The DOI matches its Crossref record; 46 of the 46 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 52 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Development of self-protective biases in response to social evaluative feedback
Open accessAbstract
Significance: The growing popularity of social media, especially among youth, has resulted in peer feedback (including rejection) pervading everyday life. Given that peer ostracism has been linked to depression and suicide, it is critical to understand the psychological impact of peer feedback from a developmental perspective. We demonstrate that adolescents and adults use peer feedback to inform views of themselves and of others in very different ways. Of particular interest, early adolescents internalized rejection from peers and felt worse about themselves, whereas adults exhibited evidence of self-protective biases that preserved positive self-views. This work advances theoretical insights into how development shapes social-evaluative experiences and informs sources of vulnerability that could put adolescents at unique risk for negative mental health outcomes.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
In a cross-sectional sample ages 10–23, adolescents and adults processed equivalent peer acceptance/rejection feedback differently: early adolescents showed rejection-congruent expectations and a task-induced drop in self-views, whereas adults showed self-protective biases, including enhanced self-views and deprecating peers who rejected them. The authors propose that heightened rejection reactivity and later-emerging self-protective processes codevelop across adolescence.
Key findings
- Participants predicted being liked 53.22% of the time (SE = 1.32%) despite receiving 50% acceptance and 50% rejection feedback, an overestimation versus the 50% base rate [t(106) = 2.439, P = 0.016].
- Self-views showed no overall task-induced change [t(103) = 1.463, P = 0.146], but age predicted percent change (linear B = 0.219, P = 0.037), with early adolescents showing a drop in self-views and self-enhancement emerging toward adulthood.
- Peer likability ratings became more positive after acceptance (M = 0.37, SE = 0.94) and more negative after rejection (M = −3.16, SE = 1.09; B = 0.035, P < 0.001), and this feedback-dependent updating increased with age (feedback type × linear age: B = 0.340, P = 0.001).
- Memory for feedback was above chance (62.74%, SE = 0.73%; t(106) = 17.474, P < 0.001) and equivalent across age (main effect and interaction with age: Ps > 0.132), supporting comparable encoding of feedback across development.
Methods
- N = 107 participants ages 9.98–23.29 years (M = 16.45, SD = 3.71; 49.5% female) completed a reciprocal social evaluation task in which they predicted and received peer acceptance/rejection feedback, plus pre/post self-esteem (Self Perception Profile) and peer likability ratings, and a surprise memory test for feedback.
- Analyses used linear and linear mixed-effects regressions, generalized additive models/generalized additive mixed models with thin plate regression smoothing splines, and model comparison via AIC; R-squared was reported as an effect-size estimate.
Limitations
- The paper states that preadolescents showed little change in self- and other-views despite understanding the task and remembering feedback, a potentially meaningful null result warranting further investigation.
- The paper states that causal links and proposed developmental mechanisms were not tested, and that future work with real social feedback from known peers (e.g., classmates) would improve ecological validity and permit longitudinal approaches, which were not possible here due to deception.
- Evident from the text: the cross-sectional age comparisons cannot establish developmental change or causality, and the sample was recruited from the local Boston/Cambridge communities with limited reported demographic characterization beyond age and gender.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
30 Not checked yet · 24 Own interpretation · 23 Own result · 9 Own method
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“predictions of being liked increased linearly with age (B = 0.299, P = 0.025)”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“and also followed a cubic function (B = −0.274, P = 0.039).”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This study also revealed age-related differences in how peer feedback impacts self-views.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The Child, Adolescent, and College-Aged versions of the SPP measure self-views comparably across age groups.
- Rests on an assumption: The 50% acceptance and 50% rejection feedback was subjectively equivalent across age groups.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“On average, participants rated peers as relatively neutral before the task (M = 45.59, SE = 1.44).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Meanwhile, adolescents showed consistency in their impressions of peers, even after being rejected.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“By contrast, adolescents exhibited lower, yet more accurate, rates of predicted acceptance.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Late adolescents and young adults reported a boost in self-views, which is consistent with a long history of research demonstrating that adults activate compensatory self-enhancement mechanisms following negative feedback, including increases in explicit and implicit self-views (4, 35).”
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The Child, Adolescent, and College-Aged versions of the SPP measure self-views comparably across age groups.
