Prospective Links Between Friendship and Early Physical Aggression: Preliminary Evidence Supporting the Role of Friendship Quality Through a Dyadic Intervention
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Positive friendships have been related to decreasing levels of children's physical aggression over time. While this evidence calls for interventions aimed at helping children build good-quality friendships, tests of causality through experimental manipulations are still needed. The goal of this study was to examine whether an intervention aimed to increase dyadic friendship quality could decrease children's physical aggression at the peer-group level over a school year. A total of 34 aggressive children and each child's best friend were randomly assigned to two groups: an experimental condition where the members in each dyad participated together in 12 weekly intervention sessions and a no-intervention control condition. Multiple sources were used to evaluate changes in friendship quality and children's physical aggression. Results showed an indirect effect of the intervention on decreasing levels of physical aggression through the improvement of one specific feature of friendship quality: conflict resolution. These results point to the usefulness of including this relational aspect in intervention programs targeting aggressive children.
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".