Academic Well-Being and Structural Characteristics of Peer Networks in School
Abstract
:1. Introduction
- Is student’s academic well-being related to his/her position in the peer network?
- Is student’s academic well-being related to the peer network structure of his/her school?
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Participants and Study Procedure
2.2. Instruments
2.2.1. Well-being Measures
2.2.2. Network Measures
- (1)
- Social activity (outgoing social ties) measure is the simplest indicator of a student connectivity with other students in their school peer network. It assigns an importance score on the basis of the number of outgoing social ties held by each student. This measure tells us how many outbound links or nominations (out of five asked in the questionnaire) each student had to other students in the network (all students who were registered in the two grades surveyed in the school).
- (2)
- Popularity (incoming social ties) measure is estimated in the same way as social activity, however, we looked at the number of inbound links or nominations. This means that the number of inbound links or nominations (out of five asked in the questionnaire) each student had to other students in the network (all students who were registered in the two grades surveyed in school) was estimated.
- (3)
- Isolated students is measured as the proportion (%) of students in the network (all students who were registered in the two grades surveyed in school) without reported social ties (no nominations in the questionnaire).
- (1)
- Density of the school network is a ratio of the total number of relational ties (nominations) at each school divided by the total number of potential relational ties at that school. In our case, density is the proportion of the number of student cooperation ties divided by the total possible number of cooperation ties in the student peer network, which corresponds to all possible ties that students registered in the two grades in the school can establish. It is expressed here as percentages. Zero means no ties between students and 100 means that every student has nominated all other students. A dense network at school, meaning more social ties between students, is generally associated with a higher provision of social support, a faster circulation of ideas and innovations, and a higher enforcement of norms [41].
- (2)
- Centralization measure identifies the most prominent individuals in the network, which is those who are extensively involved in social relationships with other individuals in the network. In other words, it assesses the tendency of a few students in the network to have more social ties compared to others. It is expressed here as percentages. Zero means that all students have the same number of nominations and 100 means that one student is the only one to be connected to all other students. Centralization is a measure of inequality in a network and it is generally associated with better coordination and efficiency but lower satisfaction [41].
- (3)
- Clustering is the average density of ties around the egos (individual students). It measures how much an ego’s friends’ friends are also the ego’s friends. It is expressed here as percentages ranging from 0 to 100. Clustering captures the network closure and the overall tendency of a network to be patterned as a small world structure—a network of several small and dense student groups connected to each other by bridges. It is computed as the average density of ties in the ego’s networks. In our study, clustering measures the proportion of one’s schoolmates (with whom one wants to do schoolwork) that are also schoolmates with each other.
2.2.3. Controlling Variables
2.3. Data Analysis
3. Results
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
Country | City | Description of the City | Average Income of the Country (€) | Average income of the region | Unemployment Rate in the Country | Unemployment Rate in the City (%) | Population of the City |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Belgium | Namur | Capital of the | 18,301 | 18,785 | 7.6 | 12.6 | 108,950 |
province of | |||||||
Namur and of | |||||||
Wallonia; | |||||||
important | |||||||
commercial and | |||||||
industrial | |||||||
centre; | |||||||
products: | |||||||
machinery, | |||||||
leather goods, | |||||||
Metals, and | |||||||
porcelain. | |||||||
Finland | Tampere | Third largest | 25,500 | 25,000 | 9.7 | 12.8 | 215,168 |
city; centre of | |||||||
leading-edge | |||||||
technology, | |||||||
education, | |||||||
research, | |||||||
culture, | |||||||
sports, and | |||||||
business. | |||||||
