Emotional clarity development and psychosocial outcomes during adolescence.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Past research on emotional clarity (EC), the ability to identify and label one's own emotions, has illustrated an association between EC deficits and poor psychosocial outcomes during the adolescent years. Although past research has connected EC to psychosocial outcomes during adolescence in cross-sectional and longitudinal designs, no studies have traced the trajectory of EC over time to determine the developmental course of the construct during adolescence. Thus, this study investigated how EC developed over five years during adolescence and what factors were associated with the developmental trajectory of emotional clarity. Participants included a diverse sample of 640 adolescents (M age at Time 1 = 12.55 years; 53.0% female; 52.2% African American; 48.0% eligible for free school lunch). Results indicated that EC tended to decrease over adolescence, and females, on average, had a steeper decline of EC over time than males. The trajectory of EC predicted psychosocial outcomes, including depression and well-being. Results are discussed with the ultimate goal of informing novel prevention and intervention programs to promote adaptive emotional functioning during an influential time in human development. (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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".