Zion_Temperament and Social Behaviour at Home and School

Journal of Intellectual Disability Research doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2788.2006.00790.x

pp

The Authors, Journal Compilation

Blackwell Publishing Ltd

445

Blackwell Science, LtdOxford, UKJIRJournal of Intellectual Disability Research

-

Blackwell Publishing Ltd,

6445456

Original Article

Temperament and social behaviour in childrenE. Zion & V. B. Jenvey

Correspondence: Dr Efrat Zion, Department of Psychology, Building

, Clayton Campus, Monash University, Victoria

, Australia (e-mail: [email protected]).

Temperament and social behaviour at home and school among typically developing children and children with an intellectually disability

E. Zion & V. B. Jenvey

School of Psychology, Psychiatry, and Psychological Medicine, Monash University, Victoria, Australia

Abstract

Background

There has been limited research on differences in temperament between typically devel-oping children and children with an intellectual dis-ability (ID). Individual differences have generally been neglected in previous investigations of children with an ID. The present research investigated differ-ences in temperament and social behaviour between typically developing children and children with an ID, in both home and school settings.

Methods

Participants were

children (M

=

.

years, SD

=

.

) from both regular and special education schools. Temperament was mea-sured using the Emotionality, Activity, Sociability (EAS) Temperament Survey for Children (parental and teacher ratings), while social behaviour was measured using the School Social Behaviour Scales, Second Edition (SSBS-

) and the Home and Community Social Behaviour Scales (HCSBS).

Results

There were minimal significant differences in temperament between the regular and special edu-cation groups. Children who attended regular schools had a significantly higher level of social competence and significantly lower level of antisocial behaviour both at home and school, when compared with chil-dren who attended special schools.

Conclusions

The difference in social behaviour between children attending regular and special schools was attributed to the difference in intellectual ability of the two groups, as well as contextual influ-ences of regular or special school environments.

Keywords

home, intellectual disability, school, social behaviour, temperament, typical development

Introduction

Historically, an association has been made between intellectual functioning and social skills. Individuals with an intellectual disability (ID), because of their delayed intellectual development, have difficulties adapting to the social environment of their peers (Tredgold

). Deficits in knowledge and reason-ing skills, manifested in low IQ scores, interfere with social development by delaying the development of positive social skills, which, in turn, leads to social

Journal of Intellectual Disability Research

E. Zion

et al

.

Temperament and social behaviour in children446



withdrawal and poor peer relationships (Guralnick & Groom

). On the other hand, intellectual ability has been found to promote the development of social competence (Green

et al

.

). Social skill deficits of children with an ID may be attributed to their difficulties in recognizing emotions, responding to others emotions, and in prosocial behaviours, when compared with typically developing children (see Kasari & Bauminger

).Temperament has also been associated with the

social behaviour of children (see Sanson

et al

.

,

). There has been limited research on tempera-ment characteristics of children with an ID. There is a need to investigate this potential association, because information on childrens temperament pro-vides vital information in understanding their social behaviour. Additionally, temperament has rarely been studied in middle childhood, as most research in this area has focused on infants and toddlers, yet tem-perament is more stable by primary (elementary)-school-age (Martin

) but there is limited infor-mation on the contribution of temperament to social behaviour in this age group.

Another factor that has been found to affect chil-drens social skilfulness and temperament is the type of school that they attend. It has been proposed that, when children with severe ID are in special education settings with peers who have a similar disability, the nature of the childrens disabilities limits their oppor-tunities for peer interactions (Diamond

). In contrast, in earlier research, it was argued that when children with an ID attend special education settings, it led to better social adjustment (Ottenbacher & Cooper

).Additionally, temperament dimensions may

present differently in different contexts as individual differences in temperament lead to different interac-tions within different environments (Prior

; Sanson & Rothbart

). Childrens temperament has also been shown to have reciprocal effects on the behaviour of those with whom children interact (Bates

a). Hence, the influence of temperament can be characterized as bidirectional.

Social skills of children with an intellectual disability

Guralnick (

) proposed that children with mild ID have difficulties interacting with peers, as they have deficits in cognitive skills that are associated with

deficits in other areas important for social develop-ment. These areas of social development include communication skills and social information process-ing, and these deficits lead to difficulties in using appropriate interaction strategies when in the com-pany of others. The social development of children with an ID is particularly important during the school years, because they spend more time with peers (Jacobs

et al

.

).Children with an ID often have been found to

display high rates of antisocial behaviour (Dunlap

et al

.

; Einfeld & Tonge

; Adams & Allen

). Further, children with low cognitive ability and inattentiveness had difficulties with social behav-iour; had deficits in prosocial skills (as rated by their teachers), and displayed aggression (as rated by their teachers), characteristics that placed them at risk for social maladjustment and poor peer relationships (Bellanti & Bierman

). Low cognitive ability, particularly low verbal ability, was found to be a risk factor for conduct disorder in boys, as rated by par-ents and teachers (Lahey

et al

.

