An Investigation of Adolescents’ Reported and Self-Perceived Risk-Taking
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adolescence is a sensitive period for taking risks, yet research has not investigated whether adolescents who engage in risk-taking actually perceive themselves to be risk-takers. In the current study, students (Grade: 6-8, N = 437) reported on their frequency of risk-taking and perceptions of themselves as risk-takers, forming four groups of interest (aware risk-takers, unaware risk-takers, aware non-risk-takers, unaware non-risk-takers). We also investigated whether these groups were associated with engagement in certain types of risks. Overall, low-risk-takers had more accurate self-perceptions (i.e., greater awareness) compared with high risk-takers. Of concern, unaware high risk-takers engaged in more rule-breaking and adventurous risks compared with non-risk-takers, though they did not consider themselves to be risk-takers. It is possible that this group of adolescents may be less receptive to educational practices that target high risk-takers given that they do not consider themselves to be a risk-taker.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".