↓ Skip to main content

Evaluating the quality of peer interactions in children and adolescents with autism with the Penn Interactive Peer Play Scale (PIPPS)

Overview of attention for article published in Molecular Autism, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
105 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
Evaluating the quality of peer interactions in children and adolescents with autism with the Penn Interactive Peer Play Scale (PIPPS)
Published in
Molecular Autism, June 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13229-017-0144-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rebecca M. Jones, Andrew Pickles, Catherine Lord

Abstract

A core difficulty for individuals with autism is making friends and successfully engaging and interacting with peers. The majority of measures to assess peer interactions are observations in a school setting or self-report. The present study examined the convergent validity of using a teacher rating scale, the Penn Interactive Peer Play Scale (PIPPS), for collecting information about the quality of peer interactions at school. Teachers completed the PIPPS for 107 children with ASD when the child was 9 and 13 years of age. Clinicians completed diagnostic and cognitive assessments and caregivers completed the Autism Diagnostic Interview-Revised (ADI-R) when the child was 9. Parent report of reciprocal friendships from the ADI-R was associated with teacher report about how socially connected the child was at school on the PIPPS, indicating strong convergence between teachers and parents. Children with more severe restricted and repetitive behaviors and lower verbal abilities were less connected with peers. Children with access to typical peers had more connections with peers compared to those who were in a special education classroom. The findings suggest that teacher ratings from the PIPPS can accurately capture the quality of peer interactions in children and adolescents with ASD and may be useful for clinicians and researchers to evaluate peer engagement in the classroom.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 105 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 105 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 15%
Student > Bachelor 15 14%
Researcher 13 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 9%
Other 14 13%
Unknown 28 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 34 32%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 9%
Social Sciences 8 8%
Neuroscience 5 5%
Unspecified 4 4%
Other 15 14%
Unknown 30 29%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 08 June 2018.
All research outputs
#4,574,063
of 17,186,405 outputs
Outputs from Molecular Autism
#345
of 570 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#82,158
of 274,789 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Molecular Autism
#2
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,186,405 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 570 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 28.7. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 274,789 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.