Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37047922›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2023

The Judgments and Emotion Attributions in Peer Exclusion Situations among Fourth, Sixth, and Eighth Graders in Japan.

Mari Hasegawa

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 41% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Mari HasegawaGraduate School of Education, Tohoku University, Sendai 980-8576, Japan.
Tohoku University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study examined the judgments and emotion attributions in peer exclusion situations among Japanese middle-childhood children (fourth graders and sixth graders) and adolescents (eighth graders). In total, 371 participants were presented with one of three bystander conditions-no bystander, passive bystander, or active bystander-and asked to judge the excluders' behavior and attribute emotions toward excluders. Here, excluders are children who physically or emotionally separate other children from social groups. All scenarios involved a child wishing to join a peer group but was rejected (that is, excluded from the group), and there were three types of situations: one in which there were no bystanders, one in which the bystanders did not respond, and one in which the bystanders allowed the excluded child into their group. The excluded target was presented as either violent or shy. Furthermore, the participants assessed their own bullying and bystander behaviors in their daily lives. Adolescents judged excluders as less immoral and as having positive emotions more often than did children. Both children and adolescents judged the exclusion of violent targets to be less serious than the exclusion of shy targets. There were no differences in judgments and attributions according to bystander types. There was weak evidence of a relationship between self-reported bullying/bystander behavior, and judgment in fictitious settings was obtained.

Indexed as

BullyingJudgmentAdolescentAggressionChildEmotionsHumansJapanPeer Groupbullyingbystanderemotion attributionemotionsjudgmentspeer exclusion

Identifiers

PMID37047922
PMCPMC10093872
OpenAlexW4361305891

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.