Friendships and deviancy training in young children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this study was to test a new approach to deviancy training, that is, the shaping and reinforcing of disruptive behaviors in social interaction, which considers not only reinforcement, but also the modeling processes involved, as well as children's roles as either providers or receivers of the training. Design/methodology/approach – Using teacher reports and observations from a semi-naturalistic experimental setting with young children, the authors examined the prevalence of provided and received modeling and positive reinforcement, as well as the concurrent contribution of behavior problems on these processes in friendship dyads using a convenience sample of six-year-old twins ( N =783; 386 boys). Frequency analyses and linear and logistic regressions were conducted. Findings – Results indicated that modeling and positive reinforcement – provided and received – were prevalent in this low-risk sample, that behavior problems were associated mainly with provided dimensions, and that deviancy training processes were also displayed between disruptive and non-disruptive children. Practical implications – Findings are relevant to peer-oriented programs designed to prevent antisocial behaviors. Prevention should target these mixed friendships where deviant behavior likely begins. Originality/value – This study provides preliminary support for a new measure of deviancy training, underscores the importance of the roles taken by children, and shows that deviancy training takes place between disruptive and non-disruptive young children.
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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".