MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403945218 · doi:10.1037/dev0001848

Joint developmental trajectories of anxious solitude and peer adversities from early childhood through adolescence: Characteristics and associations with indices of internalizing problems.

2024· article· en· W4403945218 on OpenAlexaff
Gary W. Ladd, Idean Ettekal, Robert J. Coplan, Gary W. Ladd

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopmental Psychology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institute of Mental HealthNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsPsychologyDevelopmental psychologySolitudeLate childhoodPeer relationsAnxietyAdolescent developmentPeer groupPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

= 17.89). Measures of AS, peer group rejection and victimization, loneliness, self-esteem, and depression were repeatedly administered across this epoch. Results revealed multiple joint-trajectory classes characterized by varying combinations of AS and peer adversity, and children in these classes differed in the development of internalizing problems over time. Consistent with diathesis-stress hypotheses, two types of peer adversities (stressors), peer group rejection and peer victimization, moderated the relations between children's propensity to engage in AS (diathesis) and the development of specific internalizing problems, including loneliness, depression, and low self-esteem. These findings suggest that socially vulnerable children (i.e., those high in AS) are particularly prone to developing internalizing problems in the face of peer adversity. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopmental PsychologySame topicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207