Evidence That Children and Adolescents Have Internal Models of Peer Interactions That Are Gender Differentiated
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
This study examined whether children's internal representations reflect gender differences that have been found in peer interactions. The dimensions examined were (1) preferences for dyadic or group situations, (2) whether children who are friends with a given target child are likely to be friends with each other, and (3) perceptions of the probability of knowing information about friends. Participants from preschool; grades 2, 6, 8, and 10; and college (N = 278) were asked questions about typical girls and boys. Results indicate that both girls and boys (1) rate typical boys as preferring group interactions more than do typical girls, a difference present as early as preschool; (2) rate typical boys as more likely than typical girls to be friends with one another if they are friends with the same target boy or girl respectively; and (3) rate typical girls as more likely than typical boys to know certain types of information about friends. These results are consistent with the existence of internal models of social interactions that are at least partially gender specific.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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