Peers Increase Late Adolescents' Exploratory Behavior and Sensitivity to Positive and Negative Feedback
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adolescents take more risks with peers than when alone. It is not clear how peer presence affects adolescents' risky decision making, however. We used the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT)-a game used to assess decision making involving risk and reward-to examine how peers affect late adolescents' exploration of relevant environmental cues, ability to learn from the outcomes (positive and negative) of that exploration, and ability to integrate feedback to adjust behavior toward optimal long-term outcomes. One hundred and one 18- to 22-year old males (M = 19.8 years) were randomly assigned to play the IGT either alone or observed by peers. Late adolescents tested with observers engaged in more exploratory behavior, learned faster from both positive and negative outcomes, and evinced better task performance than those tested alone.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it