Children’s sharing behavior with an unfamiliar peer across repeated social interactions.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
= 1.09; 108 females; 75.7% White) were matched with a same-age, same-sex, unfamiliar peer, and the dyad completed structured and unstructured tasks during three online sessions across 1 month. At the end of each session, children independently and anonymously participated in a task to assess sharing behavior with their interaction partner. We found evidence for three patterns of sharing behavior across the sessions: fair sharers (45.2%), minimal sharers (44.6%), and increasing sharers (10.2%). We examined how children's own traits and social perceptions of their peer's traits predicted sharing behavior. Children who were rated by their parents as lower in temperamental affiliation and children who perceived their social partner as higher in negative traits were likely to share minimally with their peer across sessions. Further, children who were rated by their parents as higher in temperamental shyness and children who perceived their social partner as higher in shy/nervous traits were likely to increase the number of tickets they shared with their peer across sessions. These findings illustrate that children's sharing behavior with an initially unfamiliar peer is related to their own traits and their perception of the recipient and may change over the course of repeated social interactions. These patterns may be driven by differences in social-affiliative goals based on temperament and unfolding social dynamics. (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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".