How Do Individual Predispositions and Family Dynamics Contribute to Academic Adjustment Through the Middle School Years? The Mediating Role of Friends’ Characteristics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the mediating effect of friends' characteristics (problem behavior and academic achievement) in the association between students' background (family and individual factors) and later academic adjustment, as operationalized by problem behavior and academic achievement. We recruited 998 participants in three public middle schools and used three annual waves of data collection (Grades 6, 7, and 8). We found that students' own academic achievement and problem behavior are predictors of later adjustment. Friendship choices are identified as a mediation mechanism that contributes to consistent adjustment from the beginning to the end of middle school. Specifically, high-achieving students in Grade 6 tend to associate with high-achieving friends and are unlikely to associate with friends who exhibit problem behavior in Grade 7, which results in continued achievement in Grade 8. Associating with high-achieving friends in Grade 7 also mediated the link between adolescent problem behavior in Grade 6 and academic achievement by Grade 8. Friends' characteristics in Grade 7 did not mediate the effect of any family factor measured in Grade 6. In general, our results suggest friendship selection is central to sustained success throughout the middle school years.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".