Dominance among unfamiliar peers starts in infancy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dominance has been conceived for a long time in terms of asymmetry in agonistic conflicts. But this conception has shown its limits in the complexity of children's social worlds. Today, dominance is rather conceived in terms of asymmetry in resource control within children's dyads. Some observational studies have been done in this context, but only on small groups of familiar children and often up to 3 years of age. Our aim was to reveal whether asymmetry in resource control would occur between younger children who met each other for the first time in the presence of an attractive toy. We observed 201 dyads of 19-month-old unfamiliar peers in four repetitive competitive sessions for a toy. Resource control and asymmetry between participants were highly consistent between sessions. The level of asymmetry in resource control between participants was very high. This asymmetry was influenced neither by gender nor by age, and coercive behaviors in the situation, physical aggression rated by parents, birth order, and day-care habits did not account for the asymmetry in our setting. However, body size at birth (although not at the time of testing) and anxiety rated by parents contributed significantly to the asymmetry in resource control.
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 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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".