‘Would Others Think It Is Okay to Express My Feelings?’ Regulation of Anger, Sadness and Physical Pain in Gujarati Children in India
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Despite the recognition of cultural influences on emotional development, very little is known regarding emotion regulation in children from different cultures. This study examined beliefs regarding social acceptability and regulatory behaviors in 80 children (aged five to six years and eight to nine years) from two urban communities (suburban and old city) in Gujarat, India. The children's explicit reasons and their preferred methods of expression and control were also investigated. The results revealed that the children considered others to be less accepting of their expressions of anger and sadness and, in turn, they reported controlling their anger and sadness more than their physical pain. The remarkable congruence between children's beliefs regarding acceptability and reported behaviors was consistent with the notion that cognitions that focus on evaluations of others are particularly salient in guiding socioemotional behavior in a collectivist culture like India. Within‐culture differences were also imperative, indicating that the children in the old city considered others to be less accepting of all of their expressions, and reported controlling these expressions more than the children in the suburban community. These differences are discussed in the context of variations in broader cultural values (i.e., the extent of collectivist orientation and adherence to Hindu ideology) in the two communities.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it