The Factors That Influence and Protect Against Power Imbalance in Covert Bullying Among Preadolescent Children at School
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article, the perceptions of preadolescent children (ages 9-11) regarding factors that influence and protect against power imbalance associated with covert aggression and bullying are explored. In aggression research, the term covert has been typically used to describe relational, indirect, and social acts of aggression that are hidden. These behaviors contrast with overt physical and verbal aggression. Children have previously conveyed their belief that covert aggression is harmful because adults do not see it even though children, themselves, are aware. We used focus groups to explore children's understanding of covert aggression and to identify children's experience and perception of adult support in relation to bullying. Thematic analysis supported the definition of covert aggression as that which is intentionally hidden from adults. Friendship, social exclusion, and secret from teacher were identified as factors that influence power imbalance, while support from friends and adult support protected against power imbalance.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".