Smiling through the shyness: The adaptive function of positive affect in shy children.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Most research treats shyness as a homogenous phenomenon when examining its correlates and consequences, which limits the identification of specific groups of shy children who may be at differential risk for maladaptive social outcomes. Here, we examined whether different types of shyness were uniquely associated with social adjustment and physiological stress reactivity in school-age children (n = 92; Mage = 7.47 years; SD = 2.23 years). During the completion of a videotaped self-presentation task, behavioral measures of positivity and avoidance were coded in order to derive shyness groups (i.e., positive shy: high positivity and high avoidance; negative shy: low positivity and high avoidance; and non-shy: low avoidance). Further, during the self-presentation task, direct observation of activity level was coded, and salivary cortisol reactivity to the social stressor was measured. We also collected parent- and teacher report of children's social anxiety, and parent report of children's sociability. We found that negative shy children were more socially anxious according to both parent- and teacher report, less sociable, and they also displayed reduced activity levels during the speech than the positive shy and non-shy children. Positive shy and non-shy children were indistinguishable across all measures of social behavior. Shyness group had no influence on children's cortisol stress reactivity. Our findings provide support for heterogeneity in the expression of shyness, and highlight that not all shy children experience poor social adjustment. Expression of positivity during socially threatening situations may have an adaptive social function in shy school-age children, as it is associated with reduced social anxiety and increased sociability. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".