↓ Skip to main content

Suicidal Adolescents' Social Support from Family and Peers: Gender-Specific Associations with Psychopathology

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, February 2006
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (58th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
peer_reviews
1 peer review site

Citations

dimensions_citation
115 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
88 Mendeley
Title
Suicidal Adolescents' Social Support from Family and Peers: Gender-Specific Associations with Psychopathology
Published in
Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, February 2006
DOI 10.1007/s10802-005-9005-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

David C. R. Kerr, Lesli J. Preuss, Cheryl A. King

Abstract

Perceptions of social support from family, non-family adults, and peers were examined in relation to the psychopathology reported by 220 suicidal adolescents (152 females) during a psychiatric hospitalization. Results of regression analyses showed that, among females, family support was negatively related to hopelessness, depressive symptoms, and suicidal ideation. Among males, peer support was positively associated with depressive symptoms and suicidal ideation. Across gender, more peer support was associated with more externalizing behavior problems; whereas, family support was negatively related to these problems and to alcohol/substance abuse. Paralleling normative findings, age was positively associated with peer support, and females perceived more peer support than did males. Findings extend previous research on social support to suicidal adolescents, and broaden the literature by examining extrafamilial support and a broader range of relevant psychopathology. That is, perceived social support relates to psychiatric impairment differentially by gender, and normative, age-related variations in perceptions of social support are detected even among highly impaired adolescents. Clinical implications and directions for future research are discussed.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 88 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 3%
Australia 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 83 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 17%
Student > Master 14 16%
Student > Bachelor 14 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 11%
Other 20 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 43 49%
Social Sciences 19 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 11%
Unspecified 9 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 3%
Other 4 5%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 25 August 2016.
All research outputs
#6,650,593
of 12,320,334 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology
#689
of 1,456 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,241
of 169,643 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology
#13
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,320,334 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,456 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its peers.
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 169,643 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 58% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.