Reciprocal Relationships Between Perceived Supportive School Climate and Self-reported Truancy: A Longitudinal Study from Grade 6 to Grade 9

Figures & data

Table 1. Variable Frequencies, Means, Standard Deviations, Intraclass Correlations, and Bivariate Correlations Between School Climate and Truancy

		1.	2.	3.	4.	5.	6.	7.	8.
1. School climate T1	n = 836		.49***	.43***	.38***	−.21***	−.19***	−.23***	−.15***
2. School climate T2	n = 827	.19**		.56***	.46***	−.20***	−.21***	−.23***	−.17***
3. School climate T3	n = 818	.04^ns	.18*		.54***	−.10**	−.14***	−.26***	−.17***
4. School climate T4	n = 881	.01^ns	.04^ns	.17*		−.07†	−.10*	−.20***	−.25***
5. Truancy T1	n = 828	−.16*	−.09*	−.04†	−.01^ns		.41***	.29***	.20***
6. Truancy T2	n = 825	−.15*	−.17*	−.12*	−.04†	.27***		.40***	.28***
7. Truancy T3	n = 795	−.05†	−.11*	−.21***	−.14*	.07*	.26***		.44***
8. Truancy T4	n = 877	−.02^ns	−.05†	−.14**	−.24***	.03^ns	.09*	.35***
M		4.03	4.07	3.90	3.78	1.07	1.11	1.21	1.20
SD		0.75	0.71	0.72	0.76	0.29	0.36	0.47	0.46
ICCClimate		.47
ICCTruancy		.32

Note. Between-student correlations are presented above the diagonal and within-student correlations (estimates derived from Model 3, see Table 2) below the diagonal. T1 = Grade 6, fall term; T2 = Grade 7, fall term; T3 = Grade 7, spring term; T4 = Grade 9, fall term. ^nsp ≥ .10, †p < .10, *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001. M = Mean, SD = Standard deviation, ICC = Intraclass correlation (ratio of the between-student variance to the total variance).

Table 2. Model fit indices

	Model description	χ^2(df)	CFI	TLI	RMSEA	Δχ^2(Δdf)
Model 1	RI-CLPM: Autoregressions freely estimated	25.51 (15) p = .044	.99	.98	.03
Model 2	RI-CLPM: Autoregressions estimated time-invariant	28.21 (19) p = .080	.99	.98	.02
Comparison 1: M1 vs. M2						3.83(4)^ns
Model 3	Autoregressions and cross-lagged paths estimated time-invariant	21.73 (17) p = .195	0.99	0.99	.02
Comparison 2: M2 vs. M3						6.81(2)*
Model 4	Full RI-CLPM: Autoregressions and cross-lagged paths freely estimated	17.23 (9) p = .045	0.99	0.97	.03
Comparison 3: M3 vs. M4						6.54(8)^ns

Note. RI-CLPM = Random intercept cross-lagged panel model. T1 = Grade 6, fall term; T2 = Grade 7, fall term; T3 = Grade 7, spring term; T4 = Grade 9, fall term. ^nsp > .05, ***p < .001. In all models, random intercept (co)variances and within-time correlations were estimated.

Table 3. Sensitivity analyses

	Model description	χ^2(df)	CFI	TLI	RMSEA
Model 1S	Regular cross-lagged panel model (CLPM) with time invariant autoregressions and cross-lagged paths	81.74 (20) p < .001	.92	.89	.06
Model 2S	Model 3 with bootstrapped standard errors^a
Model 3S	Check of robustness of within-student cross-lagged paths with a parent’s educational level^b as a predictor	26.75 (19) p = .111	.99	.98	.02
Model 4S	Check of robustness of within-student cross-lagged paths with a parent’s educational level and a student’s gender as predictors	14.32 (13) p = .352	.99	.99	.01
Model 5S	Check of robustness of within-student cross-lagged paths with a parent’s educational level, a student’s gender, and students’ academic achievement^c as predictors	9.29 (11) p = .595	1.00	1.00	.00

Note. ^aNo fit indices available. ^bAt most college-level training vs. at least university of applied sciences. ^cStudent-reported Grade 5 academic achievement.

Figure 1. Reciprocal longitudinal cross-lagged associations (unstandardized coefficients) between school climate and truancy. Note. T1 = Grade 6 fall, T2 = Grade 7 fall, T3 = Grade 7 spring, T4 = Grade 9 fall. ***p < .001, **p < .01, *p < .05, †p = .051. Circles represent between-person variance (random intercepts), ovals within-person variance, and rectangles observed variables. Observed variables’ residual variances were fixed at 0. Two-headed arrows represent correlations. Random intercepts and T1-T4 within-person variances (all p < .001) are not diagrammed.

Data availability statement

No data is available