Does shyness interact with peer group affiliation in predicting substance use in adolescence?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cigarette use and binge drinking are risky behaviors emerging during adolescence. Although many beneficial factors are well documented, studies linking shyness to substance use are somehow conflicting, which may be due to the contribution of moderators. Therefore, the present study has 2 objectives: (a) to prospectively analyze the association between shyness and substance use during adolescence, and (b) to test the moderating role of peer group affiliation on the relationship between shyness and substance use. Participants are 1447 adolescents from the Quebec Longitudinal Study of Child Development, a representative cohort of single-birth children born between 1997 and 1998 in the province of Quebec, Canada. Shyness was assessed at age 12 years. Peer group affiliation, as well as past year cigarette use and binge drinking were assessed at age 15 years. Logistic regressions were used to analyze the data. All analyses were carried out using weighted data accounting for the complex multistage sample design. Results show that shyness negatively predicts the use of tobacco and the occurrence of binge drinking while controlling for confounding variables. However, shyness does not interact with peer group affiliation in predicting substance use. This is the first study that confirms the presence of a negative relationship between shyness and substance use during adolescence over a 3-year period. Results suggest that shyness could exert a beneficial effect against substance use notwithstanding the adolescent's social context. (PsycINFO Database Record
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".