Young children's representations of conflict and distress: A longitudinal study of boys and girls with disruptive behavior problems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigated narratives, symbolic play, and emotions in children who varied in severity of disruptive behavior problems. Children's representations of hypothetical situations of conflict and distress were assessed at 4-5 and 7 years. Behavior problems also were assessed then and again at 9 years. Children's aggressive and caring themes differentiated nonproblem children, children whose problems remained or worsened with age, and those whose problems improved over time. Differences in boys and girls whose problems continued sometimes reflected exaggerations of prototypic gender differences seen across the groups. Boys with problems showed more hostile themes (physical aggression and anger), whereas girls with problems showed more caring (prosocial) themes relative to the other groups. Modulated (verbal) aggression, more common in girls than boys, showed developmentally appropriate increases with age. However, this was true only for children without problems and those whose problems improved. We consider how these findings contribute to an understanding the inner worlds of boys and girls who differ in their early developmental trajectories for behavior problems.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".