- Rests on an assumption: The 50% acceptance and 50% rejection feedback was subjectively equivalent across age groups.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“When comparing likability ratings of peers before and after the task, adults made feedback-specific adjustments in their views of others by downgrading those who had rejected them and upgrading peers who had accepted them.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Across the entire sample, participants did not demonstrate a significant task-induced change in self-views [one-sample t(103) = 1.463, P = 0.146].”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“By contrast, early adolescents experienced a drop in self-views following exposure to the same social feedback, suggesting that adolescents may not exhibit the self-protective biases that buffer adults against negative self-views following rejection.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The Child, Adolescent, and College-Aged versions of the SPP measure self-views comparably across age groups.
- Rests on an assumption: The 50% acceptance and 50% rejection feedback was subjectively equivalent across age groups.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“demonstrating a significant linear effect of age (B = 0.219, P = 0.037).”
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The optimal linear model revealed a significant interaction between feedback type and linear age (B = 0.340, P = 0.001).”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our findings demonstrated clear convergence in rejection-related biases in early adolescence and self-protective biases in early adulthood, while individuals between adolescence and adulthood showed “partial profiles” of reactivity to rejection and self-protective biases.”
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Age-related differences observed in this cross-sectional study reflect developmental change rather than cohort effects.
- Rests on an assumption: The Child, Adolescent, and College-Aged versions of the SPP measure self-views comparably across age groups.
- Rests on an assumption: The 50% acceptance and 50% rejection feedback was subjectively equivalent across age groups.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Preadolescents showed little change in self- and other-views, despite understanding the task and showing robust memory for social feedback, constituting a potentially meaningful null result that warrants further investigation.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The Child, Adolescent, and College-Aged versions of the SPP measure self-views comparably across age groups.
- Rests on an assumption: The 50% acceptance and 50% rejection feedback was subjectively equivalent across age groups.
In the paper
“Adults have been shown to blame negative feedback on external (e.g., bad luck) rather than internal sources (e.g., ability) (7)”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [7] Bernstein WM, Stephan WG, Davis MH. Explaining attributions for achievement: A path analytic approach. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1979;37:1810–1821. [Google Scholar] source
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“and show antagonistic or retaliatory behavior toward others following negative feedback (11).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [11] Achterberg M, van Duijvenvoorde AC, Bakermans-Kranenburg MJ, Crone EA. Control your anger! The neural basis of aggression regulation in response to negative social feedback. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2016;11:712–720. doi: 10.1093/scan/nsv154. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“adults generally protect themselves from these pernicious effects by engaging cognitive processes that facilitate the maintenance of positive self-views (i.e., self-protective biases) (2).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [2] Campbell KW, Sedikides C. Self-threat magnifies the self-serving bias: A meta-analytic integration. Rev Gen Psychol. 1999;3:23–43. [Google Scholar] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“While peer rejection that is prolonged or extreme can give rise to negative self-views that persist over time (1)”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [1] Williams KD. Ostracism. Annu Rev Psychol. 2007;58:425–452. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.58.110405.085641. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“and are prone to intensified emotional and stress responses to peer evaluation (15–18).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [15] Sebastian C, Viding E, Williams KD, Blakemore S-J. Social brain development and the affective consequences of ostracism in adolescence. Brain Cogn. 2010;72:134–145. doi: 10.1016/j.bandc.2009.06.008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [16] Silk JS, et al. Peer acceptance and rejection through the eyes of youth: Pupillary, eyetracking and ecological data from the Chatroom Interact task. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2012;7:93–105. doi: 10.1093/scan/nsr044. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [17] Somerville LH, et al. The medial prefrontal cortex and the emergence of self-conscious emotion in adolescence. Psychol Sci. 2013;24:1554–1562. doi: 10.1177/0956797613475633. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [18] Stroud LR, et al. Stress response and the adolescent transition: Performance versus peer rejection stressors. Dev Psychopathol. 2009;21:47–68. doi: 10.1017/S0954579409000042. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“When faced with threats to the self, such as feedback of failure or social rejection, adults exhibit compensatory behaviors that help them buffer and enhance their self-views (4–6).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [4] Baumeister RF. Self-esteem, self-presentation, and future interaction: A dilemma of reputation. J Pers. 1982;50:29–45. [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [5] Beauregard KS, Dunning D. Turning up the contrast: Self-enhancement motives prompt egocentric contrast effects in social judgments. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1998;74:606–621. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.74.3.606. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [6] Hughes BL, Beer JS. Protecting the self: The effect of social-evaluative threat on neural representations of self. J Cogn Neurosci. 2013;25:613–622. doi: 10.1162/jocn_a_00343. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“a well-validated paradigm that has been shown to elicit genuine experiences of social evaluation (20–23).