Scale Analysis
The Peer–Nomination of Aggression Scale (PNAS) is a peer-report measure used to assess the level of extreme (aggressive) behavior in an individual. It is a widely used tool in aggression research and has been applied in various settings, including schools, prisons, and mental health clinics.
Objective
The purpose of this scale is to evaluate the level of extreme or aggressive behavior in an individual.
Question Scoring
The PNAS-24 consists of 24 items, with each item being answered by nominating either “Not a boy” or “Not a girl” for each behavior.
Statistical Analysis
The scale covers six domains. Scores for each domain range from 0 to 1. Each score represents the proportion of times a child has been nominated for behaviors within that domain.
The Aggression Subscale score is calculated by summing the number of times a child is nominated by peers for 10 specific aggression-related items (items 5, 6, 11, 12, 13, 19, 20, 21, 22, and 23) and dividing that by the total number of nominators.
A maximum score of 1 means the child was nominated for every aggressive behavior by every peer.
A minimum score of 0 means the child was not nominated for any aggressive behavior by any peer.
Validity and Reliability
The PNAS has been found to be a reliable and valid measure of extreme behavior. Research has shown that the PNAS is sensitive to changes in aggressive behavior over time and is capable of distinguishing between individuals with higher and lower levels of aggression.
References
Orpinas, Eron, L. D., Walder, L. O., & Lefkowitz, M. M. (1971). Learning of aggression in children. Boston, MA: Little, Brown and Co.
Huesmann, L. R., Eron, L. D., Lefkowitz, M. M., & Walder, L. O. (1984). Stability of aggression over time and generations. Developmental Psychology, 20(6), 1120–1134.
Huesmann, L. R., Eron, L. D., & Guerra, N. G. (1992). Victimization and aggression. Philadelphia, PA: Society for Life History Research.
Huesmann, L. R., Eron, L. D., Guerra, N. G., & Crawshaw, V. B. (1994). Measuring children’s aggression with teachers’ predictions of peer nominations. Psychological Assessment, 6(4), 329–336.