MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7045947649

Conflict resolution strategies of children with depressive symptomalology in hypothetical and observational peer conflict

2000· dissertation· en· W7045947649 on OpenAlex

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2000
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicProblem Solving Skills Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHydro-QuébecSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaMcGill University
KeywordsConflict resolutionConflict resolution strategyPsychological interventionCompetence (human resources)Social competenceDepressive symptomsPeer group
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Children with depressive symptomatology are at a higher risk for experiencing social functioning difficulties (Stark et al., 1996). The research reviewed suggests a connection between type of social problem-solving strategies employed by children and levels of depressive symptomatology. Participants were grade four, five, and six students (n = 315), who were divided into a depressive symptomatology (DS) group (n = 57) and a nondepressed (NONDEP) group (n = 57). Using Felner, Lease, and Phillips' (1990) quadripartite model of social competence as a theoretical guide, the present study was conducted to compare children with and without depressive symptomatology on: (a) strategies and goals as assessed in hypothetical conflict situations; (b) types of conflict resolution strategies employed in observed conflict situations; (c) peer rated social behaviours (aggressive, isolated, sociable); (d) self-perceptions of social conflict resolution efficacy; and (e) strategies and goals as assessed in both hypothetical and actual conflict situations by gender. Results indicated that the two groups differed on the types of conflict resolution strategies but not conflict goals chosen in hypothetical situations. The two groups did not differ in the amount of solutions generated to conflict situations, but in the type of solutions, and in the effectiveness of solutions generated. In observed dyadic exchanges, the DS group employed more destructive strategies than the NONDEP group. Boys and girls differed in the types of strategies and goals chosen in response to hypothetical conflict. Significant interactions between DS group and gender emerged. Implications for assessment and interventions are discussed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.716
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.044
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.287 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it