Factors that promote and impede other-sex friendships: a qualitative study of Iranian adolescent girls
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: The aim of this study was to identify factors that promote and impede other-sex (OS) friendships in adolescent girls. METHODS: A qualitative study conducted with 20 adolescent girls recruited in public places in Tehran, Iran. Information was collected through semi-structured interviews and coded via the conventional qualitative content analysis approach. RESULTS: Four factors were identified that appeared to promote entry into OS friendships. These factors include (a) a poor understanding of perceived risks, (b) weak religious beliefs, (c) processes of identity formation, and (d) low self-esteem. In addition, six factors appeared to impede entry into these friendships: (a) self-confidence, (b) prioritizing education, (c) maintaining particular entertainment preferences, (d) awareness of prior unpleasant experiences with boys, (e) having strong religious convictions, and (f) shaming from significant others. CONCLUSION: These findings provide unique insights into the factors that stem from different levels of social complexity, which affect participation in a fundamental form of human experience.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".