MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1519223142 · doi:10.5539/ijps.v7n2p174

The Effect of Retrospectively Perceived Parental Bonding on Resilience in Adulthood

2015· article· en· W1519223142 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Monika Skerytė-Kazlauskienė, Eglė Mažulytė-Rašytinė, Jonas Eimontas, Evaldas Kazlauskas, Danutė Gailienė

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Psychological Studies · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicResilience and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEuropean Social Fund
KeywordsPsychologyPsychological resilienceLithuanianDevelopmental psychologyAuthoritarianismClinical psychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Parenting is reported to be a crucial factor for children's resilience; however, it is still unknown whether the effect of parental bonding in childhood persists on resilience later on in adulthood. The aim of our research is to evaluate the effect of retrospectively perceived parental bonding on adult resilience and its change in adulthood; we aim to study parental care, authoritarianism and behavioral control as the dimensions of parental bonding. A total of 745 adults from 18 to 81 years of age (M=44.54, SD=17.96) completed Lithuanian versions of the abbreviated Parental Bonding Instrument (PBI) and the 14-Item Resilience Scale (RS-14). Results show that there is a small though significant effect of parental bonding on resilience: the importance of parental care persists even into older age, but the significance of authoritarianism diminishes with age.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.489
Teacher spread0.415 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Psychological StudiesSame topicResilience and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207