Hello,
in an article I found the following sentence in the abstract:
"The results suggested that (1) Time 1 mathematics self-concept had significant effects on Time 2 mathematics school engagement at between-group and within-group levels; and (2) Time 2 mathematics school engagement played a partial mediating role between Time 1 mathematics self-concept and Time 2 mathematics achievement at the within-group level."
What is the meaning of the within-group-level and between-group-level in this context?
The article I am referring to is:
Xia, Z., Yang, F., Praschan, K., & Xu, Q. (2021). The formation and influence mechanism of mathematics self-concept of left-behind children in mainland China. Current Psychology, 40(11), 5567–5586. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-019-00495-4
Within-group, means that the same group was tested more than once. So the difference there is at the same group-level tested at two "separate moments". Now a between group, means that two separate groups were tested, using the same test. So, the difference here is between two separate groups tested at the "same time."
John Lawrence Dennis thank you for your answer. Did I understand correctly, that:
1) If the same individuals are investigated at T1 and T2, then engagement mediates the effect of math self-concept on math achievement
2) If individuals from T1 are compared with different individuals from T2, then engagement doesn't mediate the effect of math self-concept on math achievement?
Looking at the figure 1 from the article, I am totally confused now. For both the Between-Group-Design and Within-Group-Design there are T1 (from study 1) and T2 (from study 2, 6 months later). But all the participants from study 2 took part in the study 1 (around 850).
In the Article it says:
for Study 1:
"A total of 2000 students participated in Study
1, from Grades 4 to 6. After removing classes with fewer than
5 students to assure a reliable estimate of class-average
achievement, the final sample consisted of 1936 students from
52 classes (909 boys and 1006 girls; 874 left-behind children
and 1062 non-left-behind children; average age, 11.57 years
[SD = 1.103])."
for Study 2:
"Questionnaires were collected from the same sample of left-
behind children who participated in Study 1. After getting
consent from the school, left-behind children were asked to
complete the questionnaires in the classroom. Their data were
collected at T2; the time interval between the two studies was
6 months. A total of 874 questionnaires were distributed.
Based on left-behind children’s schools, classes, and names,
585 questionnaires could be paired with the original question-
naires in Study 1."
How is it possible, that there is a between-group-level, if both studies use the exact same participants (even if not all of them could be paired)?
In table 6 the authors also state, that "N = 52 at the between-student level". Where is this N = 52 coming from?
Hi Max,
I quickly went through the paper, and I understand your confusion. In study 2, there are actually two within-components or, if you will, a three-level design (time within students within classes).
After having read through the paper, I am quite convinced that the authors refer to between-groups when they mean between-classroom effects, e.g., average classroom math self-concept differs with respect to some predictor on the classroom level. In other words, by within-group effects the authors refer to the individual-(student-)level.
While this makes complete sense in study 1, it's slightly confusing in study 2 in my opinion because of the longitudinal design.
Hope this helps!
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Linguistics
- Composition Studies
- Publication