Germany | Hanover | Capital of the | 30,360 | 34,308 | 8.1 | 9.2 | 514,137 |
federal state | |||||||
of Lower | |||||||
Saxony; | |||||||
major centre | |||||||
in northern | |||||||
Germany; | |||||||
hosting | |||||||
annual | |||||||
commercial | |||||||
trade fairs. | |||||||
Italy | Latina | Capital of the | 22,891 | 20,487 | 8.4 | 10.6 | 118,612 |
province of | |||||||
Latina in the | |||||||
Lazio region; | |||||||
pharmaceutical | |||||||
and chemical | |||||||
industry; | |||||||
important | |||||||
agricultural | |||||||
centre. | |||||||
The | Amersfoort | Second largest | 23,400 | 24,900 | 6.4 | 6.4 | 148,250 |
Netherlands | city of the | ||||||
province of | |||||||
Utrecht; one of | |||||||
the largest | |||||||
railway | |||||||
junctions in | |||||||
the country. | |||||||
Portugal | Coimbra | Main city of | 12,408 | 12,348 | 12.7 | 10.0 | 143,396 |
the Centre | |||||||
Region; main | |||||||
activities are in | |||||||
the fields of | |||||||
commerce, | |||||||
public | |||||||
administration, | |||||||
education, | |||||||
Health, and | |||||||
social services. |
City (Country) | Selected Grades | School Selection and Stratification | Number of Schools Recruited | Number of Adolescents Participating | Participation Rate (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Namur | Last grade of lower | Based on the | 7 | 2133 | 89.8 |
(BE) | secondary and | parental SES | |||
first grade of upper | |||||
secondary education | |||||
(third and fourth); early | |||||
educational tracking | |||||
(at the age of 12) | |||||
Tampere | Last two grades of lower | Based on the | 8 | 1499 | 86.0 |
(FI) | secondary education | average income | |||
(eighth and ninth); later | and proportion of | ||||
educational tracking | highly educated | ||||
(at the age of 16) | in the area | ||||
Hanover | Last two grades of lower | Based on the | 13 | 1476 | 66.0 |
(GE) | secondary education | average income | |||
(eighth and ninth); early | in the area and | ||||
educational tracking | tracking/school | ||||
(at the age of 10) | types | ||||
Latina | First two grades of upper | Based on school | 8 | 2085 | 76.5 |
(IT) | secondary education | type | |||
(9th and 10th); later | |||||
educational tracking | |||||
(at the age of 14) | |||||
Amersfoort | Last two grades of lower | Based on the | 8 | 1922 | 80.9 |
(NL) | secondary education | available school | |||
(third and fourth); early | tracks in the | ||||
educational tracking | school | ||||
(at the age of 12) | |||||
Coimbra | First two grades of upper | Based on the | 6 | 1900 | 78.9 |
(PT) | secondary education | average income | |||
(10th and 11th); later | in the area and | ||||
educational tracking | school type | ||||
(at the age of 15) |
References
- Eccles, J.; Roeser, R.W. Schools as Developmental Contexts During Adolescence. J. Res. Adolesc. 2011, 21, 225–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gustafsson, J.-E.A.; Westling, M.; Akerman, A.; Eriksson, B.; Fischbein, S.; Granlund, M.; Gustafsson, P.; Ljungdahl, S.; Ogden, T.; Persson, R.S. School, Learning and Mental Health. A Systematic Review; The Royal Swedish Academy: Stockholm, Sweden, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Konu, A.I.; Lintonen, T.P.; Rimpelä, M.K. Factors associated with schoolchildren’s general subjective well-being. Health Educ. Res. 2002, 17, 155–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Sellström, E.; Bremberg, S. Is there a “school effect” on pupil outcomes? A review of multilevel studies. J. Epidemiol. Community Health 2006, 60, 149–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Surchke, M.; de Paz Nieves, C. The Impact of Health and Health Behaviours on Educational Outcomes in High-Income Countries: A Review of the Evidence; WHO Regional Office for Europe: Copenhagen, Denmark, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Coleman, J.C. Friendship and the peer group in adolescence. In Handbook of Adolescent Psychology; Adelson, J., Ed.; John Wiley: New York, NY, USA, 1980; pp. 408–431. [Google Scholar]
- Ennett, S.T.; Faris, R.; Hipp, J.; Foshee, V.A.; Bauman, K.E.; Hussong, A.; Cai, L. Peer Smoking, Other Peer Attributes, and Adolescent Cigarette Smoking: A Social Network Analysis. Prev. Sci. 2008, 9, 88–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Selfhout, M.; Burk, W.; Branje, S.; Denissen, J.; van Aken, M.; Meeus, W. Emerging late adolescent friendship networks and Big Five personality traits: A social network approach. J. Pers. 2010, 78, 509–538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bukowski, W.M.; Newcomb, A.F.; Hartup, W.W. Friendship and its significance in childhood and adolescence: Introduction and comment. In The Company They Keep: Friendship in Childhood and Adolescence; Bukowski, W.M., Newcomb, A.F., Hartup, W.W., Eds.; Cambridge University Press: New York, NY, USA, 1996; pp. 1–15. [Google Scholar]
