Social wariness, preference for solitude, and peer difficulties in middle childhood: A longitudinal family-informed study.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study examined, within a longitudinal family-informed design and across middle childhood, the predictive associations between preference for solitude and social wariness, two forms of social withdrawal, and peer difficulties. Specifically, preference for solitude, rather than social wariness, was expected to predict peer victimization and rejection, two aspects of peer difficulties. A total of 1,014 children from the Quebec Newborn Twin Study were assessed by teachers and peers at ages 6, 7, and 10 years. Multilevel analyses conducted across three levels, between family, within family, and within person, revealed that preference for solitude, rather than social wariness, increased the risk for peer difficulties in terms of both peer victimization and peer rejection. Specifically, preference for solitude was systematically associated with peer rejection starting at age 6 years and became progressively associated with peer victimization over time. This pattern was found both between and within families. In addition, the predictive association with peer rejection was found within genetically identical, monozygotic twin pairs, suggesting that this predictive association existed after taking into account genetic vulnerabilities. Social wariness was systematically unrelated to peer difficulties. These findings suggest that preference for solitude, rather than social wariness, is a risk factor for peer difficulties. They underscore the relevance of distinguishing these dimensions of social withdrawal and illustrate the usefulness of a family-informed design to document the processes underlying childhood social adjustment. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".