Assessment and Implications of Coping Styles in Response to a Social Stressor Among Early Adolescents in China
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aims of the present study were to (a) examine the factor structure of the Self-Report Coping Scale in a sample of Chinese early adolescents and (b) explore associations between coping and socioemotional functioning in this sample. Participants were N= 569 elementary school students (307 boys) in Grades 4 to 6. Participants completed a measure of coping in response to an argument with a friend. Students’ functioning across multiple domains was assessed using self, peer, and teacher reports. Results suggested a five-factor model of coping in Chinese early adolescents (problem solving, seeking social support, internalizing, externalizing, distancing). In support of predictions, internalizing and distancing coping were positively related to adjustment indices, whereas seeking social support and problem-solving coping were negatively related to outcomes. Results are discussed in terms of the important role of coping for adolescents’ adjustment across multiple domains and in relation to recent shifts in traditional Chinese cultural values.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it