). Behaviour problems are more highly correlated with cognitive deficits when teacher ratings of behaviour are used than when parent ratings are used (Szatmari

et al

.

).Pre-school children with cognitive delays were

found to have significant problems in their ability to establish and develop relationships and form friend-ships with other children (Guralnick

). Com-pared with typically developing peers, pre-school children with mild developmental delays display lower levels of sustained socially interactive peer play and higher levels of solitary play (Kopp

et al

.

), and more negativity and discontent during peer inter-actions (Guralnick

et al

.

). Difficulties of chil-dren with developmental delays with peer relations have been found to persist throughout development, even after controlling for their developmental level, indicating that children with an ID display enduring patterns of peer-related social competence difficulties (Guralnick

).

Influence of school type (regular vs. special school) on social behaviour

Differences have been observed in childrens social skills needed for getting along with peers, depending on whether they attend a regular school or special


E. Zion

et al

.




school. However, there have been conflicting findings in relation to the influence of school type on social behaviour. More research is required to establish the nature and extent of the impact of school type on childrens social behaviour.

Diamond (

) has proposed that when children with severe ID attend special education settings with peers who also have severe ID, the nature of childrens disabilities limit their opportunities for peer interactions. Consequently, there has been an increased focus on mainstreaming children with an ID into regular school. Mainstreaming, in part, is based on the assumption that physical proximity between children with an ID and typically developing peers will increase social interaction (Peterson & Haralick

), and consequently should increase the modelling of socially competent behaviour (Mercer & Algozzine

) and acceptance of children with an ID by peers (Birch

). Social interaction with typically developing peers has been found to have a positive effect on the social development of children with an ID (Halvorsen & Sailor

).A review of educational placement of children with

a disability concluded that, when children with dis-abilities attend regular school settings, as opposed to special education settings, their levels of social inter-actions increase (Buysse & Bailey

). Subse-quently, these findings were confirmed empirically in a study by Guralnick

et al

. (

), in which children with and without developmental delays in main-streamed playgroup settings showed more frequent peer interactions. These findings were attributed to the social demands and higher interaction levels of the non-delayed children (Guralnick

et al

.

). However, it should be noted that the children with developmental delays were neither fully accepted nor socially integrated with their peers (Guralnick

et al

.

).Not all children with an ID who interact with typ-

ically developing peers will develop more effective social skills. Other researchers (see Freeman & Alkin

; for example) have concluded that children with ID in regular schools were less socially accepted and less socially competent than typically developing chil-dren, perhaps resulting from differences in social behaviour, particularly disruptiveness of children with an ID (Freeman & Alkin

). Nevertheless, children with an ID who attended full-time regular schools were found to be more socially competent

and accepted than those who attended regular schools part-time (see Freeman & Alkin

).Fourth- to sixth-grade children with mild disabili-

ties, who spent at least

% of their time in main-stream classrooms, were more likely to be socially isolated and antisocial than children without a dis-ability (Pearl

et al

.

). It seems that children with mild disabilities have poorer social skills than children without a disability, even when they are integrated into regular schools. In another study with main-streamed students with mild ID, these children were rated by their teachers as less friendly and coopera-tive, withdrawn and more likely to avoid activities but there were no differences in their level of aggression compared with students without a disability (Taylor

et al

.

).When children with an ID attend special education

settings, it leads to better social adjustment (Otten-bacher & Cooper

). Special education schools offer advantages such as small class size, specially trained teachers, additional support services, a focus on teaching functional skills and individualized pro-grammes (Kauffman & Hallahan

). Further, it has been suggested that mainstreaming fails because children with an ID are assumed to have the social skills necessary to attend a regular school, and only need the responsive environment to display them (Wallander & Hubert

). These authors recom-mend that children with an ID participate in an inter-vention programme targeting their social skill deficits prior to mainstreaming, as this might make main-streaming more beneficial (Wallander & Hubert

).

Temperament

There are many different theories and definitions of temperament and no fixed conceptualization of it (Goldsmith, in Goldsmith

et al

.

). A widely agreed-upon definition of childrens temperament, is that temperament refers to biologically based individ-ual differences in behaviour that are present early in life and are relatively stable over time and across situations and are manifested in the context of social interaction (Goldsmith

et al

.

; Bates

b).Buss & Plomin (

) argue that all temperament traits have a genetic basis and therefore emerge early in development. Several studies have established that there are genetic bases to individual differences in


E. Zion

et al

.




infants and toddlers with respect to activity, emotion-ality, inhibition, reactivity, persistence and sociability (see Wachs & Bates

). However, the nature and extent of genetic influences differ for different tem-perament dimensions, the age of the child and the population being studied (Wachs & Bates

). The assumption that temperament is genetically based has been challenged (Goldsmith, in Goldsmith

et al

.

