Preschoolers’ sharing expectations towards friends relate to their kindergarten peer status
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent research has provided evidence for a substantial impact of children's peer status on positive and adaptive development. The current study investigated how 3- to 7-year-old preschoolers' (N = 118) sharing behaviour and sharing expectations towards a friend and a non-friend relate to their popularity among their peers. Children distributed resources between themselves and a friend as well as themselves and a non-friend and predicted another protagonist's behaviour in the same situation. In addition, teachers rated children's problematic behaviour and peers rated children's peer status. Multilevel analysis revealed that preschoolers' sharing expectations towards their friends but not sharing behaviour predicted their peer status above and beyond the impact of problematic behaviour. Age did not emerge as an independent predictor. These findings suggest that knowledge about prosociality in the form of sharing expectations is an important aspect in children's adaptive social development and stress the relevance of children's knowledge about the social world for their social life. Statement of contribution What is already known on this subject? Prosocial behaviour in general relates positively to peer status. Problem behaviour relates negatively to peer status. Sharing behaviour and sharing expectations become more selective over the preschool years. What does this study add? Sharing expectations and to a lesser extent sharing behaviour relate to peer status. Sharing expectations predict peer status above and beyond the impact of problem behaviour. Differential sharing expectations predict peer status as well as simple sharing expectations.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".