Assessment and Implications of Social Withdrawal Subtypes in Young Chinese Children: The Chinese Version of the Child Social Preference Scale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The authors' goals were to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Chinese version of the Child Social Preference Scale (CSPS; R. J. Coplan, K. Prakash, K. O'Neil, & M. Armer, 2004) and examine the links between both shyness and unsociability and indices of socioemotional functioning in young Chinese children. Participants included of two samples recruited from kindergarten classes in two public schools in Shanghai, China. Both samples included children 3-5 years old (Sample 1: n = 350, Mage = 4.72 years, SD = 0.58 years; Sample 2: n = 129, Mage = 4.40 years, SD = 0.58 years). In both samples, mothers rated children's social withdrawal using the newly created Chinese version of the CSPS, and in Sample 2, teachers also provided ratings of socioemotional functioning. Consistent with previous findings from other cultures, results from factor analyses suggested a 2-factor model for the CSPS (shyness and unsociability) among young children in China. In contrast to findings from North America, child shyness and unsociability were associated with socioemotional difficulties in kindergarten. Some gender differences were also noted. Results are discussed in terms of the assessment and implications of social withdrawal in early childhood in China.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".