Room to Grow? The Role of Adolescents’ Bedrooms During the COVID-19 Pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adolescents spend increasing amounts of time alone in their bedrooms, a shift which likely intensified during the COVID-19 pandemic. Past research has pointed to potential developmental reasons, benefits (e.g., increasing autonomy), and risks (e.g., social isolation, greater screen time) of high amounts of time alone. We explored adolescents’ experiences of their bedrooms during pandemic restrictions, as a potentially unique developmental context. We conducted 10 focus groups and 23 interviews with 74 young people, ages 10 to 19 (46% girls/women; 49% boys/men; 6% gender neutral/gender fluid/agender; 16% LGBTQ+; 5% Indigenous; 35% persons of colour; 7% persons with a disability). Middle to late adolescents, in particular, described their bedrooms as relevant to their developmental needs for autonomy and independence. Further, they underlined the emotional complexity surrounding bedrooms, such as feeling both trapped and seeking comfort and relaxation. Findings suggest the importance of time alone, and also strategies and discussion points for youth and parents.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".