MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2045608554 · doi:10.1353/dem.2001.0026

Sibling, peer, neighbor, and schoolmate correlations as indicators of the importance of context for adolescent development

2001· article· en· W2045608554 on OpenAlexaff
Greg J. Duncan, Johanne Boisjoly, Kathleen Mullan Harris

Bibliographic record

VenueDemography · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEarly Childhood Education and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Rimouski
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
KeywordsSiblingContext (archaeology)PsychologyAdolescent developmentPopulationDemographyDevelopmental psychologyGeographySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We use nationally representative data to calculate correlations in achievement and delinquency between genetically differentiated siblings within a family, between peers as defined by adolescents' "best friend" nominations, between schoolmates living in the same neighborhood, and between grademates within a school. We find the largest correlations between siblings, especially identical twins. Grademate and neighbor correlations are small. Peer-based correlations are considerably larger than grademate and neighbor correlations but not larger than most sibling correlations. The data suggest that family-based factors are several times more powerful than neighborhood and school contexts in affecting adolescents' achievement and 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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.279 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations191
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDemographySame topicEarly Childhood Education and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207