MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2150684030 · doi:10.1177/01650250544000008

Social withdrawal and maladjustment in a very group-oriented society

2005· article· en· W2150684030 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ibis Alvarez Valdivia, Barry H. Schneider, Kenia Lorenzo Chavez, Xinyin Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Behavioral Development · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLonelinessFriendshipPsychologyAggressionSocial isolationSocial withdrawalDevelopmental psychologyPeer groupSociometric statusSociometryClinical psychologySocial psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Elementary-school children in Cuba and Canada participated in measures of loneliness, sociometric status, friendship, aggression, and social withdrawal. Withdrawal was associated with loneliness in the Cuban data from both cohorts, Grade 4 and Grade 6. In the Canadian data, withdrawal was only linked to loneliness in Grade 6. In contrast with North American data, aggression was a significant correlate of loneliness in the Cuban data from both cohorts. Social withdrawal was more strongly linked with loneliness in a Grade 6 cohort than among children in Grade 4. Especially in the Cuban Grade 6 data, there was considerable evidence that peer acceptance/rejection mediates the link between problematic social withdrawal and loneliness. These data are interpreted in light of the known functions of the peer group in Cuban society in regulating social behaviours that may be interpreted as not participating in the collective group or undermining its behavioural norms.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.347
Threshold uncertainty score0.691

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.002
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.304 · 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

Citations35
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Behavioral DevelopmentSame topicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207