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [20] Gunther Moor B, van Leijenhorst L, Rombouts SARB, Crone EA, Van der Molen MW. Do you like me? Neural correlates of social evaluation and developmental trajectories. Soc Neurosci. 2010;5:461–482. doi: 10.1080/17470910903526155. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [21] Powers KE, Somerville LH, Kelley WM, Heatherton TF. Rejection sensitivity polarizes striatal-medial prefrontal activity when anticipating social feedback. J Cogn Neurosci. 2013;25:1887–1895. doi: 10.1162/jocn_a_00446. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [22] Somerville LH, Heatherton TF, Kelley WM. Anterior cingulate cortex responds differentially to expectancy violation and social rejection. Nat Neurosci. 2006;9:1007–1008. doi: 10.1038/nn1728. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [23] Somerville LH, Kelley WM, Heatherton TF. Self-esteem modulates medial prefrontal cortical responses to evaluative social feedback. Cereb Cortex. 2010;20:3005–3013. doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhq049. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Researchers have also found that adults make less favorable appraisals of others (5, 9, 10)”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [5] Beauregard KS, Dunning D. Turning up the contrast: Self-enhancement motives prompt egocentric contrast effects in social judgments. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1998;74:606–621. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.74.3.606. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [9] DeWall CN, Twenge JM, Gitter SA, Baumeister RF. It’s the thought that counts: The role of hostile cognition in shaping aggressive responses to social exclusion. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2009;96:45–59. doi: 10.1037/a0013196. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [10] Vohs KD, Heatherton TF. Ego threat elicits different social comparison processes among high and low self-esteem people: Implications for interpersonal perceptions. Soc Cogn. 2004;22:168–191. [Google Scholar] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In contrast to adults, we found that adolescents did not enhance self-views or denigrate impressions of rejecting peers, suggesting that adolescents do not avail themselves of the self-protective biases that adults do.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The Child, Adolescent, and College-Aged versions of the SPP measure self-views comparably across age groups.
- Rests on an assumption: The 50% acceptance and 50% rejection feedback was subjectively equivalent across age groups.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Pretask data indicated that at baseline, participants’ reported self-views were consistent with published norms of each age-specific scale (Table S1), with an average of 3.12 (SE = 0.06; scale: 1–4; min = 1.2, max = 4.0).”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Participants endorsed comparable levels of self-views at baseline across age [r(104) = 0.061, P = 0.537].”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Age analyses showed that participants remembered when they were liked or disliked equivalently across age (main effect and interaction with age: Ps > 0.132; see SI Results for details).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We have shown that reactivity to rejection is heightened during early adolescence, whereas self-protective processes (including retaliatory impression updating) have a more protracted emergence.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Age-related differences observed in this cross-sectional study reflect developmental change rather than cohort effects.
- Rests on an assumption: The Child, Adolescent, and College-Aged versions of the SPP measure self-views comparably across age groups.
- Rests on an assumption: The 50% acceptance and 50% rejection feedback was subjectively equivalent across age groups.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Together, our findings indicate that adolescents exhibit a particular sensitivity to rejection, whereas self-protective biases, which emerge later in development, buffer adults from the effects of rejection experiences.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Age-related differences observed in this cross-sectional study reflect developmental change rather than cohort effects.
- Rests on an assumption: The Child, Adolescent, and College-Aged versions of the SPP measure self-views comparably across age groups.
- Rests on an assumption: The 50% acceptance and 50% rejection feedback was subjectively equivalent across age groups.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The interactions between these codeveloping processes may result in early adolescents exhibiting a maximal differential between heightened reactivity to rejection and the absence of self-protective biases that preserve self-views (Fig. 6).”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Age-related differences observed in this cross-sectional study reflect developmental change rather than cohort effects.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Importantly, these results ruled out the possibility that the differences in processing of peer feedback described herein were a byproduct of superior source memory for the feedback received at any particular age.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We have shown that reactivity to rejection is heightened during early adolescence, whereas self-protective processes (including retaliatory impression updating) have a more protracted emergence.”
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Age-related differences observed in this cross-sectional study reflect developmental change rather than cohort effects.
- Rests on an assumption: The Child, Adolescent, and College-Aged versions of the SPP measure self-views comparably across age groups.
- Rests on an assumption: The 50% acceptance and 50% rejection feedback was subjectively equivalent across age groups.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These results document the developmental timescale along which feedback-dependent impression formation emerges, which is important for understanding how adolescents and adults integrate social evaluation to shape future affiliative or antagonistic social behaviors.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Age-related differences observed in this cross-sectional study reflect developmental change rather than cohort effects.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“suggesting that adolescents may not exhibit the self-protective biases that buffer adults against negative self-views following rejection.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The Child, Adolescent, and College-Aged versions of the SPP measure self-views comparably across age groups.
