Friendship conflict and the development of generalized physical aggression in the early school years: A genetically informed study of potential moderators.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Several authors consider high and frequent conflicts between friends during childhood as a serious risk for subsequent conduct problems such as generalized physical aggression toward others (e.g., Kupersmidt, Burchinal, & Patterson, 1995; Sebanc, 2003). Although it seems logical to assume that friendship conflict could have some negative consequences on children's behaviors, some scholars have suggested that a certain amount of conflict between friends may actually promote social adjustment (e.g., Laursen & Pursell, 2009). The aim of this study was to investigate the role of friendship conflict in regard to the development of generalized physical aggression toward others in the early school years (i.e., from kindergarten to Grade 1), as well as the moderating role of relational (i.e., shared positive affect and dyadic conflict resolution skills) and personal (i.e., children's sex and genetic liability for aggression) characteristics in this context. The sample included 745 twins assessed through teacher, peer, child, and friend ratings in kindergarten and Grade 1. Friendship conflict in kindergarten was linearly related to an increase in boys' but not girls' generalized physical aggression. However, shared positive affect and conflict resolution skills mitigated the prospective associations between friendship conflict and generalized physical aggression. These results were independent of children's sex, genetic risk for physical aggression, and initial levels of generalized physical aggression in kindergarten. Fostering a positive relationship between friends at school entry may buffer against the risk associated with experiencing friendship conflict.
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) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".