Social support moderates the link between chronic peer victimization in school and later cortisol secretion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Using a genetically informed design based on twins, this study tested the association between chronic peer victimization from ages 12 to 17 and later cortisol secretion at age 19 and the moderating effect of social support in this regard. These associations were examined while also considering the effects of genetic factors and concurrent victimization experiences at age 19. Participants (148 monozygotic [MZ] and 227 dizygotic [DZ] twin pairs; 56% girls) reported on their peer victimization and social support from the mother, father, and best friend from ages 12 through 17. At age 19, they reported on victimization in college, at work, and in romantic relationships and provided a hair sample for cortisol measurement. Growth mixture modeling identified three victimization trajectories: low (34%), moderate (55%), and high (11%). Biometric modeling showed that a high trajectory of peer victimization in adolescence predicted lower cortisol levels compared with a low trajectory, but only at very low levels of friends’ support. Parental support did not moderate this association and no sex moderation was found. These results highlight not only the potential disruptive influence of chronic peer victimization on hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis functioning but also the buffering role of friendship when facing such adverse social experiences.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".