- Rests on an assumption: The 50% acceptance and 50% rejection feedback was subjectively equivalent across age groups.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our findings reveal a framework of socioevaluative processing from preadolescence through young adulthood.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Age-related differences observed in this cross-sectional study reflect developmental change rather than cohort effects.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Participants’ explicit expectations of peer acceptance indicated that young adults overestimated how often peers would like them.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although the present study did not explicitly measure emotional reactions to the social feedback, the adolescent-specific reduction in self-views suggests a prioritization of rejection cues during adolescence.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The Child, Adolescent, and College-Aged versions of the SPP measure self-views comparably across age groups.
- Rests on an assumption: The 50% acceptance and 50% rejection feedback was subjectively equivalent across age groups.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The present study identified a developmental shift in explicit expectation of acceptance that troughs during adolescence and rises during the transition from adolescence to young adulthood.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These findings built confidence in our ability to isolate task-induced changes in self-views that was not biased by baseline differences.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although the social evaluation task delivered an equivalent rate of 50% acceptance and 50% rejection feedback, this mixed evaluative experience was incorporated into self-views in strikingly different ways across development.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The present study reveals a developmental framework of socioevaluative processing, which delineates age-specific changes in codeveloping processes that shape the integration of peer feedback across age.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Age-related differences observed in this cross-sectional study reflect developmental change rather than cohort effects.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Adolescents’ tendency to maintain impressions of peers after experiencing rejection is broadly consistent with their goal of social belongingness.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Adolescents spend more time with peers (42), experience more fluidity in social groups (43), and encounter more frequent feedback from peers (44).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [44] Wang J, Iannotti RJ, Nansel TR. School bullying among adolescents in the United States: Physical, verbal, relational, and cyber. J Adolesc Health. 2009;45:368–375. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2009.03.021. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 29
- Probably not a substantial claim. 20
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In general, participants predicted that they would be liked 53.22% of the time (SE = 1.32%; min = 19.60%, max = 85.00%), which is an overestimation compared with the base rate of 50% [participants received 50% acceptance and 50% rejection feedback across the task; one-sample t(106) = 2.439, P = 0.016].”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Across all participants, response times for predicting acceptance [mean (M) = 1,363 ms, SE = 33.83 ms] and rejection (M = 1,350 ms, SE = 34.43 ms) did not differ [paired t test: t(106) = 1.023, P = 0.308].”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Overall, response times were equivalent across age [r(105) = 0.024, P = 0.802].”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The observed pattern indicated that young adolescents predicted that they would be liked less frequently than young adults, who overestimated the extent to which they would be accepted by peers.”
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Specifically, early adolescents exhibited slower reaction times for predicting acceptance than rejection, suggestive of an internal heuristic more consistent with expecting rejection from others. Conversely, older participants exhibited slower reaction times for predicting rejection relative to acceptance, suggestive of an internal heuristic more consistent with expecting others to accept them.”
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Across the sample as a whole, ratings became more positive following acceptance (M = 0.37, SE = 0.94) and more negative following rejection (M = −3.16, SE = 1.09; B = 0.035, P < 0.001), suggesting that participants “upgraded” peers who provided positive feedback and “downgraded” their impressions of peers who provided negative feedback.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Results suggested that being accepted or rejected by peers exerted a greater influence on how individuals viewed their peers with increasing age. While children and early adolescents maintained impressions of peers regardless of peer feedback, young adults updated impressions of peers based on whether that peer accepted or rejected them.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In contrast to adults, we found that adolescents did not enhance self-views or denigrate impressions of rejecting peers, suggesting that adolescents do not avail themselves of the self-protective biases that adults do.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The Child, Adolescent, and College-Aged versions of the SPP measure self-views comparably across age groups.
- Rests on an assumption: The 50% acceptance and 50% rejection feedback was subjectively equivalent across age groups.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This pattern indicated that early adolescents experienced a unique drop in self-views, whereas self-enhancement emerged during the transition to adulthood.”
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our findings demonstrated clear convergence in rejection-related biases in early adolescence and self-protective biases in early adulthood, while individuals between adolescence and adulthood showed “partial profiles” of reactivity to rejection and self-protective biases.”
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Age-related differences observed in this cross-sectional study reflect developmental change rather than cohort effects.
- Rests on an assumption: The Child, Adolescent, and College-Aged versions of the SPP measure self-views comparably across age groups.
