Adolescents’ explanations for romantic dissolutions: A developmental perspective
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
Our objective was to examine the prevalence and developmental significance of romantic break-ups in adolescence, a relatively unexplored area of study. We examined their occurrence in a sample of 910 adolescents, first noting the frequency of these events across age, gender, and romantic experience, and then analyzing the dissolution explanations provided by a subsample (N=211) who experienced a break-up within the past 6 months. Break-ups were reported by 23% of youth, especially those with extensive romantic experience. Most were described as self-initiated, especially by girls. Using a categorical-content approach, we determined that the majority of dissolution explanations reflected "fit failures" in meeting developmentally salient romantic needs, especially those related to interdependence. Patterns were consistent across gender and age, however, those with romantic experience focused most on unmet intimacy needs. We discuss the developmental significance of break-ups, noting continuity between the needs expressed in intact and dissolving relationships.
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 | 0.000 | 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 it