Exploring Intergroup Peer Exclusion: Validation of the Latency Social-Psychological Developmental Questionnaire (LSPD)

Intergroup peer exclusion has been studied mainly from a pathological aspect. Currently, methods of diagnosis and treatment focus on this pathological point of view. Qualitative research has revealed that social intergroup peer exclusion has a role in the developmental task of the latency stage. The study’s main aim was to develop and validate a quick and easy quantitative questionnaire for use in a school setting that reflects the social developmental variables exposed in previous qualitative research. The 32-item Latency Social-Psychological Developmental questionnaire (LSPD) and the Loneliness and Social Dissatisfaction Questionnaire were administered to 20 Grade 4 and Grade 5 classes at four co-ed public elementary schools (N = 373 participants). Factor analysis revealed six developmental factors, and correlations were found between these factors and loneliness. The LSPD is a tool for assessing latency stage development among children who experienced exclusion as well as the developmental status of the entire class. The LSPD can assist in identifying specific development areas to focus on in treatment and intervention.


Introduction
The term intergroup peer exclusion (sometimes referred to as social rejection) in childhood is a common phenomenon in the latency developmental stage, which includes middle childhood (9 to 11 years of age) [1,2]. Intergroup peer exclusion is more prominent during this developmental stage than earlier or later stages, and focuses on the group level rather than interpersonal friendships [2][3][4][5]. Intergroup peer exclusion encompasses verbal or physical aggression, bullying, isolation, denial of access, and information, humiliation, and shaming in social networks [6]. Generally, it is seen as an inability to form or maintain social relationships [7], and experiences vary in severity from single to chronic exclusion events [8,9]. Whether the exclusion is acute or chronic in nature, children who are excluded, as well as the perpetrators and witnesses of the exclusion, may suffer extreme distress and isolation, with potentially detrimental effects on their current and future health, behavior, learning ability, and emotions [10][11][12][13][14][15].
Arousing widespread concern among educators, the phenomenon has been extensively studied in two main pathology-oriented perspectives for latency-age children. One approach focuses on the personality traits and psychopathology of the children who are rejected that increase their likelihood of becoming objects of intergroup peer exclusion [16,17]. The other approach focuses on the destructive group dynamics of the children who do the rejecting [18,19].
However, almost no studies examined intergroup peer exclusion in a general developmental context or particularly in the context of the unique latency development stage. For example, the social reasoning developmental model focuses on reasoning, judgments, and decisions about moral and social issues and how these processes change across development. According to this approach, interventions need to focus on changing group norms, biases, and prejudices, along with enabling children to understand different sources of inequalities [2,20,21]. The social reasoning developmental model, like other approaches, starts from the premise that intergroup peer exclusion is a challenge that is not necessarily related to the developmental task normatively occurring in the latency phase.
A recent qualitative study sought to examine a normative developmental aspect of this phenomenon, expand knowledge and understanding of development, and add a new dimension to the field of intergroup peer exclusion research. According to this approach, there is significant and unique development during the latency stage. Latency stage development includes several social developmental factors, such as aspiring for group independence and complying more with class social norms and uniformity and less with adult morality. The group flows with decisions that other children made for the class's actions, plans, and desires. There is acceptance and reconciliation with the existence of a social hierarchy and a reduced egocentric position [22].
Furthermore, the research suggests the possibility of intergroup peer exclusion as a mechanism protecting the group's integrity; its ability to exist and develop is a top group priority. When the group detects a threat to this development, they activate exclusion [22]. These findings have significant educational and therapeutic implications for prevention and intervention within the school systems.
Based on these qualitative results, a quantitative questionnaire that can measure these developmental aspects is needed. Several available questionnaires are used to diagnose intergroup peer exclusion. Some focus on elderly populations (e.g., [23][24][25]) or are sociometric questionnaires [26,27]. Some self-report questionnaires that detect bullying, social exclusion, and ostracism target younger ages (e.g., [28,29]). However, the focus of the existing questionnaires is to detect the existence of intergroup peer exclusion according to various signs and components and locate the victim, type of injury, and effect on the victim [30]. These effects come in multiple forms; for example, threats or harm that are physical, verbal, social-relational [31][32][33], cyber [29], property, sexual, or racially motivated [34]. Available questionnaires also examine the degree of suffering the victim experiences [35] or the boycott components, the intent to harm, repetition, and power imbalance [36]. These questionnaires are not intended to target the cause of intergroup peer exclusion or guide how it should be addressed. Their goal is to locate and treat the victim according to various approaches.
Intergroup peer exclusion can be identified from various perspectives [37,38]. The perspectives may be those of outsiders' (e.g., teachers' [39] or other children's [39][40][41]), or a self-perspective from the children experiencing the event [37,[41][42][43]. We developed this study's questionnaire as a self-report. When teachers or other children assess the class's sociometric position, they tend to describe their own perspectives of the social position of the children in the group. This information differs from the individual children's self-reported perspectives of themselves [40,41]. One child's experience of exclusion is not necessarily the same as that of the others. Children may perceive themselves as excluded or included, while others perceive the same situation differently [39]. Obtaining these self-reports is necessary to provide appropriate intervention for children who feel excluded [40,44,45].
To the best of our knowledge, no questionnaire diagnoses intergroup peer exclusion according to social psychology or examines the developmental dimensions of the latency stage for all children in a class. However, such a questionnaire might obtain a general picture of the development of the entire class and, within it, the development of the individual. It could identify not only the social exclusion but also the development area where treatment and intervention should be focused.
The newly developed Latency Social-Psychological Developmental questionnaire (LSPD) focuses on the extent to which children comply with social status, class social norms, and social uniformity; independence from adults and adult morality; "group flow;" egocentric position; acceptance; and reconciliation with the existence of a social hierarchy. These factors generate development at the latency age, and delays in their development may lead to intergroup peer exclusion. The LSPD offers an easy, simple-to-administer, in-classroom tool that can pinpoint the social developmental factor that leads some children in the class to exclude other children. It can be beneficial by directing the appropriate intervention to prevent peer exclusion and strengthen inclusiveness.
Therefore, the aims of this study were to (1) develop a quick and easy quantitative questionnaire for use in a school setting that reflects the social developmental variables found in qualitative research, (2) identify delays in the children's social-psychology development at the individual and class levels, (3) examine the questionnaire's internal reliability and validity, and (4) explore correlations with feelings of loneliness and social dissatisfaction among children in Grades 4 and 5.

