MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168664700 · doi:10.1177/0265407501186002

Social Support Networks and Self-Esteem of Idiocentric and Allocentric Children and Adolescents

2001· article· en· W2168664700 on OpenAlexaffabout
Joelle Dayan, Anna‐Beth Doyle, Dorothy Markiewicz

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Social and Personal Relationships · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCultural Differences and Values
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyDevelopmental psychologySelf-esteemEthnic groupSocial psychologyInterpersonal relationshipArabic

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

People who have an idiocentric value orientation tend to emphasize their own goals and needs over those of the groups to which they belong, and to be independent and self-reliant. Allocentric individuals tend to be cooperative, interdependent, and to have a stronger need to affiliate with others than idio-centrics. A goal of this study was to investigate how children's social relationships and self-esteem vary as a function of their allocentrism. Participants were 419 children between 9 and 18 years of age from a variety of ethnic backgrounds (French Canadian/Quebecois, Greek, Arabic, and Caribbean). As expected, allocentric children reported more social support from their peers than did idiocentric children. In addition, idiocentrics and allocentrics differed in their reported sources of intimacy and companionship, for example from best friends, mothers, and relatives. Also, the self-esteem of idiocentric children, but not of allocentric children, was predicted by social support from their best friend. Implications are that idiocentric and allocentric individuals seek out different members of their social networks to satisfy various needs, and to strengthen their self-esteem.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.363

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Social and Personal RelationshipsSame topicCultural Differences and ValuesFrench-language works237,207