↓ Skip to main content

How Accurately Can Parents Judge Their Children’s Boredom in School?

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
How Accurately Can Parents Judge Their Children’s Boredom in School?
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, June 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00770
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ulrike E. Nett, Elena C. Daschmann, Thomas Goetz, Robert H. Stupnisky

Abstract

The purpose of the present study was to explore what parents know about their Children's boredom in school; specifically, the frequency, intensity, and antecedents of their Children's boredom, as well as how they cope with boredom. A questionnaire was administered to 437 grade 9 students (54% female, M age = 14.82) and their parents (72% mothers, 14% fathers, 12% both parents, M age = 45.26) measuring variables related to students boredom in mathematics class. Three different measurements were used to evaluate the accuracy of parents' judgments: (1) the correlation between parents' and students' answers, (2) the mean differences between parents' and students' answers, and (3) the mean values of absolute differences of parents' and students' answers. The results suggest that parents generally have an informed knowledge about their child's boredom and related facets. This is reflected by a mean correlation of medium size ( = 0.34) and a small mean effect size of the difference between parents' and students' judgments over all items ( = 0.20). Parents are also substantially better in judging their Children's boredom compared to guessing for all variables (mean effect size of = 0.65). They had the most precise judgments for the frequency and intensity of boredom. The antecedents of boredom (e.g., characteristics of instruction) were also well estimated by parents; specifically, parents tend to have a bias in favor for their children evidenced by overestimating antecedents that cannot be influenced by the students and underestimating those that can be influenced by the students. The least concordance was found between parents' and Children's perception of boredom coping strategies (e.g., accepting boredom), implying that parents lack information about how their children intentionally cope with boredom. Implications for research on student boredom are discussed as well as practical applications involving parents in boredom prevention.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Mexico 1 3%
Unknown 30 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 10%
Student > Bachelor 3 10%
Student > Postgraduate 3 10%
Student > Master 3 10%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 10 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 8 26%
Social Sciences 5 16%
Linguistics 2 6%
Arts and Humanities 2 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 6%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 11 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 August 2016.
All research outputs
#5,007,608
of 26,367,306 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#8,424
of 35,210 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#79,476
of 370,452 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#130
of 394 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,367,306 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 35,210 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 370,452 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 394 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.