Personality and gender differences in friendship needs and experiences in preadolescence and young adulthood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Personality and gender differences in close same-sex friendship needs and experiences were investigated in two samples. Participants were 312 university students (217 women, M age 1/4 19.5) and 491 preadolescents (269 girls, M age 1/4 11.87). Participants completed several questionnaires yielding scores for communion and agency (personality), communal and agentic friendship needs, actual communal and agentic provisions of a best friendship, and affective functioning (satisfaction with the best friendship, loneliness). Findings revealed that close friendship serves both communal (connection) and agentic (social prominence) needs. Agency and/or communion predicted friendship needs and experiences and affective correlates of failure to meet friendship needs (friendship satisfaction, loneliness). Thus, friendship is not a homogeneous experience, but is shaped by the dispositions of the individuals who comprise it. Gender differences emerged in communal and agentic friendship needs and experiences; however, consensus among male and female participants regarding the functions of close friendship fails to support strong claims regarding gender-differentiated “worlds.”
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".