Do Friendships and Sibling Relationships Provide Protection against Peer Victimization in a Similar Way?
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 Based on the notion that friendship may serve an important protective function against peer victimization, this study examined the moderating effect of reciprocal friends' prosociality on the link between a child's reactive aggression and victimization. The study also investigated whether a similar moderating effect could be found with respect to sibling's prosociality, given that sibling relationships have been found to provide social benefits comparable to friendships. These questions were addressed using a sample of 246 six‐year‐old twin pairs (246 boys and 246 girls). The results showed that a child's own reactive aggression uniquely contributed to the risk of victimization for both boys and girls. The link between reactive aggression and victimization was, however, moderated by reciprocal friends' prosocial behavior and siblings' prosocial behavior, respectively. The results are discussed in terms of their theoretical and prevention‐related implications for children at risk for peer victimization.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it