Young children's preference for solitary play: Implications for socio‐emotional and school adjustment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to provide additional psychometric support for the Preference for Solitary Play Interview (PSPI) and to examine the associations between self-reported preference for solitary play and indices of adjustment in early childhood. Participants were N = 340 children attending kindergarten and grade 1. Children completed the PSPI, and teachers provided assessments of children's socio-emotional and school adjustment. In support of the validity of the PSPI, preference for solitary play was positively associated with asocial behaviours. Further, preference for solitary play displayed an indirect (but not direct) association with peer exclusion via asocial behaviours. Findings are discussed in terms of the social and behavioural implications of preference for solitary play in early childhood. Statement of contribution What is already known on this subject? Children who spend more time alone are at increased risk of adjustment difficulties. However, some individuals desire to spend time alone because of an appreciation for solitude. A preference for solitude is not associated with negative adjustment in adults and older youth. What does this study add? This study is among the first to examine self-reported preference for solitary in early childhood. Preference for solitude may not be related to emotional or school difficulties in young children. However, a heightened display of solitary behaviours may still evoke negative responses from peers.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".