- Rests on an assumption: The 50% acceptance and 50% rejection feedback was subjectively equivalent across age groups.
In the paper
“This collection of self-protective processes is theorized to maintain favorable self-views and is broadly linked with improved well-being (12).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [12] Alloy LB, Abramson LY. Judgment of contingency in depressed and nondepressed students: Sadder but wiser? J Exp Psychol Gen. 1979;108:441–485. doi: 10.1037//0096-3445.108.4.441. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Adolescence is a period of development characterized by an increase in social attunement and concern with being accepted by peers (3, 13).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [3] Somerville LH. Special issue on the teenage brain: Sensitivity to social evaluation. Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2013;22:121–127. doi: 10.1177/0963721413476512. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [13] Brown BB. Peer groups and peer cultures. In: Feldman SS, Elliott GR, editors. At the Threshold: The Developing Adolescent. Harvard Univ Press; Cambridge, MA: 1990. pp. 171–196. [Google Scholar]
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“and to devalue the source of feedback to challenge its importance (8).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [8] Dunning D, Cohen GL. Egocentric definitions of traits and abilities in social judgment. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1992;63:341–355. [Google Scholar] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Prior work has demonstrated that response time biases can reflect implicit conceptual conflict (30, 31), such that slowing reflects cognitive interference induced when pairing incongruent constructs and speeding reflects facilitative association when pairing congruent constructs.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [30] Greenwald AG, McGhee DE, Schwartz JL. Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The implicit association test. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1998;74:1464–1480. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.74.6.1464. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [31] Stroop JR. Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. J Exp Psychol. 1935;18:643–662. [Google Scholar] source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Previous research has revealed that adolescents, compared with children and adults, are especially oriented to recognize negative socioemotional cues (14)”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [14] Thomas LA, De Bellis MD, Graham R, LaBar KS. Development of emotional facial recognition in late childhood and adolescence. Dev Sci. 2007;10:547–558. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-7687.2007.00614.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A test for age differences in pretask likability ratings indicated that baseline ratings were equivalent across age [r(105) = 0.071, P = 0.464], suggesting that the age-customized stimulus sets were well balanced.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The tendency for adults to rate accepting peers more favorably (36), respond to negative feedback by denigrating others (5, 9, 10), and engage in retaliatory impression updating (11) aligns with previous work.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [36] Jones RM, et al. Behavioral and neural properties of social reinforcement learning. J Neurosci. 2011;31:13039–13045. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2972-11.2011. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [5] Beauregard KS, Dunning D. Turning up the contrast: Self-enhancement motives prompt egocentric contrast effects in social judgments. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1998;74:606–621. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.74.3.606. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [9] DeWall CN, Twenge JM, Gitter SA, Baumeister RF. It’s the thought that counts: The role of hostile cognition in shaping aggressive responses to social exclusion. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2009;96:45–59. doi: 10.1037/a0013196. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [10] Vohs KD, Heatherton TF. Ego threat elicits different social comparison processes among high and low self-esteem people: Implications for interpersonal perceptions. Soc Cogn. 2004;22:168–191. [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [11] Achterberg M, van Duijvenvoorde AC, Bakermans-Kranenburg MJ, Crone EA. Control your anger! The neural basis of aggression regulation in response to negative social feedback. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2016;11:712–720. doi: 10.1093/scan/nsv154. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The self-concept encompasses evaluative self-knowledge and self-worth, which are informed by status or competency across multiple domains (e.g., social, athletic, and appearance) (40).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [40] Harter S, Waters P, Whitesell NR. Relational self-worth: Differences in perceived worth as a person across interpersonal contexts among adolescents. Child Dev. 1998;69:756–766. [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“Similar tendencies have been demonstrated previously, wherein adults displayed faster response times when associating the self with positive attributes (34).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [34] Greenwald AG, Farnham SD. Using the implicit association test to measure self-esteem and self-concept. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2000;79:1022–1038. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.79.6.1022. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Research has shown that adults have a complex, multifaceted self-concept and can draw upon alternative domains of self-views to buffer against threat in a specific domain (41).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [41] Tesser A. On the confluence of self-esteem maintenance mechanisms. Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2000;4:290–299. [Google Scholar] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“These findings align with previous work positing that healthy adults maintain inherently positive or inflated self-views (4, 32) and report having more positive and less negative attributes than others, known as the “above average effect” (6, 33).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [4] Baumeister RF. Self-esteem, self-presentation, and future interaction: A dilemma of reputation. J Pers. 1982;50:29–45. [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [32] Chavez RS, Heatherton TF, Wagner DD. Neural population decoding reveals the intrinsic positivity of the self. Cereb Cortex. 2017;27:5222–5229. doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhw302. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Not checked yetcites [6] Hughes BL, Beer JS. Protecting the self: The effect of social-evaluative threat on neural representations of self. J Cogn Neurosci. 2013;25:613–622. doi: 10.1162/jocn_a_00343. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [33] Chambers JR, Windschitl PD. Biases in social comparative judgments: The role of nonmotivated factors in above-average and comparative-optimism effects. Psychol Bull. 2004;130:813–838. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.130.5.813. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Specifically, early adolescents exhibited slower reaction times for predicting acceptance than rejection, suggestive of an internal heuristic more consistent with expecting rejection from others. Conversely, older participants exhibited slower reaction times for predicting rejection relative to acceptance, suggestive of an internal heuristic more consistent with expecting others to accept them.”
