Bullying in the Same-Sex Friendships of Young Adolescent Girls: A Qualitative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This qualitative, narrative study explored the bullying experiences of young adolescent girls within their same-sex dyadic and group friendships. The participants were 5 female students, ages 11 and 12 years old, from 1 private, religious school in southern Ontario. Each girl participated in an audiotaped, 30-minute, personal interview based on an unstructured interview protocol. Interview transcripts were analyzed for bullying behaviors using Marini and Dane's (2008) subtypes of bullying, including the form, function, and involvement in bullying. Interview transcripts were also analyzed for common and emerging themes using aspects of L. M., Brown and Gilligan's (1992) "Listener's Guide." The findings of this study suggested that within their same-sex friendships girls assume the roles of all participants in bullying, including bullies, victims, bystanders, and bully-victims. The findings also suggested that bullying behaviors within young adolescent girls' same-sex friendships are mainly indirect in their mode of attack and that they are both proactive and reactive. The bully behaviors identified in this study were used to inform the major themes or salient features within the dynamics of girls' same-sex friendships also identified. These themes included acceptance, intimacy, negotiation, inclusion/exclusion, moral character judgements, and power. The findings of this study will be used to inform current theory, personal and professional practice, as well as future research.
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 | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".