- Crosnoe, R. Friendships in childhood and adolescence: The life course and new directions. Soc. Psychol. Q. 2000, 63, 377–391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Giordano, P.C. Relationships in Adolescence. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 2003, 29, 257–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Savin-Williams, R.C.; Berndt, T.J. Friendship and peer relations. In At the Threshold: The Developing Adolescent; Feldman, S.S., Elliott, G.R., Eds.; Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1990; pp. 277–307. [Google Scholar]
- Seo, D.C.; Huang, Y. Systematic review of social network analysis in adolescent cigarette smoking behavior. J. Sch. Health 2012, 82, 21–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alexander, C.; Piazza, M.; Mekos, D.; Valente, T. Peers, schools, and adolescent cigarette smoking. J. Adolesc. Health 2001, 29, 22–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- DeLay, D.; Laursen, B.; Kiuru, N.; Salmela-Aro, K.; Nurmi, J.-E. Selecting and Retaining Friends on the Basis of Cigarette Smoking Similarity. J. Res. Adolesc. 2013, 23, 464–473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kiuru, N.; Burk, W.J.; Laursen, B.; Salmela-Aro, K.; Nurmi, J.-E. Pressure to drink but not to smoke: Disentangling selection and socialization in adolescent peer networks and peer groups. J. Adolesc. 2010, 33, 801–812. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kiuru, N.; Burk, W.J.; Laursen, B.; Nurmi, J.-E.; Salmela-Aro, K. Is Depression Contagious? A Test of Alternative Peer Socialization Mechanisms of Depressive Symptoms in Adolescent Peer Networks. J. Adolesc. Health 2012, 50, 250–255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kiuru, N.; Aunola, K.; Vuori, J.; Nurmi, J.-E. The role of peer groups in adolescents’ educational expectations and adjustment. J. Youth Adolesc. 2007, 36, 995–1009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kindermann, T.A. Effects of Naturally Existing Peer Groups on Changes in Academic Engagement in a Cohort of Sixth Graders. Child Dev. 2007, 78, 1186–1203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Li, Y.; Lynch, A.D.; Kalvin, C.; Liu, J.; Lerner, R.M. Peer relationships as a context for the development of school engagement during early adolescence. Int. J. Behav. Dev. 2011, 35, 329–342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ryan, A.M. The Peer Group as a Context for the Development of Young Adolescent Motivation and Achievement. Child Dev. 2003, 72, 1135–1150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cook, T.D.; Deng, Y.; Morgano, E. Friendship Influences During Early Adolescence: The Special Role of Friends’ Grade Point Average. J. Res. Adolesc. 2007, 17, 325–356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, Y.; Lerner, R.M. Trajectories of school engagement during adolescence: Implications for grades, depression, delinquency, and substance use. Dev. Psychol. 2011, 47, 233–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, M.-T.; Degol, J. Staying Engaged: Knowledge and Research Needs in Student Engagement. Child Dev. Perspect. 2014, 8, 137–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Wang, M.-T.; Fredricks, J.A. The Reciprocal Links Between School Engagement, Youth Problem Behaviors, and School Dropout During Adolescence. Child Dev. 2014, 85, 722–737. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, M.-T.; Chow, A.; Hofkens, T.; Salmela-Aro, K. The trajectories of student emotional engagement and school burnout with academic and psychological development: Findings from Finnish adolescents. Learn. Instr. 2015, 36, 57–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Upadyaya, K.; Salmela-Aro, K. Development of school engagement in association with academic success and well-being in varying social contexts: A review of empirical research. Eur. Psychol. 2013, 18, 136–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tuominen-Soini, H.; Salmela-Aro, K.; Niemivirta, M. Achievement goal orientations and academic well-being across the transition to upper secondary education. Learn. Individ. Differ. 2012, 22, 290–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fredricks, J.A.; Blumenfeld, P.C.; Paris, A.H. School Engagement: Potential of the Concept, State of the Evidence. Rev. Educ. Res. 2004, 74, 59–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Salmela-Aro, K.; Upadaya, K. The Schoolwork Engagement Inventory: Energy, dedication, and absorption (EDA). Eur. J. Psychol. Assess. 