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“these findings are consistent with one prior study showing that early adolescents expected to be liked less frequently than adults (20).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [20] Gunther Moor B, van Leijenhorst L, Rombouts SARB, Crone EA, Van der Molen MW. Do you like me? Neural correlates of social evaluation and developmental trajectories. Soc Neurosci. 2010;5:461–482. doi: 10.1080/17470910903526155. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These strategies may help to preserve self-views by promoting future affiliation with accepting rather than rejecting peers, undercutting the validity of negative feedback sources, and discouraging peers from future exclusionary behavior.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Adolescents, by contrast, are in the process of building up self-referential knowledge, identity, and social group affiliations (40).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [40] Harter S, Waters P, Whitesell NR. Relational self-worth: Differences in perceived worth as a person across interpersonal contexts among adolescents. Child Dev. 1998;69:756–766. [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Across explicit and implicit measures of behavior, we found evidence that adolescents expected and internalized rejection, which negatively impacted their self-views, while adults expected acceptance and processed peer evaluation in a way that enhanced self-views.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Indeed, theoretical accounts describe adult self-enhancing processes as complex regulation strategies deployed to mitigate the negative affect experienced following a threat to self-positivity (35).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [35] Rudman LA, Dohn MC, Fairchild K. Implicit self-esteem compensation: Automatic threat defense. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2007;93:798–813. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.93.5.798. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Together, our findings indicate that adolescents exhibit a particular sensitivity to rejection, whereas self-protective biases, which emerge later in development, buffer adults from the effects of rejection experiences.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Age-related differences observed in this cross-sectional study reflect developmental change rather than cohort effects.
- Rests on an assumption: The Child, Adolescent, and College-Aged versions of the SPP measure self-views comparably across age groups.
- Rests on an assumption: The 50% acceptance and 50% rejection feedback was subjectively equivalent across age groups.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Consistent with this perspective, prior work has demonstrated that adolescents’ ability to regulate emotional and behavioral responses toward social and emotional cues continues to improve through adolescence (37–39).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [37] Somerville LH, Hare T, Casey BJ. Frontostriatal maturation predicts cognitive control failure to appetitive cues in adolescents. J Cogn Neurosci. 2011;23:2123–2134. doi: 10.1162/jocn.2010.21572. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [38] Tottenham N, Hare TA, Casey BJ. Behavioral assessment of emotion discrimination, emotion regulation, and cognitive control in childhood, adolescence, and adulthood. Front Psychol. 2011;2:39. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00039. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [39] Silvers JA, et al. Age-related differences in emotional reactivity, regulation, and rejection sensitivity in adolescence. Emotion. 2012;12:1235–1247. doi: 10.1037/a0028297. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Adolescents exhibited the reverse trend of longer response times to predict acceptance, which could reflect the fundamentality of biased expectancies of rejection in adolescence.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Furthermore, adolescents’ impressions of their peers were unaffected by the feedback they received, whereas adults deprecated the peers who rejected them.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Together, these findings implicated codeveloping processes of reactivity to rejection and self-protective defenses that resulted in adolescents internalizing and adults externalizing negative social feedback.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Overall, participants accurately remembered 62.74% (SE = 0.73%) of the feedback they received, which was significantly above chance [50%; one-sample t(106) = 17.474, P < 0.001].”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In all, these findings demonstrated robust differences in social expectancies across development, with the transition from adolescence to adulthood characterized by a shift from rejection-congruent to acceptance-congruent expectations.”
