A Test of the Bistrategic Control Hypothesis of Adolescent Popularity
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Resource Control Theory (Hawley, 1999) posits a group of bistrategic popular youth who attain status through coercive strategies while mitigating fallout via prosociality. This study identifies and distinguishes this bistrategic popular group from other popularity types, tracing the adjustment correlates of each. Adolescent participants (288 girls, 280 boys; Mage = 12.50 years) completed peer nominations in the Fall and Spring of the seventh and eighth grades. Longitudinal latent profile analyses classified adolescents into groups based on physical and relational aggression, prosocial behavior, and popularity. Distinct bistrategic, aggressive, and prosocial popularity types emerged. Bistrategic popular adolescents had the highest popularity and above average aggression and prosocial behavior; they were viewed by peers as disruptive and angry but were otherwise well-adjusted.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 it