2012, 28, 60–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maslach, C.; Shaufeli, W.B.; Leiter, M.P. Job burnout. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 2001, 52, 397–422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kiuru, N.; Aunola, K.; Nurmi, J.-E.; Leskinen, E.; Salmela-Aro, K. Peer Group Influence and Selection in Adolescents’ School Burnout: A Longitudinal Study. Merrill Palmer Q. 2008, 54, 23–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Salmela-Aro, K.; Kiuru, N.; Leskinen, E.; Nurmi, J. School Burnout Inventory (SBI): Reliability and validity. Eur. J. Psychol. Assess. 2009, 25, 48–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Walburg, V. Burnout among High School Students: A Literature Review. Child Youth Serv. Rev. 2014, 42, 28–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Salmela-Aro, K.; Upadyaya, K. School burnout and engagement in the context of demands–resources model. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 2014, 84, 137–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ennett, S.T.; Bauman, K.E.; Hussong, A.; Faris, R.; Foshee, V.A.; Cai, L.; DuRant, R.H. The Peer Context of Adolescent Substance Use: Findings from Social Network Analysis. J. Res. Adolesc. 2006, 16, 159–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lakon, C.M.; Valente, T.W. Social integration in friendship networks: The synergy of network structure and peer influence in relation to cigarette smoking among high risk adolescents. Soc. Sci. Med. 2012, 74, 1407–1417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Lorant, V.; Soto, V.E.; Alves, J.; Federico, B.; Kinnunen, J.; Kuipers, M.; Moor, I.; Perelman, J.; Richter, M.; Rimpelä, A.; et al. Smoking in school-aged adolescents: Design of a social network survey in six European countries. BMC Res. Notes 2015, 8, 91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Kinnunen, J.M.; Lindfors, P.; Rimpelä, A.; Salmela-Aro, K.; Rathmann, K.; Perelman, J.; Federico, B.; Richter, M.; Kunst, A.E.; Lorant, V. Academic well-being and smoking among 14- to 17-year-old schoolchildren in six European cities. J. Adolesc. 2016, 50, 56–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Valente, T.W. Social Networks and Health: Models, Methods, and Applications; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Kadushin, C. Understanding Social Networks; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Resnick, M.D.; Bearman, P.S.; Blum, R.W.; Bauman, K.E.; Harris, K.M.; Jones, J.; Tabor, J.; Beuhring, T.; Sieving, R.E.; Shew, M.; et al. Protecting Adolescents From Harm: Findings From the National Longitudinal Study on Adolescent Health. JAMA 1997, 278, 823–832. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Currie, C.; Molcho, M.; Boyce, W.; Holstein, B.; Torsheim, T.; Richter, M. Researching health inequalities in adolescents: The development of the Health Behaviour in School-Aged Children (HBSC) Family Affluence Scale. Soc. Sci. Med. 2008, 66, 1429–1436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kandel, D.B. Homophily, selection, and socialization in adolescent friendships. Am. J. Sociol. 1978, 84, 427–436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kiuru, N.; Nurmi, J.-E.; Aunola, K.; Salmela-Aro, K. The role of peer groups in adolescents’ educational trajectories: A longitudinal study. Eur. J. Dev. Psychol. 2009, 6, 521–547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Werner, C.; Parmelee, P. Similarity and activity preference among friends: Those who play together stay together. Soc. Psychol. Q. 1979, 42, 62–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Salmela-Aro, K.; Kiuru, N.; Pietikäinen, M.; Jokela, J. Does School Matter? The Role of School Context in Adolescents’ School-Related Burnout. Eur. Psychol. 2008, 13, 12–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McNeely, C.; Falci, C. School Connectedness and the Transition into and out of Health-Risk Behavior Among Adolescents: A Comparison of Social Belonging and Teacher Support. J. Sch. Health 2004, 74, 284–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- O’Brennan, L.M.; Furlong, M.J. Relations Between Students’ Perceptions of School Connectedness and Peer Victimization. J. Sch. Violence 2010, 9, 375–391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hietajärvi, L.; Salmela-Aro, K.; Tuominen, H.; Hakkarainen, K.; Lonka, K. Beyond screen time: Multidimensionality of socio-digital participation and relations to academic well-being in three educational phases. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2019, 93, 13–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kiuru, N.; Nurmi, J.-E.; Aunola, K.; Salmela-Aro, K. Peer group homogeneity in adolescents’ school adjustment varies according to peer group type and gender. Int. J. Behav. Dev. 2009, 33, 65–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Valente, T.W.; Unger, J.B.; Anderson Johnson, C. Do popular students smoke? The association between popularity and smoking among middle school students. J. Adolesc. Health 2005, 37, 323–329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Robalino, J.D.; Macy, M. Peer effects on adolescent smoking: Are popular teens more influential? PLoS ONE 2018, 13, e0189360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Salmela-Aro, K.; Upadyaya, K.; Hakkarainen, K.; Lonka, K.; Alho, K. The Dark Side of Internet Use: Two Longitudinal Studies of Excessive Internet Use, Depressive Symptoms, School Burnout and Engagement Among Finnish Early and Late Adolescents. J. Youth Adolesc. 2017, 46, 343–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Covariate | Mean or % | Std | Number of Students | Pearson Correlation with | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
School Burnout | Schoolwork Engagement | ||||
Sociodemographic | |||||
Sex, female % | 51.72 | 49.97 | 10,933 | 0.03 ** | 0.12 *** |
Age, years | 15.24 | 1.05 | 10,934 | 0.01 | −0.04 *** |
Academic well-being | |||||
School burnout (range 1–6) | 3.08 | 1.24 | 10,659 | −0.32 *** | |
Schoolwork engagement | 2.09 | 1.43 | 10,615 | −0.32 *** | |
(range 0–5) | |||||
Student network position | |||||
Social activity, mean of | 3.43 | 1.45 | 11,015 | −0.01 | 0.06 *** |
outgoing nominations | |||||
(range 0–5) | |||||
Popularity, mean of | 3.43 | 2.25 | 11,015 | −0.06 *** | 0.07 *** |
incoming nominations | |||||
(range 0–5) | |||||
Isolated students, % | 1.40 | 11.8 | 10,585 | 0.01 | 0.00 |
School network | |||||
characteristic | |||||
Density, % | 1.56 | 1.12 | 11,015 | 0.05 *** | −0.03 ** |
Centralization, % | 3.33 | 0.73 | 11,015 | −0.03 ** | 0.01 |
Clustering, % | 40.17 | 7.14 | 11,015 | 0.08 *** | 0.03 ** |
School connectedness | 3.04 | 0.19 | 11,015 | −0.06 *** | 0.11 *** |
(range 1–4) |
Covariate | Bivariate Models | Multivariate Model 1 | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
β | 95% CI | β | 95% CI | |
Student network position | ||||
Social activity | –0.02 ** | –0.04, –0.00 | 0.01 | –0.02, 0.03 |
Popularity | –0.07 *** | –0.09, –0.05 | –0.07 *** | –0.10, –0.05 |
Isolated students | 0.01 | –0.01, 0.03 | 0.01 | –0.01, 0.03 |
School network characteristic | ||||
Density | 0.02 ** | 0.00, 0.05 | 0.02 | –0.01, 0.05 |
Centralization | –0.02 | –0.04, 0.00 | –0.07 *** | –0.09, −0.04 |
Clustering | 0.03 *** | 0.00, 0.06 | 0.03 * | –0.00, 0.06 |
School connectedness | –0.43 *** | –0.62, –0.24 | −0.59 *** | –0.80, –0.38 |
Covariate | Bivariate Models | Multivariate Model 1 | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
β | 95% CI | β | 95% CI | |
Student network position | ||||
Social activity | 0.06 *** | 0.04, 0.08 | 0.03 *** | 0.01, 0.05 |
Popularity | 0.07 *** | 0.05, 0.08 | 0.03 *** | 0.02, 0.04 |
Isolated students | 0.00 | −0.01, 0.02 | 0.10 | −0.12, 0.31 |
School network characteristic | ||||
Density | 0.01 | −0.01, 0.03 | 0.04 *** | 0.02, 0.07 |
Centralization | –0.05 *** | −0.07, −0.03 | –0.01 | –0.03, 0.02 |
Clustering | –0.01 | −0.04, 0.01 | –0.02 | –0.05, 0.01 |
School connectedness | 0.84 *** | 0.66, 1.02 | 0.85 *** | 0.65, 1.04 |
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Rimpelä, A.; Kinnunen, J.M.; Lindfors, P.; Soto, V.E.; Salmela-Aro, K.; Perelman, J.; Federico, B.; Lorant, V. Academic Well-Being and Structural Characteristics of Peer Networks in School. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 2848. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17082848
Rimpelä A, Kinnunen JM, Lindfors P, Soto VE, Salmela-Aro K, Perelman J, Federico B, Lorant V. Academic Well-Being and Structural Characteristics of Peer Networks in School. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2020; 17(8):2848. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17082848
Chicago/Turabian StyleRimpelä, Arja, Jaana M. Kinnunen, Pirjo Lindfors, Victoria Eugenia Soto, Katariina Salmela-Aro, Julian Perelman, Bruno Federico, and Vincent Lorant. 2020. "Academic Well-Being and Structural Characteristics of Peer Networks in School" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 17, no. 8: 2848. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17082848