Theory of Mind, Self-Perceptions, and Peer Popularity in Middle Childhood and Early Adolescence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background/Objectives: Peer popularity is often associated with children’s and adolescents’ Theory of Mind (ToM), as well as with self-perceptions. This paper describes two cross-sectional studies that investigate the individual differences and associations among peer popularity, ToM, and self-perceptions (i.e., several dimensions of self-esteem, including global, academic, or physical self-esteem). Methods: Study 1 involved 229 German children aged 5 to 8 years. Study 2 involved 127 Canadian adolescents aged 10 to 12 years. Participants in both studies completed measures of ToM, self-perceptions, and peer popularity. Results: Study 1 found significant associations among children’s ToM and self-perceptions (their global self-esteem) but found no associations with children’s peer popularity. Study 2 revealed significant positive associations between adolescents’ ToM and their peer popularity, as well as between ToM and self-perceptions (in particular, adolescents’ academic self-esteem). Conclusions: Our findings support the view that ToM matters for children’s and young adolescents’ self-perceptions and plays an increasingly important role in their everyday social life. Curricular implications for ToM, identity formation (self-perceptions), and peer relations are discussed.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".