; Hinde, in Goldsmith

et al

.

). These critics argue that this assumption is restrictive and ignores complications in the developmental, temporal pat-terns of gene action, and the influence of the pre- and post-natal environments on the developing nervous system and behavioural systems. Previous research has shown that while genetic factors may influence the stability of temperament across time and con-texts, changes in temperament patterns seem to result from either environmental influences or an interac-tion of genetic and environmental influences (Wachs & Bates

).Buss and Plomin described temperaments as a

subclass of personality traits because they are inher-ited but can be modified through socialization and individual experience (Buss

). This view was also presented by Goldsmith (in Goldsmith

et al

.

), who suggested that temperament traits form the emotional basis of later personality characteristics, and together with other factors such as self-concept, socialization and cognitive skills, interact to shape personality. Rothbart (in Goldsmith

et al

.

) also proposed that the areas of temperament and person-ality broadly overlap, where temperament provides the biological basis for the developing personality.

Temperament of children with an intellectual disability

The limited research on the temperament of devel-opmentally delayed children may be partly due to the difficulties in obtaining a large enough sample to make inferences about these childrens temperament. There is difficulty in recruiting a homogeneous sam-ple (McDevitt

), because of the many different identifiable and not readily identifiable causes that lead to delayed growth and development among chil-dren. Down syndrome children from infancy to mid-dle childhood have been the most extensively studied population with regards to temperament (see Gold-berg & Marcovitch

for review). The reason for

this focus on children with Down syndrome is that they represent the largest relatively homogeneous group of developmentally delayed children, and because they are also diagnosed at or before birth, they can be studied during infancy when tempera-ment research most often takes place (Goldberg & Marcovitch

). Although children with Down syndrome represent the largest homogeneous group of developmentally delayed children, it would not be appropriate to generalize these findings to children with delays of other aetiologies (Marcovitch et al. ). Variability in temperament also exists within populations of children with developmental disabili-ties and the nature of a childs temperament is not (specifically) predictable from the disability a child has (Huntington & Simeonsson ). For example, typically developing children and children with Down syndrome were rated as less difficult than infants with global delay, cerebral palsy and sensory impairment (Greenberg & Field ). Additionally, children with Down syndrome had less attentional focusing and expressed less inhibitory control and less sadness than typically developing children (Nygaard et al. ).

A temperamental pattern of low persistence, high sensory threshold, and high mobility was found to be associated with specific developmental delays (Maziade et al. ). Children identified as at risk by teachers, were also rated by them as significantly higher in reactivity and significantly lower in task orientation and adaptability than those identified as non-risk (Pullis & Cadwell ).

Additionally, mildly developmentally delayed infants were rated by their mothers as having lower positive mood and as being less approaching and more withdrawn than typically developing infants (Van Tassel ).

Temperament has also been associated with behaviour problems, including both internalizing and externalizing problems (see Saudino for review). The rate of behavioural and emotional prob-lems has been found to be much greater among intel-lectually disabled children than typically developing children (e.g. Einfeld & Tonge ).

It terms of the assessment of temperament, most measures of temperament have been developed with the aim of measuring infants or toddlers (approxi-mately aged months to years) temperament. However, there are relatively few measures that can


E. Zion et al. Temperament and social behaviour in children449

The Authors, Journal Compilation Blackwell Publishing Ltd

be used to assess the temperament of primary (elementary)-school-aged children. Temperament measures have been used less frequently with clinical populations, including children with ID. Tempera-ment research has focused mostly on typically devel-oping children, leading to limited research to guide clinicians or researchers in the appropriate use of temperament instruments with these populations (Goldberg & Marcovitch ).

Influence of school type (regular vs. special school) on temperament

Differences in temperament have been found between students with special needs who attend a regular school and those who attend a special school. Keogh () found significant differences between children with developmental delays in special educa-tion programmes and those in regular schools on all three temperament factors (Task Orientation, PersonalSocial Flexibility and Reactivity) on the short form of the Teacher Temperament Question-naire. It was reported that differences favored (sic) regular over special education groups (Keogh ; p. ) although the specific differences were not stated.

The present study

The present study aimed to investigate the differences between children with an ID and typically developing children in relation to their temperament and social skills. Because childrens temperament and social behaviour are likely to be manifested differently at home and at school, differences between regular and special education groups will be investigated sepa-rately for both home and school contexts. Both parent and teacher ratings of social competence, anti-social behaviour and temperament will be utilized.

Few studies have included assessment of both social competence and antisocial behaviour within the same study. Two research questions were posed: Are there differences between children attending regular and special schools in their level of social competence and antisocial behaviour at home and at school? and Are there differences between children attending regular and special schools in their temperament at home and at school?

