iGen or <i>shy</i> Gen? Generational Differences in Shyness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Generation Z (1997–2012) has been characterized in the popular media as more socially inhibited, cautious, and risk averse than prior generations, but are these differences found between generations on an empirical level? And, if so, are these differences observable within generations in response to acute events such as the COVID-19 pandemic? Using a simplified time-lagged design to control for age effects, we examined between-group differences in self-reported shyness in young adult participants ( N = 806, age: 17–25 years) at the same developmental age and university from the millennial generation (tested: 1999–2001; n = 266, M age = 19.67 years, 72.9% female) and Generation Z (tested: 2018–2020), the latter generation stratified into prepandemic ( n = 263, M = 18.86 years, 82.4% female) and midpandemic ( n = 277, M age = 18.67 years, 79.6% female) groups. After first establishing measurement invariance to ensure trustworthy group comparisons, we found significantly higher mean levels of shyness across each successive cohort, starting with millennials, through Generation Z before the pandemic, to Generation Z during the pandemic.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.006 | 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".