Construction of the LSPD and Item Selection
The LSPD was originally developed in Hebrew and underwent a process of valid translation and back-translation to English (Table 1).

22
In my class, we listen to the class king/queen more than to other kids in the class. 23 I listen to the popular kids in my class. 24 All the kids in my class think I'm popular. 25 If kids hurt me, I don't ask my teacher to deal with them.  It's hard for me when kids don't listen to me and don't do what I want. 28 It's hard for me that people listen to and do as other kids say.

29
At break, I prefer to go out and play with kids from my class and not stay in the classroom. 30 I'm friends with the popular kids in my class.

31
If someone asked the class king/queen, he/she would say I'm popular. 32 During the break, I'm with the popular boys/girls. The questionnaire's content was founded on several resources that established the tool's content validity: (a) analyses of previously conducted focus groups [22], (b) psychological developmental approaches of the latency stage, (c) moral development of the latency stage, and (d) the social reasoning development approach. Consequently, 36 items were constructed. To establish content and face validity, a panel of four experienced professionals (educational psychologist, educational counselor, art therapist, and movement therapist) conducted an expert review of the selected items. Following this consultation, 32 items were chosen to be included in the questionnaire. Children are asked to score how correct they find each statement, from 1 (not at all correct) to 5 (absolutely correct). A higher score represents better latency social-psychological development. Examples include Item 14, "I behave like everyone else" and Item 30, "I'm friends with the popular kids in my class." Eight items (Items 5, 7, 18, 19, 25-28) require reverse coding.

