A study of effects of trait shyness and regulation of emotional expression on satisfaction and dyadic behavior of friendship
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of the trait shyness and the regulation of emotional expression on close friendship behavior at both cognitive and behavioral level. Two hundred and thirty-one undergraduates (111 males and 120 females) completed a) Trait shyness scale, b) regulation of emotional expression scale, c) self-rated satisfaction of friendship and d) checklist of dyadic behaviors with their close friends. The main results were as follows: i) Shy males were less satisfied and had fewer behaviors with their friends than not-shy males. ii) Shy females had fewer behaviors with their friends than not-shy females. iii) Females who marked a high score on regulation of emotional expression were less satisfied of their friendship than low scorers. iv) Only for males, the interaction effects of trait shyness and regulation of emotional expression on close friendships were partly confirmed. The results indicate that trait shyness has negative effects on both dyadic behavior of friendship and friendship satisfaction though excessive emotion expression has negative effects only on friendship satisfaction.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".