Adolescents’ Stories of Decision Making in More and Less Authoritative Families
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two studies used a narrative methodology to test the prediction that adolescents from more authoritative homes would exhibit greater responsiveness to parents’ views than would others. In Study 1, 51 Canadian adolescents in two age groups completed an interview to determine their levels of responsiveness to the parental voice in their narratives about advice from parents about specific decisions. Results showed a significant positive correlation between reports of an authoritative family parenting style and patterns of clearer appropriation of the parental voice as rated independently from students’ narratives. In Study 2, a sample of 184 Grade 12 students again showed a positive association between level of parent voice in stories and an authoritative family parenting style. In addition, a more advanced identity status was positively related to level of parent voice in stories, suggesting that a more sophisticated representation of both own and others’ voices may develop in concert.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it