MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Advanced theory of mind in adolescence: Do age, gender and friendship style play a role?

2017· article· en· W2589691014 on OpenAlex
Marta Białecka‐Pikul, Anna Kołodziejczyk, Sandra Bosacki

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Adolescence · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Animal Learning Development
Canadian institutionsBrock University
FundersNarodowe Centrum Nauki
KeywordsFriendshipPsychologyStyle (visual arts)Developmental psychologyAdolescent developmentTheory of mindSocial psychologyCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ability to recursively infer the mental states of others to explain their complex behavior in ambiguous social situation may be called Advanced Theory of Mind (aToM). The relations between two components of aToM, cognitive and affective, measured on a behavioral level in 151 Polish 13-year-olds and 174 16-year-olds was examined. The role of age, gender and friendship style and its relations to the cognitive and affective aToM was explored. Cognitive aToM was only weakly to moderately related to affective aToM. Across both age groups females scored higher than males. Males' aToM abilities did not differ according to age, but they scored higher in the cognitive aToM than affective ToM. Also, different aspects of friendship style were significant predictors of both aToM abilities. The implications for two aToM components within a gendered social context were discussed.

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 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 score0.085
Threshold uncertainty score0.524

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.286 · 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