A brief social-belonging intervention improves academic and health outcomes of minority students.
Walton, G. M., & Cohen, C. L. (2011). Science, 331(6023), 1447–1451. doi:10.1126/science.1198364.
-
examining37Students, gradePS
Social Belonging Intervention Report - Supporting Postsecondary Success
Review Details
Reviewed: October 2021
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Meets WWC standards without reservations because it is a randomized controlled trial with low attrition.
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Please see the WWC summary of evidence for Social Belonging.
Findings
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Cumulative GPA (sophomore - senior year) |
Social Belonging vs. Business as usual |
3 Years |
Black;
|
3.60 |
3.34 |
Yes |
|
|
|
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Cumulative GPA (sophomore - senior year) |
Social Belonging vs. Business as usual |
3 Years |
Full sample;
|
3.57 |
3.48 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Cumulative GPA (sophomore - senior year) |
Social Belonging vs. Business as usual |
3 Years |
White;
|
3.54 |
3.61 |
No |
-- | ||
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
-
Race Black 100% -
Ethnicity Not Hispanic or Latino 100%
Study Details
Setting
The study took place at a selective university in the United States.
Study sample
Study participants were students in the spring term of their freshman year. The total analytic sample included 31 students in the intervention group and 39 students in the comparison group. Among the Black students, 18 were in the intervention group and 19 were in the comparison group.
Intervention Group
The goal of the intervention was to decrease students’ psychological perceptions of social threat on campus by framing social adversity as common and transient. Students in the intervention group read narratives that purportedly described the social experiences of upper-level students in their first year at the university who worried about whether they belonged in college. The narratives encouraged students to attribute adversity to common and transient aspects of transitioning to college rather than something unique to themselves or their ethnic group. The researchers used several steps to encourage the students to internalize the message including having the students write an essay about their own experiences and give a video testimonial for future students. The intervention was delivered in approximately one hour.
Comparison Group
Students in the comparison group performed similar activities. However, these students received narratives that were unrelated to social belonging. The activities for these students also took about one hour.
Support for implementation
Additional information is not available about the implementation of the Social Belonging intervention.
Additional Sources
In the case of multiple manuscripts that report on one study, the WWC selects one manuscript as the primary citation and lists other manuscripts that describe the study as additional sources.
-
Walton, G. M., & Cohen, G. L. (2007). A question of belonging: Race, social fit, and achievement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(1), 82–96. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.92.1.82
Grant Competition
Review Details
Reviewed: February 2016
- Grant Competition (findings for Social Belonging)
- Individual Studies in the Postsecondary Education Topic Area Review Protocol 3.0
- Review Standards 3.0
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Meets WWC standards without reservations because it is a randomized controlled trial with low attrition.
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Findings
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
GPA |
Social Belonging vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
Black students;
|
3.49 |
3.34 |
Yes |
|
|
|
|
GPA |
Social Belonging vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
White students;
|
3.64 |
3.61 |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
GPA |
Social Belonging vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
Full sample;
|
3.55 |
3.48 |
No |
-- | ||
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Study sample characteristics were not reported.-
Race Black 53% White 47%
Study Details
Setting
The study took place at a selective university in the United States. Blacks in this university are not well represented as they are numeric minority.
Study sample
The students were in their second semester of their first year of postsecondary education in a selective college in the United States. In particular, the study was interested in looking at African-American students and the effects of the intervention on this specific subgroup. The analytic sample was comprised of 37 Blacks and 33 Whites.
Intervention Group
The intervention aimed to lessen psychological perceptions of threat on campus by framing social adversity as common and transient. Participants had to report to a lab to partake in the intervention. Students in the intervention group were provided with specific narratives from the researchers. The students read these narratives that aimed to make social adversity in school shared and short-lived. The messages from the narratives encouraged students to attribute adversity to common and transient aspects of transitioning to college rather than something unique to themselves or their ethnic group. The researchers used several steps to encourage the students to internalize the "saying-is-believing" message. Participants also read fabricated survey results that revealed that similar students faced the same challenges, but overcame them. Participants were then asked to write essays on how their personal experiences were reflected in the surveys. The total time of the intervention was approximately 1 hour.
Comparison Group
The control participants also reported to the lab and were involved in similar procedures. However, the survey and narratives these students received were unrelated to social-belonging. The process for these students also took about 1 hour.
Support for implementation
No support for implementation information was reported.
Additional Sources
In the case of multiple manuscripts that report on one study, the WWC selects one manuscript as the primary citation and lists other manuscripts that describe the study as additional sources.
