MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1987339655 · doi:10.1207/s15327922par0103_01

Parenting Practices and Aggressive Behavior in Chinese Children

2001· article· en· W1987339655 on OpenAlexafffund
Xinyin Chen, Huafeng Wu, Huichang Chen, Li Wang, Guozhen Cen

Bibliographic record

VenueParenting · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaWilliam T. Grant Foundation
KeywordsAggressionAssertionPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyContext (archaeology)Observational studyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective. We examined relations between parental warmth, guidance, and power assertion and child aggressive behavior in Chinese children. Design. A sample of children (N = 68), at 4 years of age, and their parents in P. R. China, participated in the study. Observational data concerning parenting and child compliance were obtained from home visits. Aggressive behavior was assessed in the context of peer interactions in the laboratory. Results. Maternal warmth and guidance were negatively associated with aggression. Parental power assertion was positively associated with aggression. The relations between parenting practices and aggressive behavior might be moderated by the child's characteristics: Whereas maternal warmth was negatively related to aggression mainly for compliant children, paternal positive parenting was negatively related to aggression for noncompliant and defiant children. Finally, maternal power assertion and paternal power assertion interacted with each other in predicting child aggression. Conclusions. The study provided valuable information about functional "meanings" of major parenting dimensions in Chinese culture.

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 score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.505

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.314 · 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

Citations84
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueParentingSame topicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207