Procedure
The final 32-item questionnaire was administered to 20 classes in four co-ed public elementary schools in central Israel as part of a project in collaboration with the Ministry of Education. The study was conducted according to the Declaration of Helsinki guidelines and approved by the Ministry of Education Ethics Committee (7 August 2022, #12618). All parents provided consent in line with the ethics approval, and children completed questionnaires in class independently or with minimal verbal assistance from the project moderators, all qualified educational psychologists.

Participants
A minimum sample size of 210 participants was determined using G*Power software guidelines, considering the medium effect size of 0.5, power = 0.95, and alpha = 0.05 [46].

Demographic Questionnaire
The children completed questions about basic background information, including gender, age, and grade.

Loneliness and Social Dissatisfaction Questionnaire, Modified
The Loneliness and Social Dissatisfaction Questionnaire [47] is a validated 16-item questionnaire that measures feelings of loneliness and social dissatisfaction among school children. As with the original scale, the modified 24-item questionnaire was administered to third-through sixth-grade students. The 16 primary items focus on children's feelings of loneliness (e.g., "I'm lonely at school"), feelings of social adequacy versus inadequacy (e.g., "I'm good at working with other children at school"), and subjective estimations of peer status (e.g., "I have lots of friends in my class"). Eight more filler items focus on the children's hobbies or preferred activities (e.g., "I like to paint and draw"). These eight items were included to help children feel more open and relaxed about indicating their feelings on various topics. Items are rated on a Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). A higher score represents more loneliness. This scale yielded high internal reliability (α = 0.915).

Data Analysis
Data were analyzed using IBM SPSS (Version 26). Descriptive statistics were used to describe the participants. Cronbach's alpha was calculated to establish reliability, and a level of α ≥ 0.65 was defined as acceptable. Exploratory factor analysis with varimax rotation was applied to the item responses to assist in developing, refining, and evaluating the LSPD. The variables were tested for normality using Shapiro-Wilk tests. We conducted Spearman correlations to assess associations between study variables and Mann-Whitney procedures to compare between groups (e.g., gender). p-values lower than 5% are considered significant.

Construct Validity
An exploratory factor analysis was performed to assess the LSPD construct validity using the criteria of varimax rotation producing orthogonal (independent) factors that explain unique variances and loading of item responses above 0.4. The results revealed six factors composed from 29 items, yielding a cumulative explained variance percentage of 48.2%. See Table 2 for the detailed findings of the factor analysis. The first factor, social status, includes six items and accounted for 11.26% of the variance measuring social status (e.g., "I'm among the most popular kids in my class"). The second factor, hierarchy acceptance, includes four items and accounted for 8.62% of the variance measuring hierarchy acceptance (e.g., "My class has popular kids"). The third factor, egocentrism, includes four items and accounted for 8.52% of the variance, measuring egocentrism (e.g., "It's hard for me when other kids decide things in my class and I don't"). The fourth factor, social norms and uniformity, includes five items and accounted for 6.84% of the variance (e.g., "I behave like everyone else"). The fifth factor, group flow, includes five items and accounted for 6.84% of the variance (e.g., "I don't like insisting on my own wishes against the wishes of the class"). Finally, the sixth factor, social independence, includes four items and accounted for 5.33% of the variance (e.g., "If kids hurt me, I don't ask my teacher to deal with them").
The main study variables were tested for normality distribution by Shapiro-Wilk procedures. These procedures yielded significant results (p < 0.001), meaning the variables' distributions are not proximately normal. Table 3 presents the descriptive statistics of the main study variables, LSPD scores, and loneliness score [47]. Results showed that high social status (i.e., being well liked and accepted) was correlated with high social norms and uniformity, high tendency to group flow, and low levels of loneliness. In addition, high hierarchy acceptance was positively correlated with egocentrism and loneliness. Egocentrism was negatively correlated with the tendency to group flow and correlated with loneliness. Group flow was negatively correlated with egocentrism and loneliness but positively correlated with social status, social norms, and uniformity. The more the children were connected to the group, had high social status, and could move flexibly with the group and social norms, the lower their scores for egocentrism and loneliness. In addition, egocentrism positively correlated with the acceptance of social hierarchy. That is, children in an egocentric position saw themselves at the center and top of the social ladder and clearly noticed the social hierarchy that eliminated their centrality. Finally, the LSPD total score was negatively associated with loneliness. Table 4 presents the comparison between boys and girls in the study variables. The comparisons were conducted using Mann-Whitney procedures due to the nonnormal distribution of the variables. Results showed that boys scored higher than girls in social status. In addition, the girls reported higher loneliness than the boys.  Table 5 presents the comparison between Grade 4 and Grade 5 in the study variables. The comparisons were conducted using Mann-Whitney procedures due to the nonnormal distribution of the variables. The results showed that students in Grade 5 scored higher in hierarchy acceptance than students in Grade 4. No other differences were found.

