Managing Threat: Do Social‐Cognitive Processes Mediate the Link Between Peer Victimization and Adjustment Problems in Early Adolescence?
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
Peer victimization has been linked concurrently and over time with multiple adjustment problems. However, the reasons for this multi‐finality in victimization are not well understood. The current study examines social‐cognitive processes (hostile attributions, social perspective awareness, and interpersonal skills) as mediators of the relations between subtypes of peer victimization (relational, physical) and depression and anxiety, social withdrawal, and physical aggression in early adolescence. The overall pattern of associations among subtypes of victimization, social‐cognitive processes, and adjustment converged with expectations that victimization biases adolescents' cognitions about peers in conflict situations and skills relating to peers. In turn, these cognitions and skills differentially compromised their ability to regulate diverse emotions or limit reticent behaviors in response to peer threats. Modest gender differences in these associations were found.
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 | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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