MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Adolescent online romantic relationship initiation: Differences by sexual and gender identification

2015· article· en· W1995879943 on OpenAlex
Josephine D. Korchmaros, Michele L. Ybarra, Kimberly J. Mitchell

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Adolescence · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSexuality, Behavior, and Technology
Canadian institutionsTellabs (Canada)
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsPsychologyLesbianPopularityRomanceTransgenderQueerDevelopmental psychologyHuman sexualityThe InternetSocial psychologyGender studiesSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Data from the national Teen Health and Technology Study of adolescents 13-18 years old (N = 5091) were used to examine online formation of romantic relationships. Results show that lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) and non-LGBTQ adolescents similarly were most likely to have met their most recent boy/girlfriend in the past 12 months at school. However, they differed on many characteristics of romantic relationship initiation, including the extent to which they initiated romantic relationships online. LGBTQ and non-LGBTQ adolescents also differed on level of offline access to potential partners, offline popularity, and numerous other factors possibly related to online relationship initiation (e.g., Internet use and demographic factors). Even after adjusting for differences in these factors, LGBTQ adolescents were more likely than non-LGBTQ adolescents to find boy/girlfriends online in the past 12 months. The results support the rich-get-richer hypothesis as well as the social compensation hypothesis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.489

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.166
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.215 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it