It takes two to tango: Preschool siblings’ musical play and prosociality in the home
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 In childhood, musical play is an important part of home life and, potentially, sibling play. Considering the social–emotional relevance of musical activities, siblings’ engagement in musical play may also be associated with social development. The current longitudinal study examined musical play in 39 pairs of siblings during naturalistic home play at two time points: (a) when siblings were 2 and 4 years old (T1), and (b) 2 years later when siblings were 4 and 6 years old (T2). Musical play, especially singing and dancing, was more prevalent at T2. Birth order effects were also revealed; 4‐year‐old second‐borns (T2) engaged in more solo musical play than 4‐year‐old firstborns (T1), but 4‐year‐old firstborns initiated joint musical play more often than 4‐year‐old second‐borns. Associations between musical play and prosociality also emerged. Specifically, both older and younger siblings’ rates of prosociality correlated positively with older sibling musical play at each time point. These findings reveal intriguing effects of age and birth order on both solo and joint musical play between siblings, and highlight a potential link between spontaneous musical play in the home and social development.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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