Emotional competencies in emerging adolescence: relations between teacher ratings and student self-reports
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This cross-sectional study examines gender-informed teachers’ and early adolescents’ reports of emotional competencies within the school setting. The sample for the current study consisted of 290 emerging adolescents (114 boys, 170 girls) recruited from 24 schools. Social-emotional competencies were assessed by students’ self-report questionnaires and teacher and parent reports. Results showed significant positive associations between teacher-rated emotional competencies and emerging adolescents’ self-reports with three of the four Interpersonal Reactivity Index subscales (Perspective Taking, r = .231, p = .000; Fantasy, r = .303, p = .000; and Empathetic Concern, r = .196, p = .007). Significant gender differences were also found as both adults and adolescents’ rated girls as showing greater emotional competencies than boys. Results are discussed in terms of future research directions and implications for educational strategies and practices to help build prosocial and emotional abilities and behaviours.
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".