MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2131803571 · doi:10.1080/15374410802359619

Own and Friends' Smoking Attitudes and Social Preference as Early Predictors of Adolescent Smoking

2008· article· en· W2131803571 on OpenAlexaff
Roy Otten, Brigitte Wanner, Frank Vitaro, Rutger C. M. E. Engels

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSmoking Behavior and Cessation
Canadian institutionsResearch Unit on Children's Psychosocial MaladjustmentUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyPreferencePersonalityDevelopmental psychologyCigarette smokingSocial psychologyClinical psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examined the role of friends' attitudes in adolescent smoking (N = 203). Growth mixture modeling was used to identify three trajectories of smoking behavior from ages 12 to 14 years: a low-rate group, an increasing-rate group, and a high-rate group. Adolescents' own and their friends' attitudes at age 11 years were not significantly related to smoking. However, in the increasing-rate group (compared with the low-rate group), friends' attitudes interacted with both adolescents' own and friends' social preference (i.e., likeability). The link between friends' attitudes and membership in the increasing-rate group was stronger for early adolescents with low social preference scores and for early adolescents with friends who had low social preference scores. Other than for the high-rate group, for which causal factors of smoking may be located early in childhood (e.g., family and personality or temperamental characteristics), the combination of low social preference and friends who hold a positive attitude toward smoking is associated with escalating cigarette use among young adolescents.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.115
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.298 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Child & Adolescent PsychologySame topicSmoking Behavior and CessationFrench-language works237,207