Longitudinal trajectories of social reticence with unfamiliar peers across early childhood.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Behavioral inhibition is a temperament assessed in the toddler period via children's responses to novel contexts, objects, and unfamiliar adults. Social reticence is observed as onlooking, unoccupied behavior in the presence of unfamiliar peers and is linked to earlier behavioral inhibition. In the current study, we assessed behavioral inhibition in a sample of 262 children at ages 2 and 3, and then assessed social reticence in these same children as they interacted with an unfamiliar, same-age, same-sex peer at 2, 3, 4, and 5 years of age. As expected, early behavioral inhibition was related to social reticence at each age. However, multiple trajectories of social reticence were observed including High-Stable, High-Decreasing, and Low-Increasing, with the High-Stable and High-Decreasing trajectories associated with greater behavioral inhibition compared to the Low-Increasing trajectory. In addition, children in the High-Stable social reticence trajectory were rated higher than all others on 60-month Internalizing problems. Children in the Low-Increasing trajectory were rated higher on 60-month Externalizing problems than children in the High-Decreasing trajectory. These results illustrate the multiple developmental pathways for behaviorally inhibited toddlers and suggest patterns across early childhood associated with heightened risk for psychopathology.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".