Physical and relational bullying and victimization: Differential relations with adolescent dating and sexual behavior
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Taking an evolutionary psychological perspective, we investigated whether involvement in bullying as a perpetrator or victim was more likely if adolescents reported having more dating and sexual partners than their peers, an indication of greater engagement in competition for mates. A total of 334 adolescents (173 boys, 160 girls) between the ages of 12 and 16 years (M = 13.6, SD = 1.3), recruited from community youth organizations, completed self-report measures of physical and relational bullying and victimization, as well as dating and sexual behavior. As predicted, pure physical bullying was positively associated with the number of dating and sexual partners, primarily for adolescent boys. Adolescent girls with more dating partners had greater odds of being relational bully-victims, in line with predictions. Finally, adolescent girls with more sexual partners were at greater risk of being physically victimized by peers, and greater involvement with dating and sexual partners was associated with higher odds of being a physical bully-victim. Results are discussed with respect to evolutionary theory and research in which adolescent boys may display strength and athleticism through physical bullying to facilitate intersexual selection, whereas relational bullying may be employed as a strategy to engage in intrasexual competition with rivals for mates. Aggr. Behav. 43:111-122, 2017. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it