Beyond Intimacy: Conceptualizing Sex Differences in Same-Sex Friendships
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
This study was designed to replicate and extend prior findings that same-sex friendships of women and men are equally important but that women's friendships are more intimate. A group of adolescents and a group of adults were asked to complete an anonymous questionnaire regarding the quality of their close friendships, the degree to which they would support a close friend in times of difficulty, and the degree to which they would celebrate with a friend in times of success. Results demonstrated that both females and males saw and spoke with their close friends and were equally willing to confront and trust their close friends. Females, however, reported more desire to spend time with a close friend in times of difficulty and to celebrate with a close friend who had just experienced a positive event. Results are discussed in terms of the differing functions of women's and men's same-sex friendships and women's greater general interest in and attention to transitions in the lives of other individuals.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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