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Young adults showed relatively faster responses when predicting acceptance compared with rejection, which could reflect an internal schema more consistent with expecting acceptance.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Adolescents spend more time with peers (42), experience more fluidity in social groups (43), and encounter more frequent feedback from peers (44).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [42] Larson RW. How U.S. children and adolescents spend time: What it does (and doesn’t) tell us about their development. Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2001;10:160–164. [Google Scholar] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“A key challenge of adolescence is to readily incorporate social feedback and flexibly adjust behavior to successfully navigate their dynamic social environments (45).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [45] Nelson EE, Leibenluft E, McClure EB, Pine DS. The social re-orientation of adolescence: A neuroscience perspective on the process and its relation to psychopathology. Psychol Med. 2005;35:163–174. doi: 10.1017/s0033291704003915. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Preadolescents showed little change in self- and other-views, despite understanding the task and showing robust memory for social feedback, constituting a potentially meaningful null result that warrants further investigation.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“We administered the Child (ages 9–14) (24), Adolescent (ages 15–17) (25), and College-Aged (ages 18–23) (26) versions of the questionnaire as validated.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [24] Harter S. Self-Perception Profile for Children. Univ of Denver; Denver: 1983. [Google Scholar]
- Not checked yetcites [25] Harter S. Self-Perception Profile for Adolescents. Univ of Denver; Denver: 1988. [Google Scholar]
- Not checked yetcites [26] Neemann J, Harter S. Manual for the Self-Perception Profile for College Students. Univ of Denver; Denver: 1986. [Google Scholar]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“The transition to adolescence is accompanied by a marked change in the complexity of the social environment (13).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [13] Brown BB. Peer groups and peer cultures. In: Feldman SS, Elliott GR, editors. At the Threshold: The Developing Adolescent. Harvard Univ Press; Cambridge, MA: 1990. pp. 171–196. [Google Scholar]
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The resulting adolescent-specific internalization of social feedback may reflect a key challenge of this phase of development: growth in social competence and group affiliation along with progressive tuning of cognitive strategies that help individuals thrive in complex social worlds as adults.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Age-related differences observed in this cross-sectional study reflect developmental change rather than cohort effects.
In the paper
“Adolescents spend more time with peers (42), experience more fluidity in social groups (43), and encounter more frequent feedback from peers (44).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [43] Cairns RB, Leung M-C, Buchanan L, Cairns BD. Friendships and social networks in childhood and adolescence: Fluidity, reliability, and interrelations. Child Dev. 1995;66:1330–1345. [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“All participants were questioned by using a funnel debriefing procedure to confirm their belief in the cover story.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“According to the sociometer theory (46), shifts in self-views serve to reflect inclusionary status, with a drop in self-views signaling risk of exclusion.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [46] Leary MR, Tambor ES, Terdal SK, Downs DL. Self-esteem as an interpersonal monitor: The sociometer hypothesis. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1995;68:518–530. [Google Scholar] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper relies on this without support.
Age-related differences observed in this cross-sectional study reflect developmental change rather than cohort effects.
“This study also revealed age-related differences in how peer feedback impacts self-views.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The Child, Adolescent, and College-Aged versions of the SPP measure self-views comparably across age groups.
“We administered the Child (ages 9–14) (24), Adolescent (ages 15–17) (25), and College-Aged (ages 18–23) (26) versions of the questionnaire as validated.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The 50% acceptance and 50% rejection feedback was subjectively equivalent across age groups.
“Although the social evaluation task delivered an equivalent rate of 50% acceptance and 50% rejection feedback, this mixed evaluative experience was incorporated into self-views in strikingly different ways across development.”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“exclusion differs from fair play by defying widely-held baseline expectations of approximate fairness (Gunther Moor et al., 2010; Rodman et al., 2017), thereby inducing expectancy violations”
From Feeling left out or just surprised? Neural correlates of social exclusion and overinclusion in adolescence (2020) · cites this paper as Rodman et al., 2017
Statistics recomputed
Every reported test result, recomputed from its test statistic and degrees of freedom. A result shows as not adding up only once an independent check has confirmed it.
- Consistentt(106) = 2.439reported p = .016 · recomputed p = .016
“t(106) = 2.439, p = .016”
- Consistentr(105) = 0.024reported p = .802 · recomputed p = .806
“r(105) = 0.024, p = .802”
- Consistentt(106) = 1.023reported p = .308 · recomputed p = .309
“t(106) = 1.023, p = .308”
- Consistentr(104) = 0.061reported p = .537 · recomputed p = .534
“r(104) = 0.061, p = .537”
- Consistentt(103) = 1.463reported p = .146 · recomputed p = .147
“t(103) = 1.463, p = .146”
- Consistentr(105) = 0.071reported p = .464 · recomputed p = .467
“r(105) = 0.071, p = .464”
- Consistentt(106) = 17.474reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001
“t(106) = 17.474, p < .001”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Results
“The linear model (AIC: −175.6) was superior to the cubic (AIC: −174.4), quadratic (AIC: −173.9), and null (AIC: −173.1) models”
§ Results
“the linear regression model (AIC: −175.5; 4.21% variance explained)”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Results
“A difference score subtracting the posttask from pretask ratings quantified whether participants enhanced impressions of a peer following acceptance (positive difference score) and reduced impressions of the peer following rejection (negative difference score).”
