MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399356077 · doi:10.1111/cfs.13207

Developmental Trajectories of Cybervictimization Among Canadian Adolescents: The Impact of Socializing Online and Sharing Personal Information

2024· article· en· W4399356077 on OpenAlexaffabout
Bowen Xiao, Jennifer D. Shapka

Bibliographic record

VenueChild & Family Social Work · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBullying, Victimization, and Aggression
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)PsychologySample (material)Developmental psychologyLongitudinal studyMedicineGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The goal of the present study was to investigate the developmental trajectories of cybervictimization, as well as to identify how risk factors such as the sharing of personal information online and engaging in online socializing was related to cybervictimization from age 13 to 16 for Canadian adolescents. Participants included 354 adolescents from the Lower Mainland of British Columbia who were in Grades 6 and 7 at Wave 1 of the study (193 boys, M age = 13.65 years, SD = 0.71 year). Three years of longitudinal data on cybervictimization, sharing personal information online and time spent socializing online were collected from self‐reports surveys. Results from latent class growth analysis identified three different trajectories of cybervictimization: a moderate‐increasing trajectory (49 adolescents, 12.7% of the sample), low‐increasing trajectory (292 adolescents, 75.8% of the sample) and high‐decreasing trajectory (13 adolescents, 3.44% of the sample). Adolescents who reported higher scores on sharing personal information and socializing online were more likely to be in moderate‐increasing subgroup. This study makes a substantial contribution to our understanding of the developmental trajectories of cybervictimization in a Western context, from late childhood through to early adolescent.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.212
Threshold uncertainty score0.981

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChild & Family Social WorkSame topicBullying, Victimization, and AggressionFrench-language works237,207