Discussion
Intergroup peer exclusion, a common phenomenon in the latency developmental stage, seriously harms children in all phases of life, both present and future. The theoretical and practical approaches relate to this phenomenon from a pathological aspect. Accordingly, sociometric questionnaires locate the victims of exclusion. A recent qualitative study examining intergroup peer exclusion from a developmental aspect showed that the focus of the problem with exclusion in latency was not a pathology stemming from the victim's shortcomings or destructive class dynamics. Instead, intergroup peer exclusion stems from a disturbance in achieving the developmental task in the latency stage [22]. Developmental tasks in latency include the developmental factors of social status, hierarchy acceptance, egocentrism, social norms and uniformity, group flow, and social independence.
So far, no developed questionnaire examines intergroup peer exclusion as a developmental aspect. Thus, the LSPD was constructed to test six developmental factors and was applied in Grades 4 and 5 in Israel. This questionnaire is effective in locating the social status of all children in a class. At the same time, it adds and specifies the developmental area of the class as a whole and of the individual children in it, identifying weaknesses to be strengthened. In this study, we tested the validity and reliability of the quantitative LSPD for use in schools as a quick and easy tool to assess and identify areas for intervention.
Factor analysis revealed the six developmental factors. The first, social status, represents the self-position of the respondent regarding their social status in the class. The literature supports this terminology, defining two dimensions of high social status in childhood: preference (e.g., being well liked and accepted) and popularity (e.g., being seen as popular and influential) [48][49][50][51][52]. The six LSPD items for this factor address the child's self-perception of preference in the class through their own eyes and those of their classmates, and the more preferred and accepted children in the class. These items include a self-description of the social status of the respondent's friends with whom the child connects in general and during school recess (when children play freely and social connections are expressed). The social status factor was constructed with these six items based on developmental understandings that emerged from the LSPD's qualitative findings [22] and that determine social status according to social-psychological development indicators. The novelty of this factor is that it assesses the degree of maturity of the children developing during latency; it does not determine a type of pathology.
The second factor, hierarchy acceptance, represents the respondent's perception of the existence of social hierarchy in the classroom. Classroom hierarchy has been previously studied relative to gender, race, and other social categories that society constructs and reinforces (e.g., nationality, accent, and language) [53][54][55][56]. The four items in this factor address the child's perception of the existence of social classes. The social hierarchy acceptance factor is a new factor related to intergroup peer exclusion. It is based on the understanding that the perception of the existence of a social hierarchy has developmental importance and relates to other social factors included in the LSPD (egocentrism, social norms and uniformity, group flow, and social independence). The novelty of this factor is that it was not previously examined in the context of development in the latency stage in general or intergroup peer exclusion in latency in particular.
The third factor, egocentricity, represents the respondent's feelings regarding their central position in the class. The four LSPD items incorporate the respondent's feelings about the choices and decisions the children in their class make. They compare the classmates' attitude toward the respondent with their attitude toward other children in the class. The egocentricity factor is found in Piaget's theory at younger ages when, at the age of latency, an egocentric position decreases [57][58][59][60]. According to the understanding from new advances [22], the degree of maturity in the egocentric position relates to general development in the latency stage and the ability to flow with the group and its social norms.
The fourth factor, social norms and uniformity, represents the respondent's conduct in social uniformity according to social norms that prevail in the classroom in various areas: behavior, appearance and clothing, speech, classes, humor, and attitude toward studies. The social norms and uniformity factor is based on previous studies' findings indicating a relationship between conduct in social uniformity according to social norms and social status [61,62]. This factor has not previously been applied in questionnaires to test development in latency or intergroup peer exclusion factors.