-
Walton, G. M., & Cohen, G. L. (2007). A question of belonging: Race, social fit, and achievement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(1), 82–96. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.92.1.82
A brief social-belonging intervention improves academic and health outcomes of minority students.
Review Details
Reviewed: January 2016
- Single Study Review (670 KB) (findings for Social Belonging)
- Individual Studies in the Postsecondary Education Topic Area Review Protocol 3.1
- Review Standards 3.0
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Meets WWC standards without reservations because it is a randomized controlled trial with low attrition.
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Findings
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
GPA |
Social Belonging vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
Full sample;
|
3.55 |
3.48 |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
GPA |
Social Belonging vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
Black students;
|
3.49 |
3.34 |
Yes |
|
||
|
GPA |
Social Belonging vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
White students;
|
3.64 |
3.61 |
No |
-- | ||
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Study sample characteristics were not reported.-
Race Black 53% White 47%
Study Details
Setting
The study took place at a selective university in the United States where Black students are a numeric minority.
Study sample
The students were in their second semester of their first year of postsecondary education in a selective college in the United States. In particular, the study focused on Black students and the effects of the intervention on this specific subgroup. Ninety-two students volunteered and were randomly assigned to conditions (50 intervention, 42 comparison). The final analytic sample was comprised of 37 Black students (19 intervention, 18 comparison) and 33 White students (20 intervention, 13 comparison).
Intervention Group
The intervention aimed to lessen students’ psychological perceptions of social threat on campus by framing social adversity as common and transient. Students in the intervention group read narratives from the researchers that purportedly described the social experiences of upper-level students at the university. The narratives encouraged students to attribute adversity to common and transient aspects of transitioning to college, rather than something unique to themselves or their ethnic group. The researchers used several steps to encourage the students to internalize the message, including having the students write an essay about their own experiences and give a video testimonial for future students. The total time of the intervention was approximately 1 hour.
Comparison Group
The comparison participants also reported to the lab and were involved in similar procedures. However, the narratives these students received were unrelated to social belonging. The process for these students also took about 1 hour.
Support for implementation
Information is not available about the implementation or costs of the social-belonging intervention.
Grant Competition
Review Details
Reviewed: December 2013
- Grant Competition (findings for Social Belonging)
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Meets WWC standards without reservations
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Findings
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
GPA |
Social Belonging vs. Business as usual |
Posttest |
Full sample;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
GPA |
Social Belonging vs. Business as usual |
Posttest |
African American students;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
GPA |
Social Belonging vs. Business as usual |
Posttest |
European American students;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Study sample characteristics were not reported.-
Race Black 53% White 47%
An indicator of the effect of the intervention, the improvement index can be interpreted as the expected change in percentile rank for an average comparison group student if that student had received the intervention.
For more, please see the WWC Glossary entry for improvement index.
An outcome is the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that are attained as a result of an activity. An outcome measures is an instrument, device, or method that provides data on the outcome.
A finding that is included in the effectiveness rating. Excluded findings may include subgroups and subscales.
The sample on which the analysis was conducted.
The group to which the intervention group is compared, which may include a different intervention, business as usual, or no services.
The timing of the post-intervention outcome measure.
The number of students included in the analysis.
The mean score of students in the intervention group.
The mean score of students in the comparison group.
The WWC considers a finding to be statistically significant if the likelihood that the finding is due to chance alone, rather than a real difference, is less than five percent.
The WWC reviews studies for WWC products, Department of Education grant competitions, and IES performance measures.
The name and version of the document used to guide the review of the study.
The version of the WWC design standards used to guide the review of the study.
The result of the WWC assessment of the study. The rating is based on the strength of evidence of the effectiveness of the intervention. Studies are given a rating of Meets WWC Design Standards without Reservations, Meets WWC Design Standards with Reservations, or >Does Not Meet WWC Design Standards.
A related publication that was reviewed alongside the main study of interest.
Study findings for this report.
Based on the direction, magnitude, and statistical significance of the findings within a domain, the WWC characterizes the findings from a study as one of the following: statistically significant positive effects, substantively important positive effects, indeterminate effects, substantively important negative effects, and statistically significant negative effects. For more, please see the WWC Handbook.
The WWC may review studies for multiple purposes, including different reports and re-reviews using updated standards. Each WWC review of this study is listed in the dropdown. Details on any review may be accessed by making a selection from the drop down list.
Tier 1 Strong indicates strong evidence of effectiveness,
Tier 2 Moderate indicates moderate evidence of effectiveness, and
Tier 3 Promising indicates promising evidence of effectiveness,
as defined in the
non-regulatory guidance for ESSA
and the regulations for ED discretionary grants (EDGAR Part 77).