MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2566194732 · doi:10.4018/ijcbpl.2016100104

Adolescent Problematic Gaming and Domain-Specific Perceptions of Self

2016· article· en· W2566194732 on OpenAlexaff
Devin J. Mills, Jessica Mettler, Michael J. Sornberger, Nancy L. Heath

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Cyber Behavior Psychology and Learning · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicImpact of Technology on Adolescents
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerceptionPsychologyFriendshipVideo gameAffect (linguistics)Social psychologyAssociation (psychology)Developmental psychologySocial perception

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Problematic video game use (PVGU) is an inability to meet personal and social responsibilities due to video gaming. It is estimated to affect 5 to 6% of adolescents. Research demonstrates greater video game engagement is associated with a poorer perception of self in several domains; however, the relation between PVGU and self-perception has not yet be examined. The present study explored this association using a sample of 758 Grade 7 adolescents (55.1% Female; Mage= 12.34 years; SD = 0.49 years). Results revealed greater PVGU to be associated with a poorer perception of self within the behavioural conduct and close friendship domains. Similar differences emerged when examining reports of self-perception across the PVGU classifications (i.e., None, Minimal, At-Risk, Problematic). Unexpectedly, two interactions between gender and PVGU classifications were observed for the behavioural conduct and self-worth domains of self-perception. The discussion addresses the implications of these findings and points to areas of future research.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.140
Threshold uncertainty score0.245

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.339 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Cyber Behavior Psychology and LearningSame topicImpact of Technology on AdolescentsFrench-language works237,207