Method

Participants

Participants were -year-old children ( boys and girls, M = . years, SD = .), their parents who completed questionnaires about their childrens behaviours ( were mothers, were fathers and were other carergivers), and each childs class teacher who completed questionnaires about their students behaviours. Participants, their parents and teachers were recruited from eight regular schools and special schools across a wide range of Melbourne suburbs and thus represented a diverse range of socio-economic backgrounds. Sixty partici-pants were recruited from regular schools and participants were recruited from three different types of special schools (see Table for descriptive data of each special school type).

In Victorias education system, the decision for spe-cial school placement is made by an interdisciplinary panel that considers the childs performance on intellectual functioning assessment, as well as the childs daily adaptive skills, and additional evidence from reports and assessments of other professionals.

Most of the students recruited from these special schools (and some students from the regular schools)

Table 1 Descriptive data of special schools

School type Range of disabilityNumberof schools

Numberof students

Special school Mild intellectual disability (IQ range 5069) 5 27Special developmental school Moderate to severe intellectual disability (IQ below 50) 5 12Physical disability school Physical disability 1 1




had diagnoses of other disabilities in addition to ID (see Table ) as reported by their parents and caregivers.

Measures

Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test (K-BIT, Kaufman & Kaufman , )

This instrument was chosen in order to provide an estimate of the childrens level of intellectual func-tioning. The K-BIT yields standardized scores, with an overall IQ (M = , SD = ), which is measured by the K-BIT IQ Composite (Kaufman & Kaufman ). The K-BIT was used to confirm the allocation of participants as typically developing or a group of children with an ID, based on the type of school they attended.

School Social Behaviour Scales, Second Edition (SSBS-, Merrell )

This instrument is a rating scale designed to be used by teachers and other school personnel, to evaluate both positive (i.e. Social Competence) and negative (i.e. Antisocial Behaviour) behaviours of children and youth aged years in school settings (Merrell ).

The SSBS- yields standardized scores (t-scores: M = , SD = ). Higher Social Competence scores indicate greater levels of social adjustment, and higher Antisocial Behaviour scores indicate

greater levels of social-behavioural problems (Merrell ).

Home and Community Social Behaviour Scales (HCSBS, & Caldarella )

This instrument is a parent-rater version of the SSBS- (Merrell ). It is a rating scale designed to be used by parents and other home-based raters (such as grandparents, guardians) in evaluating Social Competence and Antisocial Behaviour of children and youth, aged years, in home and community settings. The HCSBS and SSBS- are similar conceptually in item content, number of items and rating format (Merrell & Caldarella ).

Emotionality, Activity, Sociability (EAS) Temperament Survey for Children: Parental Ratings (Buss & Plomin )

This is a questionnaire designed to be completed by parents to assess their childrens temperament. It is intended to assess temperament in children aged years, but has also been used with adolescents (-years-olds) with acceptable reliability (Goodyer et al. ). Four dimensions of temperament are proposed: Emotionality, Activity, Sociability and Shyness.

Emotionality, Activity, Sociability (EAS) Temperament Survey for Children: Teacher Ratings (Buss & Plomin )

This questionnaire contains similar items to the one completed by parents except for some items that account for behaviours that are likely to be observed by teachers in the different social context of school classroom, or the school grounds. The survey also yields a score for each of the dimensions of Emotion-ality, Activity, Sociability and Shyness.

Procedure

Parents and teachers completed the questionnaires in their own time and returned them in a stamped addressed envelope to the investigator. Children were administered the K-BIT during school hours in a private space in their usual school environment.

Table 2 Principal diagnoses of participating children

Diagnosis Frequency

Intellectual disability/global developmental delay (unknown aetiology)*

12

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder with intellectual disability

8

Down syndrome 7Chromosomal abnormality/rare genetic disorder 7Cerebral palsy with intellectual disability 5Epilepsy with intellectual disability 2Attention deficit disorder with intellectual

disability1

*This group included two children who attend regular schools, and were reported by their teachers to have an intellectual disability.




Results

Descriptive data

Descriptive statistics for each of the variables are displayed in Table . Most participants in the overall sample were rated by both their teachers and parents as being in the Average range of Social Competence and Antisocial Behaviour, when compared with the normative group. Most students in regular schools were rated by their teachers and parents as being in the Average level (th to th percentile) for Social Competence and Antisocial Behaviour, while most students in special schools were also rated by their teachers as being in the Average range of Social Com-petence and Antisocial Behaviour, but they mostly were rated by their parents as being in the At-Risk range (th to th percentile) of Social Competence and Antisocial Behaviour.

Regular school students were found to be in the Average range of intelligence compared with the normative group, while special school students were in the Lower Extreme range of intelligence. Independent sample t-tests were performed to find out whether there were any significant differences between regular school students and special school students, in terms of their K-BIT IQ Composite. Students attending regular schools had a significantly higher K-BIT IQ Composite than those attending

special schools, t() = ., P = . (two-tailed), d = .. These results confirmed the allocation of participants into regular and special education set-tings, on the basis of their intellectual functioning.

