Missed Opportunities for Middle Childhood: Less Sport Predicts Increased Risk for Shyness in Millennial Girls with Preschool Access to Bedroom Television
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and Purpose: Childhood bedroom screens represent a risk factor for negative behavioral outcomes. Childhood sport participation might be a protective factor for potential negative associations with having a bedroom screen in early childhood. Methods: This study examines whether extracurricular sport participation in middle childhood reduces developmental risks associated with bedroom screens in boys and girls. We use a millennial birth cohort from the QLSCD. Children reported having a bedroom television at age 4 years. Parents reported child participation in sport from ages 6 to 10 years. We examine subsequent teacher-reported depressive symptoms and shyness outcomes by the end of sixth grade. We used linear regression to examine the interaction between child-reported bedroom television placement (age 4 years) and parent-reported childhood sport participation trajectories (ages 6 to 10 years) in predicting behavioral outcomes at age 12 years. Key Results: For girls, inconsistent extracurricular sport amplified the relationship between having a preschool bedroom television and subsequent shyness (b = 0.6212, SE = 0.3245, p < 0.05), beyond individual and family characteristics. Conclusions: Less consistent sport participation was associated with increased risk of shyness in girls having grown up with a bedroom television. These findings corroborate that extracurricular activity can be a suitable candidate for enhancing skills and social interactions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".