MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2100979325 · doi:10.1177/0743558409341080

Adolescent Peer Relationships and Emerging Adult Romantic Styles

2009· article· en· W2100979325 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

VenueJournal of Adolescent Research · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAttachment and Relationship Dynamics
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRomancePsychologyExploratory researchInterpersonal communicationLongitudinal studyDevelopmental psychologyPeer groupInterpersonal relationshipStyle (visual arts)Early adulthoodSocial psychologyYoung adult

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study extends understanding of romantic development in the emerging adult years by using an 8-year longitudinal design in Italy. Peer groups at age 13, interpersonal functioning and emotion regulation at age 17, and romantic styles at age 21 were measured in 388 youth. Early peer groups were shown to be indirectly associated with two romantic outcomes: a consolidated style and an exploratory style. As mediators, interpersonal functioning was integral to both longitudinal trajectories, while emotion regulation was unique to the exploratory one. Results provide empirical support for the heterogeneous nature and paths of developing romantic relationships in emerging adulthood and the lasting effects of early peer groups on romantic development beyond adolescence. Results are discussed in consideration of Italian culture.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.472
Teacher spread0.375 · 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