Home context

Differences between children attending regular and special schools in their level of social competence and antisocial behaviour at home

Results of independent sample t-tests showed that students attending regular schools were rated by their parents significantly more highly on their level of Social Competence (M = ., SD = .) than those attending special schools (M = ., SD = .), t() = ., P = . (two-tailed), d = .. Additionally, students attending regular schools were rated by their parents significantly lower on their level of Antisocial Behaviour (M = ., SD = .) than those attending special schools (M = ., SD = .), t() = ., P = . (two-tailed), d = ..

Differences between children attending regular and special schools in their temperament at home

Results of independent sample t-tests showed that students attending regular schools were rated by their

Table 3 Descriptive statistics of variables measured

Mean score (SD)

Total sample (n ==== 100) Regular school (n ==== 60) Special school (n ==== 40)

K-BIT IQ composite 84.44 (25.55) 102.30 (11.88) 57.65 (14.74)Social Competence (parent-rated) 46.47 (11.20) 51.70 (9.06) 38.63 (9.45)Antisocial Behaviour (parent-rated) 54.88 (13.69) 48.80 (8.56) 64.00 (14.93)Social Competence (teacher-rated) 50.65 (8.95) 53.90 (8.74) 45.78 (6.87)Antisocial Behaviour (teacher-rated) 49.35 (8.63) 47.03 (8.38) 52.83 (7.89)Emotionality (parent-rated) 2.85 (0.98) 2.73 (0.92) 3.03 (1.05)Activity (parent-rated) 3.71 (0.84) 3.63 (0.84) 3.83 (0.85)Sociability (parent-rated) 3.40 (0.84) 3.62 (0.73) 3.08 (0.89)Shyness (parent-rated) 2.45 (0.90) 2.56 (0.94) 2.29 (0.82)Emotionality (teacher-rated) 2.14 (0.98) 1.93 (0.97) 2.44 (0.94)Activity (teacher-rated) 3.51 (0.90) 3.51 (0.86) 3.52 (0.98)Sociability (teacher-rated) 3.89 (0.81) 3.89 (0.74) 3.90 (0.92)Shyness (teacher-rated) 2.53 (0.83) 2.45 (0.82) 2.66 (0.83)

K-BIT, Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test.




parents (on the EAS questionnaire) as significantly higher in the temperament dimension of Sociability (M = ., SD = .) than those attending special schools (M = ., SD = .), t() = ., P = . (two-tailed), d = .. No significant dif-ferences were found between students attending reg-ular schools and those attending special school, in terms of their parents ratings of the temperament dimensions of Emotionality t() = ., P = . (two-tailed), Activity t() = ., P = . (two-tailed), and Shyness t() = ., P = . (two-tailed).

School context

Differences between children attending regular and special schools in their level of social competence and antisocial behaviour at school

Results of independent sample t-tests showed that students attending regular schools were rated by their teachers significantly more highly on their level of Social Competence (M = ., SD = .) than those attending special schools (M = ., SD = .), t() = ., P = . (two-tailed), d = .. Students attending regular schools were rated by their teachers significantly lower on their level of Antisocial Behaviour (M = ., SD = .) than those attending special schools (M = ., SD = .), t() = ., P = . (two-tailed), d = ..

Differences between children attending regular and special schools in their temperament at school

Results of independent sample t-tests showed that students attending regular schools were rated by their teachers (on the EAS questionnaire) significantly lower on the Emotionality dimension of temperament (M = ., SD = .) than those attending special schools (M = ., SD = .), t() = ., P = . (two-tailed), d = ..

No significant differences were found between students attending regular schools and those attending special school, in relation to their teachers ratings of their level of Activity, t() = ., P = . (two-tailed), Sociability, t() = ., P = . (two-tailed), and Shyness t() = ., P = . (two-tailed).

Discussion

Overall, there were minimal differences in tempera-ment between the regular and special education groups. Differences in parent-rated temperament between children attending regular and special schools, were found only for the temperament dimen-sion of sociability, suggesting that intellectually disabled children have almost as much individual variability in temperament as typically developing children. Consequently, intellectually disabled chil-dren could not be readily distinguished from typically developing children on the basis of their tempera-ment styles, except for their level of sociability.

When childrens temperaments were rated by teachers, a difference between those attending regular and special schools was found only for the tempera-ment dimension of emotionality, suggesting again that intellectually disabled children have almost as much individual variability in temperament as typi-cally developing children, and therefore cannot be easily distinguished from typically developing chil-dren on the basis of their temperament styles.

In one of the few studies in this area, significant differences were found (on teacher-rated tempera-ment factors of Task Orientation, PersonalSocial Flexibility and Reactivity) between children who attended regular and special schools (Keogh ). It was reported that differences favored (sic) regular over special education groups (Keogh ; p. ) although the nature of these differences were not stated. The present studys results showed a signifi-cant difference in teacher-rated emotionality between special school and regular school students (where special school students were rated more highly on emotionality than regular school students), and are therefore consistent with Keoghs finding of a signif-icant difference on Reactivity (which measures inten-sity, threshold and negative mood).

