MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Social Cognitions of Socially Withdrawn Children

2004· article· en· W2089800109 on OpenAlex

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

VenueSocial Development · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBullying, Victimization, and Aggression
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyAttributionAssertivenessSocial cognitionDevelopmental psychologyPreferenceCognitionPsychological interventionAggressionPeer groupSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The purpose of this study was to examine the social cognitions of peer‐identified socially withdrawn children. Participants included 457 children from grades four, five and six (54% females, 46% males). Children completed a selection of self‐ and peer‐report measures including: (1) peer‐rated behavioral nominations; (2) hostile intent biases and social responses to ambiguous situations; (3) social goals and self‐efficacy; and (4) a newly developed measure of causal attributions. An extreme groups procedure was used to identify three groups of children: (1) socially withdrawn (n = 50); (2) aggressive (n = 53); and (3) a comparison group (n = 206). As compared with their peers, withdrawn children displayed a pattern of self‐defeating attributions for social situations, reported lower efficacy for assertive goals, and indicated a preference for non‐assertive, withdrawn strategies to deal with hypothetical conflict situations. Findings are discussed with respect to implications for interventions, and directions for further research are presented.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.942
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.281 · 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