Self-Concepts and Parental Reports on Children’s Social Skills at Home
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Social behaviours are critical to children’s developmental outcomes, yet the evidence may be difficult to interpret from either child self-report or reports by other people. We propose that any distinctions and commonalities among parent and child reports depend on content and context. The materials were reliable indicators of self-concepts and parent reports on children’s social behaviour at home from the Rowe Behaviour Rating Inventory. Participants were four- to thirteen-year-old girls and boys, and the parents or primary care-givers, in a selected location close to the Australian national average in socio-economic indicators. Results show that child self-reports and parent reports were generally not associated. The findings support the contextual hypothesis of distinct perspectives by parents and children. Findings also contribute to knowledge of children’s social self concepts that has practical considerations for health and education programmes. We conclude that it would be worthwhile to extend this work on dimensions of children’s social behaviour at home to cover other behaviours and the perspectives by other key people across diverse socio-economic locations.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".