Interrelations Among Adolescents’ Family Connections, Solitude Preferences, Theory of Mind and Perceptions of Academic and Work Competence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study explored the links among family connections, solitude preferences, perceptions of work (academic and job) competence, and Theory of Mind (ToM) in 73 Canadian adolescents aged 11-18 (M age = 13.1). Previous studies show significant connections among these factors, although little is known about how such associations may relate to one another, especially the role of young people's perceptions. To address these gaps in the literature, this study focused on adolescents' experiences and perceptions of their family relationships, solitude preferences, and competence in the school context and workplace. Participants completed a series of self-report measures, advanced ToM tasks and written explanation for perceived family emotional connections. Results revealed that adolescents with more positive family connections reported higher levels of self-perceived academic and job competence, embraced solitude positively, yet felt less desire to be alone. Girls showed a higher affinity for solitude than boys, and the presence of more siblings reduced the desire for solitude. Those youth who were proficient in ToM skills reported positive family connections and high levels of academic competence. Findings hold implications for future research and education in adolescent's social cognition and social and academic outcomes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".