Closeness and Conflict in Childrenâs Friendships: Relations with Friendship Stability, Adjustment and Sociometric Status
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Not many children report relationships with friends that are both close and conflictual. There is a paucity of research examining the trajectory of children's relationship closeness and conflict together over time. This is unfortunate because contentious relationships are related to cardiovascular problems, at least in young adults and because the trajectories of these two aspects of children's relationship quality over time is not understood. Therefore, two longitudinal data sets with younger (mean age 7.5 years at Time 1; four data points over 2 years) and older (mean age 9.9 years at Time 1; two data points over 1 year) children were studied. In both cohorts, measures of friendship quality and peer nominations of liking/disliking as well as overt and relational (older cohort) aggression were completed. Children who reported relationships high in both closeness and conflict were generally satisfied with their friendships; they were not more likely to end their friendships than were children who reported different levels of closeness and conflict (younger cohort). Both boys' and girls' relationship closeness increased over time according to growth curve analyses. The relationships of girls who remained in the same friendship, and who therefore provided ratings on the same friend at each time point, tended to increase in closeness at a different rate over time than the relationships of girls who provided ratings on different friends (younger cohort). Children who reported relationships high in closeness and in conflict were not more aggressive over time than were children who reported different levels of relationship closeness and conflict. However, girls' closeness and overt aggression tracked each other (increased) over time (younger cohort). Girls who reported low social support and negative interactions in their friendships increased the most in overt aggression over time (older cohort). Aggressive and nonaggressive children generally reported similar friendship quality (both cohorts), but the friendship closeness of chronically aggressive boys decreased over time (younger cohort). There were negligible friendship quality differences amongst the sociometric groups. The discussion centers on friendship quality changes in children's continuing friendships, the potential dire effects of turbulent friendships and the friendships of aggressive as well as controversial children.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".