Neighborhood Effects on Children's Development in Experimental and Nonexperimental Research
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
Children's neighborhood contexts are defined by rising socioeconomic inequality and segregation. This article reviews several decades of research on how neighborhood socioeconomic conditions are associated with children's development. The nonexperimental literature suggests that the most salient neighborhood socioeconomic condition depends on the outcome—disadvantage for social, emotional, and behavioral outcomes and advantage for achievement-related outcomes. Moreover, children's cumulative exposure to neighborhood socioeconomic conditions over the first two decades of life, and possibly especially in childhood, may matter most for later development. These findings are partially supported by the few experimental studies available, and across study designs, neighborhood effects are typically modest. In order to improve our understanding of this topic, we recommend methodologically rigorous designs—experimental and nonexperimental—and comparative approaches, particularly ones addressing the complexities of development in neighborhood contexts. To guide this research, we provide an integrated framework that captures a broad and dynamic perspective including macro forces, neighborhood social processes and resources, physical features, spatial dynamics, and individual differences.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it