pan-human theory: Universality of the big-fish-little-pond effect across 41 culturally and economically diverse countries". Journal of Educational Psychology. 101 (2): 403–419. doi:10.1037/a0013838.
  20. Roy, A.; Guay, F.; Valois, P. (2015). "The big-fish–little-pond effect on academic self-concept: The moderating role of differentiated instruction and individual achievement". Learning and Individual Differences. 42: 110–116. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2015.07.009. hdl:20.500.11794/13782.
  21. Nagengast, B.; Marsh, H. W. (2011). "The negative effect of school-average ability on science self-concept in the UK, the UK countries and the world: the Big-Fish-Little-Pond-Effect for PISA 2006". Educational Psychology. 31 (5): 629–656. doi:10.1080/01443410.2011.586416. S2CID 144350997.
  22. Nagengast, B.; Marsh, H. W. (2012). "Correction to: 'The negative effect of school-average ability on science self-concept in the UK, the UK countries and the world: the Big-Fish-Little-Pond-Effect for PISA 2006'". Educational Psychology. 32 (4): 547. doi:10.1080/01443410.2012.696353. S2CID 218510878.
  23. Salchegger, S. (2016). "Selective school systems and academic self-concept: How explicit and implicit school-level tracking relate to the big-fish-–little-pond effect across cultures". Journal of Educational Psychology. 108 (3): 405–423. doi:10.1037/edu0000063.
  24. Marsh, H. W.; Morin, A. J. S.; Parker, P. D. (2015). "Physical Self-Concept Changes in a Selective Sport High School: A Longitudinal Cohort-Sequence Analysis of the Big-Fish-Little-Pond Effect". Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology. 37 (2): 150–163. doi:10.1123/jsep.2014-0224. PMID 25996106.
  25. Marsh, H. W. (2016). "Cross-cultural generalizability of year in school effects: Negative effects of acceleration and positive effects of retention on academic self-concept". Journal of Educational Psychology. 108 (2): 256–273. doi:10.1037/edu0000059.
  26. Pintrich, P. R. (2003). "A Motivational Science Perspective on the Role of Student Motivation in Learning and Teaching Contexts". Journal of Educational Psychology. 95 (4): 667–686. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.95.4.667. S2CID 142460229.
  27. Boekaerts, M.; Rozendaal, J. S. (2010). "Using multiple calibration indices in order to capture the complex picture of what affects students' accuracy of feeling of confidence". Learning and Instruction. 20 (5): 372–382. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.03.002.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.