Social Interactions With Familiar and Unfamiliar Peers in Chinese Children: Relations With Social, School, and Psychological Adjustment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined how interactions with familiar and unfamiliar peers were associated with social, school, and psychological adjustment in Chinese children. A sample of children ( N = 256, 104 boys and 152 girls, M age = 11 years, ranging from 9 to 13 years) engaged in free play sessions in quartets consisting of 2 pairs of familiar children. Information on the relative proportion of time spent interacting with familiar, unfamiliar, and mixed peers was obtained from videotaped observations. Data on social (e.g., leadership, victimization), school (e.g., school competence, learning problems), and psychological (e.g., perceived self-worth, depression) adjustment were collected from multiple sources including teacher ratings, self-reports, and school records. The results showed that interaction with familiar peers was positively associated with social and school competence and negatively associated with social, behavioral, and learning problems. Interaction with mixed familiar and unfamiliar peers was positively associated with indexes of psychological adjustment and negatively associated with psychological problems. In addition, interaction with unfamiliar peers was infrequent and not associated with adjustment or problems. The results indicate that social interactions with different types of peers may reflect different aspects of competence among Chinese children.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".