Youth in Group Home Care: An Investigation of Negative Peer Influence and Youth Antisocial Behavior
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The risk of delinquent to antisocial behaviors among youth (teenagers) seem to be more prevalent in group homes than other foster homes. The aim of this study was to examine the association between negative peer influence and youth antisocial behaviors in group homes. Participants were 875 youth aged 10 to 17 at baseline (2010–2011). Logistic regression modeled antisocial behavior and tested the hypothesis that negative peer influence will predict youth antisocial behaviors cross sectionally at baseline and longitudinally after 3-year follow up, and negative peer influence will be moderated by group home size. The Ontario Looking after Children database was used for analysis. Findings indicate that negative peer influence predicts youths’ risk of antisocial behavior (at baseline). The risk increased almost five folds in 3 years. At baseline ( OR = 1.65) and ( OR = 4.90) after 3 years. Generally, findings suggest negative peer influence underscores youth antisocial behaviors in group homes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".