Monthly Instability in Early Adolescent Friendship Networks and Depressive Symptoms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This study examined (1) the relation between perceived friendship instability and depressive symptoms, (2) the directionality of this link, and (3) whether the relation between friendship instability and depressive symptoms would differ according to specific friendship status (best and secondary friendships) and contexts (school, non‐school, and multiple). Participants were 102 young adolescents (51 girls; M age = 12 years) who completed a series of five monthly telephone interviews and in‐class questionnaires. Results suggested that friendship instability over a five‐month period was significantly associated with an increase in depressed mood. Regarding the directionality of the influence, cross‐lag analyses revealed that elevated depressive symptoms at one time point significantly predicted an increase in friendship instability by the following month, whereas friendship instability at one time point did not predict an increase in depressive symptoms the next month. Finally, participants' depressed mood appeared to be associated with instability in their best friendships (but not secondary friendships) and in their school friendships (but not non‐school and multi‐context friendships). The theoretical and practical implications of the results 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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".