MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4284890038 · doi:10.1037/spq0000507

Chinese children’s heterogeneous friendship quality trajectories: Relations with school adjustment.

2022· article· en· W4284890038 on OpenAlexaff
Yuling Liu, E. Scott Huebner, Lili Tian

Bibliographic record

VenueSchool Psychology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsChild, Adolescent and Family Mental Health
FundersBasic and Applied Basic Research Foundation of Guangdong ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsFriendshipPsycINFOPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyLatent growth modelingQuality (philosophy)Class (philosophy)Social psychologyMEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

= 0.72 at Time 1) completed measures of relevant constructs on five occasions at 6-month intervals. Latent class growth modeling revealed four heterogeneous developmental trajectory classes of friendship quality: high-increasing (49.6%), moderate-decreasing (5.1%), moderate-increasing (31.9%), and low-stable (13.4%). Girls were more likely than boys to fall into the higher friendship quality trajectory classes in reference to the low-stable class. Children in the high-increasing class and low-stable class showed the best and the worst school adjustment, respectively. The identification of four heterogeneous developmental trajectories of friendship quality with differential school adjustment outcomes highlights the importance of intervention programs tailored to specific groups for promoting children's friendship quality and school adjustment. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.102
Threshold uncertainty score0.202

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.312 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSchool PsychologySame topicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207