MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The other side of the screen: The impact of perspective‐taking on adolescents’ online communication

2021· article· en· W3084068252 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Adolescence · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedia Influence and Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)PsychologyDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: In recent decades, adolescents' interactions with peers have increasingly transitioned online. While socially interactive technologies provide multiple avenues for positive communication between peers, adolescents may experience harmful online peer interactions, with such interactions negatively impacting their well-being. A paucity of work exists investigating how adolescents' characteristics are related to their communicative choices on social media and if such choices can be influenced by cues to consider a recipient. Addressing this gap, this work examines experimental manipulations of perspective-taking and individual differences in socio-cognitive skills as they relate to adolescents' communicative choices online. METHOD: Within individual sessions, 12- to 15-year-old Canadian participants (N = 72, 36 girls) viewed pictures of other adolescents on a simulated social media app similar to Snapchat and chose between pre-written aggressive or prosocial comments to send to a recipient under three conditions: a perspective-taking cue, a time-delay, no delay. Participants also completed self-report questionnaires assessing emotion regulation and empathy. RESULTS: Following perspective-taking cues, participants chose more prosocial comments to send compared to when participants were permitted to choose a comment immediately after viewing another adolescent's picture, while controlling for a brief time-delay. Adolescents' individual characteristics (i.e., Social Media Use, State Mood, Affective Empathy, Gender) were associated with their communicative choices online. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this work provide new insight into the ways adolescents navigate their complex and increasingly online peer interactions. Further, the results suggest that adolescents' social media communication is malleable with a brief perspective-taking cue to consider a recipient.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.622
Threshold uncertainty score0.291

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.065
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.278 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it