“My Best Friend Always Did and Still Does Betray Me Constantly”: Examining Relational and Physical Victimization Within a Dyadic Friendship Context
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study was an investigation of the nature of victimization within the context of dyadic peer friendships. In particular, relational and physical victimization were examined to determine whether level of victimization by a friend varied as a function of sex or having a reciprocated friendship. Qualities of the friendship and satisfaction with the friendship were explored as predictors of both forms of victimization. The sample consisted of 384 children in Grades 4 to 6 ( M = 10.5 years of age). Girls in relationally victimizing friendships described these relationships as high in both positive and negative friendship qualities, whereas both boys and girls in physically and physically plus relationally victimizing friendships described their relationships as more negative across all friendship quality variables. All children in victimizing relationships reported less satisfaction than those in nonvictimizing relationships. Using regression analyses, we were able to predict almost half of the variance in relational victimization and almost a third of the variance in physical victimization from friendship quality ratings. Some implications for prevention and intervention are discussed.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".