Van Tassel () compared mildly developmen-tally delayed infants and typically developing infants. Delayed infants were rated by their mothers as having lower positive mood and as being less approaching and more withdrawn than the typically developing infants. This finding is more consistent with the teacher ratings of temperament in the present study, where special school children were rated as higher in emotionality, but the present findings are not consis-tent with Van Tassels finding of less approach and




higher withdrawal (comparable to the shyness dimen-sion of the EAS). The inconsistency between the current studys results and that of Van Tassel () may be attributed to the different age groups assessed. Because temperament becomes more stable in later stages of development, when children attend school, it is likely that emotionality is stable from early stages of development, whereas shyness mani-fests itself at later stages of development.

Findings about temperament in this study are unique. First, the participants were of primary (ele-mentary) school age, as opposed to participants in other temperament studies where infants have mostly been investigated. Second, the participants in this study included both typically developing and intellec-tually disabled children. Intellectually disabled children are frequently overlooked in research investigating individual differences among children. Hence, the results of the present study, that intellec-tually disabled children display the same range of temperamental individuality as do typically develop-ing children, differ from existing studies of ID and temperament (e.g. Maziade et al. ). Previous studies have reported a temperamental pattern of low persistence, high sensory threshold and high mobility characteristic of specific developmental delays.

The present study also found that children who attend regular schools had a significantly higher level of social competence and significantly lower level of antisocial behaviour, at both home and school, when compared with children who attend special schools.

When one considers that the special school stu-dents have an ID, it seems plausible that, because of their lower intellectual functioning, they would also have poorer social skills. However, the finding of dif-ferent social skills in children attending regular and special schools also suggests that there are aspects of that school context which influence childrens social behaviour. Children in special schools interact with children who also have an ID. Previous research has, in fact, suggested that when children with severe ID are in special education settings with peers who also have severe ID, the nature of the childrens disabilities limit their opportunities for diverse peer interactions (Diamond ).

However, there have been conflicting findings in relation to the influence of attending a particular school type on childrens social behaviour. If a child

with an ID attends a regular school, there appear to be more opportunities and demands for social inter-action, but the childs dissimilarity to others in the school setting may lead to social exclusion, which might make the experience a negative one for the child.

Methodological issues

Certain characteristics of the special education (chil-dren with an ID) sample limit the ability to generalize the results of the present work. The participants from the special school setting, although representative of those children found in special education pro-grammes (in terms of the range of ID among children in those programmes) were very heterogeneous. Because one of the aims of the study was to investi-gate the social skills of children with an ID in general, rather than children with a specific aetiology (e.g. Down syndrome), the sample in the current study consisted of children with ID with various aetiologies, including children with no known aetiology, but who had previously been assessed as having an ID. The sample also consisted of children with a range of intellectual functioning. Within the group of children with an ID, this consisted of children with mild-to-severe ID. Thus, generalizing the findings of the study to children with a particular aetiology or a specific level of ID should be carried out with caution.

Additionally, the temperament measure used in the present study was developed on typically developing children and this should be considered in the inter-pretation of the results of the study. Unfortunately, there is limited literature to guide clinicians or researchers in the appropriate use of temperament instruments with clinical populations or intellectually disabled children (Goldberg & Marcovitch ).

Future research

It is difficult to ascertain what aspect of different school settings determined differences in childrens social behaviour. That is, whether childrens differen-tial behaviours in special and regular schools were related to the nature of the school environment, or the level of childrens intellectual functioning (which determined the type of school they attended). In order to investigate this further, one might consider investigating aspects of the school environment that




may influence childrens social behaviour, such as how much contact children with an ID have with other children with a disability as well as with typi-cally developing children. Extensions of the current design might include the addition of a group of chil-dren with an ID who are integrated into mainstream schools. Comparing the social skills of these three groups would provide greater understanding of the influence of school type on childrens social behaviour.

Conclusion

The current study has demonstrated a link between the type of school attended by children (special or regular) and their socially competent and antisocial behaviour at home and in the community. Children who attended a special school were found to have poorer social skills at home and at school than those who attended regular schools. Hence, the social con-texts in which children function, play an important role in how their social skills are manifested and how their temperament characteristics are expressed. This may be attributed to the influence of interactants in those settings, as well as constraints on childrens behaviour in those settings.

The results of the current study also provided evi-dence of similar individual (temperamental) differ-ences among both typically developing children and children with an ID, indicating that childrens tem-perament has the potential to have a similar influence on childrens social behaviour, irrespective of their level of intellectual functioning. These results con-tribute to the limited amount of research on the dif-ferences in temperament between these two groups, particularly with primary (elementary)-school-aged children. Individual differences have also been neglected in previous investigations of children with an ID, of diverse aetiologies. These findings thus pro-vide important information about the nature of indi-vidual differences among children with an ID.

