Behaviour Problems and Social Support Which Children Perceived from the Different Sources
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research is a descriptive research aimed to examine whether the social support perceived from the different sources is the significant predictor of behaviour problems in children. Participants of the research are composed of 360 students (174 females and 186 males) attending the 5th grades of elementary schools. In the study, Social Support Assessment Scale for Children and Adolescents, and Youth Self Report/YSR 11-18 were used. Data analysis of the study was carried out via descriptive statistics, Mann Whitney U Test and stepwise regression analysis. It was seen in this study that in children, the social support perceived from the family, peer and teachers significantly predicts the behaviour problems. While differentiation in accordance with gender is meaningful in the children’s behaviour problems, it was observed that perceived social support from the different sources of children did not significantly show difference in terms of gender. Consequently, it will be useful for the families and teachers as well as the children in the elementary school period to be made to acquire awareness as regards behaviour problems. Also, the prevention and intervention programs intended for different developmental periods to be developed, for the social support sources to be activated and for healthy coping strategies with behaviour problems to be developed.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".