General and Domain-Specific Self-Esteem Among Regular
Education and Special Education Students
T D. C
1
University of Missouri–Kansas City
N G
University of California, Los Angeles
J VO P F
Madison East High School
We examined the global and domain-specific self-esteem of students who are emo-
tionally disturbed, students who are learning disabled, and students who are in
regular education classrooms. Students who were emotionally disturbed or learning
disabled had lower global self-esteem than did students in regular education classes.
The specific domains in which students in special education felt that they were less
competent than students in regular education included social skills, leadership skills,
and academics. However, the 2 groups of students in special education did not differ
from one another. No differences emerged between the groups on a measure of
self-esteem that is less subject to social desirability concerns. Implications of this
research for education are discussed.
Do the specific types of special education labels placed on students influ-
ence children’s self-esteem? Do students who are set aside from their peers
and placed in special classrooms suffer from decrements in self-esteem, rela-
tive to students who are in regular education classrooms? In this research, we
explore the various facets of self-esteem among students with learning dis-
abilities and students with emotional disturbance in comparison to students
in regular education classes. We also determine the association between
self-esteem and behavioral outcomes among these students.
Self-Esteem Components
In most studies of students’ self-esteem, a global self-esteem measure is
employed. That is, researchers assess how participants feel about themselves
generally, in an overall sense. For example, a common measure that has been
1
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Terri Conley, Department of
Psychology, University of Missouri–Kansas City, Kansas City, MO 64110. E-mail: terriconley@
umkc.edu
775
Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 2007, 37, 4, pp. 775–789.
© 2007 Copyright the Authors
Journal compilation © 2007 Blackwell Publishing, Inc.