§ Results
“ratings became more positive following acceptance (M = 0.37, SE = 0.94) and more negative following rejection (M = −3.16, SE = 1.09; B = 0.035, P < 0.001)”
Citations
Cites
A new look at the statistical model identification
Akaike, H. (1974) · IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control · doi:10.1109/tac.1974.1100705 · Cited by 51,879
Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions
Stroop, J. R. (1935) · Journal of Experimental Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0054651 · Cited by 18,622
Generalized Additive Models: An Introduction with R
Wood, S. N. (2017) · doi:10.1201/9781315370279 · Cited by 13,852
Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: the implicit association test
Greenwald, A. G., McGhee, D. E., & Schwartz, J. L. K. (1998) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.74.6.1464 · Cited by 9,210
At the Threshold: The Developing Adolescent
Feldman, S. S., & Elliott, G. R. (1990) · Cited by 3,136
Self-esteem as an interpersonal monitor: The sociometer hypothesis
Leary, M. R., Tambor, E. S., Terdal, S. K., & Downs, D. L. (1995) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.68.3.518 · Cited by 2,519
School bullying among adolescents in the United States: Physical, verbal, relational, and cyber
Wang, J., Iannotti, R. J., & Nansel, T. R. (2009) · Journal of Adolescent Health · doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2009.03.021 · Cited by 2,045
Williams, K. D. (2007) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.58.110405.085641 · Cited by 1,828
Judgment of contingency in depressed and nondepressed students: Sadder but wiser?
Alloy, L. B., & Abramson, L. Y. (1979) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: General · doi:10.1037/0096-3445.108.4.441 · Cited by 1,692
Using the implicit association test to measure self-esteem and self-concept
Greenwald, A. G., & Farnham, S. D. (2000) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.79.6.1022 · Cited by 1,393
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- J Neemann, S Harter Manual for the Self-Perception Profile for College Students (Univ of Denver, Denver, 1986).
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Media use and brain development during adolescence
Crone, E. A., & Konijn, E. A. (2018) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-018-03126-x · Cited by 464
Mechanisms linking social media use to adolescent mental health vulnerability
Orben, A., Meier, A., Dalgleish, T., & Blakemore, S.-J. (2024) · Nature Reviews Psychology · doi:10.1038/s44159-024-00307-y · Cited by 220
Nook, E. C., Sasse, S. F., Lambert, H. K., McLaughlin, K. A., & Somerville, L. H. (2018) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0956797618773357 · Cited by 160
Self-citationAdolescent risk-taking in the context of exploration and social influence
Ciranka, S., & van den Bos, W. (2021) · Developmental Review · doi:10.1016/j.dr.2021.100979 · Cited by 127
Nook, E. C., Stavish, C. M., Sasse, S. F., Lambert, H. K., Mair, P., McLaughlin, K. A., & Somerville, L. H. (2019) · Emotion · doi:10.1037/emo0000609 · Cited by 107
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Rodman, A. M., Powers, K. E., & Somerville, L. H.
- Affiliations
- Harvard University (US)
- Venue
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Publisher
- National Academy of Sciences
- Published
- 2017-11-27
- Volume
- 114
- Issue
- 50
- Pages
- 13158-13163
- ISSN
- 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
- 1091-6490
- PMC
- PMC5740641
- OpenAlex
- W2770241776
- Cited by
- 110
- References
- 46
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 8
- FWCI
- 9.79
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- American Psychological Association (Elizabeth Munsterberg Koppitz Fellowship, F.J. McGuigan Prize)
- Dr. Mortimer and Theresa Sackler Foundation (Sackler Scholars Programme in Psychobiology)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Death Anxiety and Social Exclusion
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Bullying, Victimization, and Aggression
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
- Keywords
- peer rejection, peer feedback, adolescents, adults, self-concept, social development (developmental psychology), depression, suicide risk, social media
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Child, Female, Humans, Male, Self Concept, Psychological Distance, Feedback, Psychological, Adolescent Development, Young Adult, Social Media
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
