A cross-cultural analysis of the relations of physical and relational aggression with peer victimization
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
To better address the many consequences of peer victimization, research must identify not only aspects of individuals that put them at risk for victimization, such as aggression, but also aspects of the context that influence the extent of that risk. To this end, this study examined the contextual influences of gender, same-sex peer group norms of physical and relational aggression, and nationality on the associations of physical and relational aggression with peer victimization in early adolescents from Canada, China, Brazil, and Colombia ( N = 865; M age = 11.01, SD = 1.24; 55% boys). Structural equation modeling was used to test for measurement invariance of the latent constructs. Multilevel modeling revealed that both forms of aggression were positive predictors of peer victimization, but physical aggression was a stronger predictor for girls than boys. Cross-national differences emerged in levels of peer victimization, such that levels were highest in Brazil and lowest in Colombia. Cross-national differences were also evidenced in the relationship between relational aggression and victimization: the relationship was positive in China, Brazil, and Canada (listed in descending order of magnitude), but negative in Colombia. Above and beyond the cross-national differences, physical aggression was a stronger predictor of victimization in peer groups low in physical aggression, and relational aggression was a stronger predictor in peer groups low in relational aggression. Ultimately, this research is intended to contribute to a better theoretical understanding of risk factors for peer victimization and the development of more effective and culturally-appropriate prevention and intervention efforts.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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