Personal and familial predictors of peer victimization trajectories from primary to secondary school.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Using a sample of 767 children (403 girls, 364 boys), this study aimed to (a) identify groups with distinct trajectories of peer victimization over a 6-year period from primary school through the transition to secondary school, and (b) examine the associated personal (i.e., aggression or internalizing problems) and familial (family status, socioeconomic status, the parent-child relationship) predictors. Peer victimization was assessed via self-reports from Grades 4 through 9 (ages 10 through 15 years), aggression and internalizing problems were assessed in Grade 4 via peer nominations, and the parent-child relationship was assessed in Grade 7 (i.e., right after the transition to secondary school) via parent-reports. Growth Mixture modeling revealed 1 group (62%) who experienced little victimization in primary school and even less in secondary school, another group (31%) who was victimized in primary but not or much less in secondary school, and a third group (7%) who was chronically victimized in both school contexts. Boys were more likely than girls to follow any elevated victimization trajectory. Chronic victimization across primary and secondary school was predicted by nonintact family status and a combination of both internalizing problems and aggression compared with nonvictimized youth. In contrast, transitory victimization during primary but not in secondary school was predicted by aggression, but not internalizing problems. Support as well as conflict in the parent-child relationship also showed significant, albeit distinct associations with the different peer victimization trajectories. (PsycINFO Database Record
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".