Social competence in early childhood: An empirical validation of the SOCIAL model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Social skills are the basis of human interactions and functioning in society. Social competence (SC) is thought to evolve gradually during childhood and adolescence via the interplay of multiple factors. In particular, the early years of life are marked by the emergence of basic social abilities and constitute the foundation for successful social development. The biopsychosocial SOcio-Cognitive Integration of Abilities modeL (SOCIAL) posits that internal (child-based), external (environment), and cognitive factors are critical to SC in the context of normal brain maturation; but this has yet to be shown empirically and comprehensively. This study tested the SOCIAL model in a sample of typically developing preschool children. Parents of 103 children (M = 67.59 months, SD = 11.65) completed questionnaires and children underwent neuropsychological assessment of executive functioning (EF), communication skills and social cognition. Three-step hierarchical regression analyses (1) Internal factors, 2) External factors, 3) Cognitive factors) confirmed that each step of the regression model significantly predicted SC. In the final model, general cognitive and socio-cognitive factors significantly predicted SC above and beyond internal and external factors: children with lower temperamental negative affect and less parent-reported executive dysfunction, as well as better non-verbal communication and theory of mind had better SC. Our findings support the conceptual SOCIAL model, and highlight the importance of internal, external, and cognitive factors for SC in the preschool years. Identification of factors associated with early social development can inform both normative and clinical approaches to identifying intervention loci and optimizing SC in those at risk for maladaptive social functioning.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".