MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2020449983 · doi:10.1177/0829573513491212

Cyberbullying

2013· article· en· W2020449983 on OpenAlex

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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of School Psychology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBullying, Victimization, and Aggression
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenQueen's UniversityYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyProsocial behaviorLongitudinal studyDevelopmental psychologyClinical psychologyDepression (economics)Human factors and ergonomicsSuicide preventionInjury preventionPoison controlOccupational safety and healthMedicineMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although research on cyberbullying has recently begun to emerge, few researchers have used longitudinal data to explore this phenomenon in Canada. Using 1-year longitudinal data from the Health Behavior in School-Aged Children Study conducted by the World Health Organization, we investigated the prevalence and stability and risk factors associated with cyberbullying, cybervictimization, and simultaneous cyberbullying and cybervictimization among 1,972 adolescents. Risk factors associated with cyberbullying included higher levels of antisocial behaviors and fewer prosocial peer influences. Risk factors associated with cybervictimization included being in the transition year for high school, as well as higher levels of traditional victimization and depression. Higher levels of traditional victimization were also associated with simultaneous cyberbullying and cybervictimization. Gender differences and implications of the findings are discussed.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.495
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0530.003

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.281 · 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