Developmental Associations Between Media Use and Adolescent Prosocial Behavior
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
Youth today spend a tremendous amount of time with digital media. The purpose of the present study was to estimate developmental associations between screen media use between the ages of 15 and 17 and corresponding changes in prosocial behavior. Participants ( N = 1,509) were part of the Quebec Longitudinal Study of Child Development, a population-based study of children born in the province of Quebec, Canada. Youth self-reported internet and video game use and television or movies/DVD viewing, as well as prosocial behavior at the ages of 15 and 17. Analyses were conducted using multilevel linear modelling to account for between-, within-, and lagged-person effects. Internet and video game use accounted for less prosocial behavior at the within-person and lagged-person levels. Television use also accounted for lagged-person effects in prosocial behavior. Finally, internet use and television viewing contributed to between person differences in prosocial behavior. Our study presents strong statistical evidence that media use during adolescence can undermine the development of prosocial behavior.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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