Use of latent profile analysis to assess the validity of a peer-rejected group of children.

The goal of this article was to validate the existence and qualities of a peer-rejected group of children using latent profile analysis (LPA). Two separate racially/ethnically diverse samples (Study 1: N = 2,052 second graders; Study 2: N = 594 fourth and fifth graders) completed peer nominations of liking and disliking, from which we calculated Social Preference and Social Impact scores. These scores served as indicators in the LPAs to form LPA groups. In addition, we collected self-, teacher-, and peer-report report data on aggression, depressive symptoms, peer victimization, and social competence. In each sample, an LPA group emerged in which most children were classified as rejected using the Coie, Dodge, and Coppotelli ( 1982 ; CDC) approach (Study 1: 95%; Study 2: 86%). However, in both samples, only a minority of children classified as rejected using the CDC approach fell into this LPA group (Study 1: 46%; Study 2: 36%). The LPA group that mirrored the CDC rejected group received more maladjusted scores than all other LPA groups on aggression, depressive symptoms, peer victimization, and social competence. Furthermore, when compared to children classified as rejected using only the CDC approach, children classified as rejected under both the LPA and CDC approaches were more maladjusted in terms of all sociometric and socioemotional variables. LPA analyses across two developmental levels validated the existence of an empirically derived group of children who overlapped closely with the CDC rejected group. However, this group was considerably smaller and more maladjusted than the CDC rejected group.