MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2060431242 · doi:10.1177/0272431608320126

Bullying and Stress in Early Adolescence

2008· article· en· W2060431242 on OpenAlex
Chiaki Konishi, Shelley Hymel

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Early Adolescence · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBullying, Victimization, and Aggression
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyDistractionCoping (psychology)Clinical psychologySocial supportCoping behaviorStress (linguistics)Injury preventionDevelopmental psychologyHuman factors and ergonomicsMultilevel modelPoison controlSocial psychologyMedicineMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Prior research from Norway and Japan has demonstrated positive relationships between stress and bullying—The more stress students experience, the more they engage in bullying. The modest correlations, however, suggest that other variables may moderate the stress-bullying link, serving as protective factors that make such negative responses to stress less likely for some individuals. This study examined the stress-buffering roles of coping and social support in reducing the likelihood of bullying in response to stress. Students in Grades 5-7 ( N = 312) completed questionnaires assessing stress levels (daily hassles, stressful events), coping strategies (active, avoidance, distraction, support seeking), social support (from peers, family, teachers), and bullying. Consistent with previous research, correlational analyses indicated that stress is significantly related to self-reported bullying but not to peer-assessed bullying. Regression analyses revealed that family support moderated and distraction coping amplified the stress-bullying relationship.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.453

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.251 · 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