Profiles of children’s social behaviors and peer victimization in early elementary school: Sex differences and stability over time.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research suggests that younger children engage in fewer peer victimization roles compared to their older peers (e.g., aggressor, victim, defender). Still, the development of these roles throughout early elementary school remains unclear. Additionally, aggression and social behaviors evolve differently in boys and girls, yet sex differences in these roles are not well understood. This study examined children's profiles of involvement in physical and relational aggression, prosocial behaviors, and peer victimization in kindergarten and first and second grades by using latent profile analyses and testing profile similarity across sex and school years. Then, it examined the stability of profile membership from kindergarten to second grade before testing how early socioeconomic status predicted profile membership. The sample included 1,757 children of various sociodemographic backgrounds, mostly White, from a longitudinal birth study in Canada. Boys' profiles aligned with a four-role typology that remained consistent from kindergarten to second grade: prosocial, normative, moderately aggressive-victimized (AV), and highly AV profiles. In kindergarten, girls' typology also included four profiles: prosocial, normative, relationally aggressive, and AV. By first grade, a fifth profile emerged: victimized girls. Profile membership for both boys and girls was generally very stable over time, and low socioeconomic status predicted higher odds of belonging to any AV profiles compared to prosocial ones. These findings underscore both developmental similarities and distinctions in boys' and girls' social behaviors and experiences in early elementary school and the precocity of stable membership in at-risk profiles. They highlight socioeconomic status as an early risk factor that could inform prevention research. (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 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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".