Shyness, Child–Teacher Relationships, and Socio‐Emotional Adjustment in a Sample of Italian Preschool‐Aged Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of the present study was to examine the moderating role of child–teacher relationship quality (i.e., closeness, conflict, and dependence) in the association between children's shyness and indices of socio‐emotional adjustment and maladjustment. The participants were Italian preschool children (63 boys; 66 girls) and two lead teachers per classroom (N = 7 classrooms). In each classroom, one teacher, randomly selected, evaluated the quality of the child–teacher relationship; the other evaluated children's social competence and maladjustment. Peer liking was measured using a sociometric procedure. Parents provided an assessment of their children's shyness. Shyness was positively related to teacher‐reported rejection and internalizing problems whereas shyness was negatively associated with closeness and conflict with teachers. Moreover, closeness, conflict, and dependence in the child–teacher relationship moderated the links between children shyness and indices of preschool social competence and maladjustment. For example, among children with low levels of closeness, shyness was negatively associated with teacher‐reported social competence and positively related to teacher‐reported peer rejection. At very high levels of dependence, there was a negative relation between shyness and social competence. The findings suggest that a positive child–teacher relationship may be a protective factor in avoiding social maladjustment in Italian scuole d'infanzia, where most pupils remain with the same teacher for 3 years. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".