References

Adams D. & Allen D. () Assessing the need for reactive behaviour management strategies in children with intel-lectual disability and severe challenging behaviour. Jour-nal of Intellectual Disability Research , .

Bates J. E. (a) Applications of temperament concepts. In: Temperament in Childhood (eds G. A. Kohnstamm, J. E. Bates & M. K. Rothbart), pp. . Wiley, Chichester.

Bates J. E. (b) Concepts and measures of tem-perament. In: Temperament in Childhood (eds G. A. Kohnstamm, J. E. Bates & M. K. Rothbart), pp. . Wiley, Chichester.

Bellanti C. J. & Bierman K. L. () Disentangling the impact of low cognitive ability and inattention on social behavior and peer relationships. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology , .

Birch J. W. () Mainstreaming: Educable Mentally Retarded Children in Regular Classes. Council for Excep-tional Children, Reston, VA.

Buss A. H. () Temperaments as personality traits. In: Temperament in Childhood (ed. M. K. Rothbart), pp. . Wiley, Chichester.

Buss A. H. & Plomin R. () Temperament: Early Devel-oping Personality Traits. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.

Buysse V. & Bailey D. B. Jr () Behavioral and develop-mental outcomes in young children with disabilities in integrated and segregated settings: a review of compara-tive studies. Journal of Special Education , .

Diamond K. E. () The development of social compe-tence in children with disabilities. In: Blackwell Handbook of Childhood Social Development. Blackwell Handbooks of Developmental Psychology (eds P. K. Smith & C. H. Hart), pp. . Blackwell, Malden, MA.

Dunlap G., Robbins F. R. & Darrow M. A. () Parents reports of their childrens challenging behaviors: results of a statewide survey. Mental Retardation , .

Einfeld S. L. & Tonge B. J. () Population prevalence of psychopathology in children and adolescents with intellectual disability. II. Epidemiological findings. Jour-nal of Intellectual Disability Research , .

Freeman S. F. N. & Alkin M. C. () Academic and social attainments of children with mental retardation in general education and special education settings. Reme-dial and Special Education , .

Goldberg S. & Marcovitch S. () Temperament in devel-opmentally disabled children. In: Temperament in Child-hood (eds G. A. Kohnstamm, J. E. Bates & M. K. Rothbart), pp. . Wiley, Chichester.

Goldsmith H. H., Buss A. H., Plomin R., Rothbart M. K., Thomas A., Chess S., Hinde R. A. & McCall R. B. () Roundtable: what is temperament? Four approaches. Child Development , .

Goodyer I. M., Ashby L., Altham P. M. E., Vize C. & Cooper P. J. () Temperament and major depression in - to -year-olds. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines , .

Green K. D., Forehand R., Beck H. & Vosk B. () An assessment of the relationship among measures of chil-




drens social competence and childrens academic achievement. Child Development , .

Greenberg R. & Field T. () Temperament ratings of handicapped infants during classroom, mother, and teacher interactions. Journal of Pediatric Psychology , .

Guralnick M. J. () The peer social networks of young boys with developmental delays. American Journal on Mental Retardation , .

Guralnick M. J. () Family and child influences on the peer-related social competence of young children with developmental delays. Mental Retardation and Develop-mental Disabilities Research Reviews , .

Guralnick M. J. () Social competence with peers and early childhood inclusion: Need for alternative approaches. In: Early Childhood Inclusion: Focus on Change (ed. M. J. Guralnick), pp. . Brookes, Baltimore, MD.

Guralnick M. J., Connor R. T., Hammond M. A., Gottman J. M. & Kinnish K. () Immediate effects of main-streamed settings on the social interactions and social integration of preschool children. American Journal on Mental Retardation , .

Guralnick M. J. & Groom J. M. () Correlates of peer-related social competence of developmentally delayed preschool children. American Journal of Mental Deficiency , .

Guralnick M. J., Paul-Brown D., Groom J. M., Booth C. L., Hammond M. A., Tupper D. B. & Gelenter A. () Conflict resolution patterns of preschool children with and without developmental delays in heterogeneous playgroups. Early Education and Development , .

Halvorsen A. T. & Sailor W. () Integration of students with severe and profound disabilities: a review of research. In: Issues and Research in Special Education, Vol. (ed. R. Gaylord-Ross), pp. . Teachers College Press, New York.

Huntington G. S. & Simeonsson R. J. () Temperament and adaptation in infants and young children with disabil-ities. Infant Mental Health Journal , .

Jacobs L., Turner L. A., Faust M. & Stewart M. () Social problem solving of children with and without men-tal retardation. Journal of Developmental and Physical Dis-abilities , .

