Do other people's plights matter? A genetically informed twin study of the role of social context in the link between peer victimization and children's aggression and depression symptoms.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Using a genetically informed design, this study examined the additive and interactive effects of genetic risk, personal peer victimization experiences, and peer victimization experienced by others on children's aggression and depression symptoms. Of major interest was whether these effects varied depending on whether or not the victimized others were children's close friends. The sample comprised 197 monozygotic and same-sex dizygotic twin pairs reared together (95 female pairs) assessed in Grade 4. Each twin's victimization experiences and victimization experienced by his or her friends and other classmates were measured using individuals' reports about their own levels of peer victimization. Aggression was assessed using peer nominations, and depression was measured using self-reports. Indicative of a possible social-learning mechanism or the emotional contagion of anger, multilevel regressions showed that personal victimization experiences were related to especially high levels of aggression when close friends where also highly victimized, albeit only in boys. Moreover, in line with social comparison theory, the effect of frequent personal victimization experiences on depressive feelings was much weaker when close friends were also highly victimized than when close friends were not or were only rarely victimized. Finally, a high level of peer victimization experienced by other classmates was related to a lower level of aggression in girls and boys, possibly because of a heightened sense of threat in classrooms where many suffer attacks from bullies. All of these results were independent of children's genetic risk for aggression or depression. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".