The fifth factor, group flow, represents the respondent's conduct in conflict situations with the group. The individual's conduct in conflict situations can range from individual insistence and rowing against the flow to voluntarily joining the group flow according to the classroom's prevailing social norms. Group flow is a relatively new term used in research about work, music, and sport. However, a comprehensive theoretical model describing Group flow has yet to be developed [63]. The different definitions of group flow are based on the premise that in a situation of group flow, a merging of the individual with the group activity occurs. Thus, the boundaries between the individual and activity blur. In such a situation, there is no vigilance toward the outside world and no self-awareness. The individual joins the group naturally-without conflict or peer pressure-and the group provides the individual with a sense of strength [63][64][65]. The LSPD four group flow items represent conflict situations between the individual and the group, where the individual does not merge and flow with the group's plans, desires, game choices, or work styles. This fifth factor is based on an understanding of development in which the ability to flow with a group relates to social status, social uniform conduct according to social norms, and an egocentric position [22]. The novelty of this factor is that it has not been tested previously at the age of latency in the contexts of development in general or intergroup peer exclusion in particular.
The sixth factor, group independence, represents a position toward independent social conduct. Independence has been extensively researched regarding early development and adolescence [66][67][68][69][70][71][72]. However, research concerning independence development during latency has been limited, and has focused primarily on teachers' crucial role in the development of children's independence [73,74]. The four group-independence items represent each child's perception of their conduct in social matters on their own. This sixth factor is based on understandings that at the age of latency, independence develops in the group [22]. This factor is novel because it views independence development in latency as a group process and not an individual one.
The LSPD quantitative questionnaire's internal reliability and validity was examined by comparing the LSPD responses to feelings of loneliness and social dissatisfaction among children in Grades 4 and 5 who are at the age for latency development. Its factors were found to correspond with the previous findings with qualitative focus groups [22]. Factor analysis revealed six developmental factors. Social status, uniformity and norms, and group flow correlate with each other: The more children maintain social uniformity, behave according to social norms, and flow with the group, the higher their social status will be. These three factors were found to have a strong relationship with the total LSPD questionnaire score and a negative relationship with the loneliness index.
Group flow, which was found to have a positive relationship with social status and social norms and uniformity, had a negative relationship with egocentrism and loneliness: The more children are connected to the group, have a high social status, and can flow and move flexibly with the group and its social norms, the less egocentric they are, and the lower the loneliness index. In addition, egocentrism positively correlated with acceptance of social hierarchy. That is, children in an egocentric position notice the social hierarchy that eliminates their centrality.
One unexpected finding was revealed when examining the correlations between variables. Although no significant correlation was found between social independence and the other factors, a positive correlation was found between social independence and the LSPD total score, and a negative correlation was found with the loneliness score. A possible explanation for this is that the class teachers were present while we administered the questionnaires. Their message is usually to seek the teachers' help during social quarrels. School rules and parental guidance at home support their strong and clear message. The participants possibly identified with this message when they answered the questions that tested social independence in dealing with social quarrels and, in the presence of the teachers, would not raise the possibility of independently solving their social problems.
We found no differences between boys and girls or between Grades 4 and 5 in the variables. However, regardless of the variable tested, the statistical analyses showed that boys reported higher scores than girls in the social status factor. This finding appears consistent with the literature on gender differences in the age of latency. At this age, boys tend to show their courage and strength and avoid showing weakness, thus strengthening their popularity [75][76][77][78]. Girls, on the other hand, demonstrate their weakness and report lower social status and higher loneliness than boys. These findings are consistent with previous studies, which found that girls report loneliness more than boys (e.g., [79][80][81][82]).

