Cyberbullying probability, not frequency, predicts mental health: a gendered investigation of individual, familial, and school-level predictors
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study distinguishes between the probability and frequency of cyberbullying to examine its malleable predictors, mental health impacts, and gender differences among primary school children. We analysed data from 1031 students (49.75% male) and their parents across 19 primary schools in Hong Kong, employing a two-part model that distinguishes between the probability and frequency of cyberbullying experiences. The findings reveal that the probability of experiencing cyberbullying, rather than its frequency, was a significant predictor of poorer mental health in children. Higher digital literacy (DL), lower academic stress, and less frequent online activity were linked to reduced cyberbullying involvement for both boys and girls. Better family functioning was associated with lower rates of perpetration and victimisation among girls only. These findings offer a nuanced perspective on how individual, familial, and digital factors distinctly shape cyberbullying experiences and their mental health outcomes across genders in primary school students.
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 it