Kasari C. & Bauminger N. () Social and emotional development in children with mental retardation. In: Handbook of Mental Retardation and Development (eds J. A. Burack, R. M. Hodapp & E. Zigler), pp. . Cambridge University Press, New York.

Kauffman J. M. & Hallahan D. P. () Towards a com-prehensive delivery system for special education. In: Inte-grating General and Special Education (eds J. I. Goodlad & T. C. Lovitt), pp. . Merrill, New York.

Kaufman A. S. & Kaufman N. L. () Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test. American Guidance Service, Circle Pines, MN.

Kaufman A. S. & Kaufman N. L. () Australian Adap-tation of the Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test (K-BIT). Adap-tation Package. American Guidance Service, Circle Pines, MN.

Keogh B. K. () Temperament and teachers views of teachability. In: Prevention and Early Intervention: Individ-ual Differences as Risk Factors for the Mental Health of Children (eds W. B. Carey & S. C. McDevitt), pp. . Bruner/Mazel, New York.

Kopp C. B., Baker B. L. & Brown K. W. () Social skills and their correlates: preschoolers with developmental delays. American Journal on Mental Retardation , .

Lahey B. B., Loeber R., Hart E. L., Frick P. J., Applegate B., Zhang Q., Green S. M. & Russo M. F. () Four-year longitudinal study of conduct disorder in boys: pat-terns and predictors of persistence. Journal of Abnormal Psychology , .

Marcovitch S., Goldberg S., Lojkasek M. & MacGregor D. () The concept of difficult temperament in the devel-opmentally disabled preschool child. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology , .

Martin R. P. () Child temperament and common prob-lems in schooling: hypotheses about causal connections. Journal of School Psychology , .

Maziade M., Caron C., Cote R., Boutin P. & Thivierge J. () Extreme temperament and diagnosis. Archives of General Psychiatry , .

McDevitt S. C. () Assessment of temperament in developmentally disabled infants and preschoolers. In: Assessment of Young Developmentally Disabled Children (eds T. D. Wachs & R. Sheehan), pp. . Plenum Press, New York.

Mercer C. D. & Algozzine B. () Observational learning and the retarded: teaching implications. Education and Training of the Mentally Retarded , .

Merrell K. W. () School Social Behavior Scales, nd edn. Assessment-Intervention Resources, Eugene, OR.

Merrell K. W. & Caldarella P. () Home and Community Social Behavior Scales. Assessment-Intervention Resources, Eugene, OR.

Nygaard E., Smith L. & Torgersen A. M. () Temper-ament in children with Down syndrome and in prema-turely born children. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology , .

Ottenbacher K. J. & Cooper M. M. () The effect of class placement on the social adjustment of mentally retarded children. Journal of Research and Development in Education , .

Pearl R., Farmer T. W., Van Acker R., Rodkin P., Bost K. K., Coe M. & Henley W. () The social integration of students with mild disabilities in general education classrooms: peer group membership and peer-assessed social behaviour. Elementary School Journal , .




Peterson N. L. & Haralick J. G. () Integration of hand-icapped and non-handicapped preschoolers: an analysis of play behavior and social interaction. Education and Training of the Mentally Retarded , .

Prior M. () Childhood temperament. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines , .

Pullis M. & Cadwell J. () Temperament as a factor in the assessment of children educationally at risk. Journal of Special Education , .

Sanson A., Hemphill S. A. & Smart D. () Tempera-ment and social development. In: Blackwell Handbook of Childhood Social Development (eds P. K. Smith & C. Hart), pp. . Blackwell, Malden, MA.

Sanson A., Hemphill S. A. & Smart D. () Connections between temperament and social development: a review. Social Development , .

Sanson A. & Rothbart M. K. () Child temperament and parenting. In: Handbook of Parenting, Vol. (ed. M. Bornstein), pp. . Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.

Saudino K. J. () Special article: behavioral genetics and child temperament. Journal of Developmental and Behav-ioral Pediatrics , .

Szatmari P., Offord D. R., Siegel L. S., Finlayson M. A. J. & Tuff L. () The clinical significance of neurocogni-tive impairments among children with psychiatric disor-ders: diagnosis and situational specificity. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry , .

Taylor A. R., Asher S. R. & Williams G. A. () The social adaptation of mainstreamed mildly retarded chil-dren. Child Development , .

Tredgold A. F. () A Textbook of Mental Deficiency. Wood, Baltimore, MD.

Van Tassel E. () Temperament characteristics of mildly developmentally delayed infants. Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics , .

Wachs T. D. & Bates J. E. () Temperament. In: Black-well Handbook of Infant Development (eds G. Bremner & A. Fogel), pp. . Blackwell, Malden, MA.

Wallander J. L. & Hubert N. C. () Peer social dysfunc-tion in children with developmental disabilities: empirical basis and a conceptual model. Clinical Psychology Review , .

Accepted September

Documents

Zion_Temperament and Social Behaviour at Home and School