Comparing Justice-Involved and Community Adolescents’ Emotional Well-Being and Feelings of Social Connection During COVID-19: A Daily Diary Study of Adolescents’ Social Contact
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study utilizes 6 weeks of electronic daily diary self-assessments across more than 1 year of the COVID-19 pandemic to examine associations between adolescents’ phone and video social contact with friends, family, and others over time. The sample includes justice-involved juveniles adjudicated to probation or incarceration and a comparison community sample of never-arrested adolescents. Findings reveal that community youth did not demonstrate positive emotional gains from social contact via phone or video during the pandemic and at times experienced more negative emotion on days with virtual social contact; however, such contact was especially beneficial for justice-involved youth, who had better self-conceptions and stronger feelings of social connection (although more loneliness as well) on days when they engaged in phone or video contact with friends or family. Thus, social contact via phone or video may serve to close the gap in emotional well-being between justice-involved and community adolescents.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".