MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1961674363 · doi:10.3138/jcfs.32.3.393

Discrepant Parent-Adolescent Views on Family Functioning: Predictors of Poorer Self-Esteem and Problems of Emotion and Behaviour in British and Canadian Adolescents

2001· article· en· W1961674363 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Christopher Bagley, Lorne D. Bertrand, Floyd Bolitho, Kanka Mallick

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Comparative Family Studies · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyScale (ratio)Developmental psychologySelf-esteemFamily Environment ScaleFamily conflictClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Conflict between a parent and an adolescent may be indicative of problems of family cohesion, and may predict poorer self-esteem and problems of emotion and behavior. This idea is explored in high school and junior college populations in Alberta, Canada, and in Britain. In all, 1,796 12 to 19-year-olds completed the summary scale of the McMaster Family Assessment Device (FAD), which was also completed by a parent. Results were generally similar in both cultures, with many more similarities than differences. On all scale items, adolescents were significantly more critical of their family life than were their parents. The degree of difference between parent and child desc riptions o f family functioning was significantly correlated with the adolescents’ Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale scores, as well as self-completed, standardized measures of problems of emotion and behaviour. Differences between parent and child’s responses to the FAD were better predictors than FAD scores alone.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.629

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations27
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Comparative Family StudiesSame topicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207