Perceived Paternal Parenting Style and Proactive Coping Strategies of Indian Adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Parental child rearing practices are regarded as significant step towards development of coping skills in children and adolescents. The role of fathers in child’s progress from infancy through adulthood is undeniable. The unique bond that a father and a child share is instrumental in influencing various behavioural outcomes in children. For a traditional country like India the emergence of active involvement of fathers in parenting is increasingly becoming popular. The present study investigates the influence of perceived paternal parenting styles on adolescents’ coping strategies. Family structure, gender of adolescents and income of father were taken as moderators in the study. The sample of this study was N = 180 (male 45.6% and female 54.4 %). Adolescents from standard X-XI, belonging to joint family (22.8%) and nuclear family (77.2%) were selected from different schools in Kharagpur, West Bengal (India). Analysis of variance and hierarchical multiple regression analysis were carried out for data analysis. Results revealed that adolescents’ perception of paternal demandingness and autonomy granting significantly predicts preventive and instrumental coping strategies among adolescents. Income of father and gender of adolescent were found to moderate the relationship between perceived paternal parenting style and coping strategies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".