Limitations and Future Research
Some limitations of the current study should be considered. The children studied at public regional schools, where the students are allocated from the same city or areas of generally the same socioeconomic level. In addition, the trait-level differences measured were not examined to validate the LSPD. Future research that considers these aspects and implementation of the questionnaire in additional countries, languages, and cultures could further expand the understanding of intergroup peer exclusions.

Conclusions
The LSPD's theoretical contribution lies in its confirmation of the assumptions of the qualitative research [22] showing that intergroup peer exclusion is related to the developmental task in the latency age. This differs from existing approaches in the professional literature, which refer to exclusion as a pathological phenomenon arising from the rejected children's difficulty, disability, or failure, or from destructive group dynamics [16][17][18][19]. In addition, the LSPD offers a new perspective for the assessment focus. It makes possible the measurement of intergroup peer exclusion in the context of the developmental task in latency and development areas in latency not yet studied. The LSPD's practical contribution to the field is its ability to locate exclusion at various levels and manifestations differently from the approaches and questionnaires that existed previously [26][27][28][29].
The LSPD identifies not only the victim and type of intergroup peer exclusion, but also developmental areas where there is immaturity. Thus, treatments and interventions can be adjusted depending on the diagnosis. The interventions that exist today for intergroup peer exclusion-which is seen as arising from pathological factors-focus on fighting the intergroup peer exclusion of children or on treating those children's difficulty or disability. Instead, depending on the LSPD questionnaire results, interventions would focus on both the class and individual levels to improve development areas that are at low levels.

Practical Implications
The LSPD questionnaire can be used to locate the social developmental factor that must be addressed at the individual or class level. At the individual level, the LSPD can detect a weakness in one of the child's development areas. For example, the teacher can address the area of social norms and social uniformity by referring to both the individual child and the class.
In the first stage, the teacher can give the individual child a general explanation, according to their level of understanding, of the developmental task at that age-the development of group social skills-and the importance of practicing skills to socially belong to the class. The teacher can describe behaviors that often lead to intergroup peer exclusion and explain how these behaviors harm and disturb class society. An example would be when a class decides on the rules for a game, but one child resists (and even fights) these rules and ruins the game for the other children. The teacher can describe the difficulty of acting as a group when everyone pulls in their own direction and can offer practical ways that the child can strengthen their sense of belonging to the group norms. The teacher can offer the child practical ways to discover involvement and keep up-to-date with their classmates' activities. For example, connecting to social networks might strengthen their knowledge of prevailing norms for class activities, plans, and conversation topics.
Similarly, teachers can help children at the class level. They can ask the children for examples of social norms that exist in their class ("things all the children in the class agree on and do together") to help a child who has experienced intergroup peer exclusion identify them and offer tools that raise their awareness of when they deviated from social norms (e.g., using a "social stop sign"). The questionnaire can also help map the areas where the entire classroom needs programs and activities to strengthen classroom cohesion, such as when a large number of children score highly in the egocentricity variable. Class programs and activities could be run to develop the children's ability to accept situations in which others in the class are also important and that children other than themselves should also be considered.  Institutional Review Board Statement: The study was approved according to the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Israel Ministry of Education Ethics Committee (7 August 2022, #12618).
Informed Consent Statement: Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement:
The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to privacy and ethical reasons.

Conflicts of Interest:
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.