Deviant Talk in Adolescent Friendships: A Step Toward Measuring a Pathogenic Attractor Process
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
Abstract Deviant talk in adolescent friendships has been previously found to predict escalations in substance use, delinquency, and violence. The current paper extends past work on deviant talk by examining its dynamic, self‐organizing properties. From the direct observations of peer interactions, a simple measure was developed that indicated whether, as an interaction unfolded, deviant talk bouts became longer in duration (indicating an attractor state). Participants included 102 high‐risk adolescents and their friends. A time‐series of the duration of each successive deviant talk bout over the course of an interaction was created for all dyads. Slope values were derived from the time‐series and used as an index of attractor strength. As hypothesized, the attractor index predicted serious authority conflict (arrests, school expulsion) and drug abuse three years later, after controlling for prior problem behavior, family coercion and deviant peer associations. The findings suggest that the process by which adolescents become increasingly absorbed in deviant talk is an important underlying mechanism in the development of serious antisocial behavior.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 it