MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999600709 · doi:10.1080/02568540409595037

Chinese Parenting Styles and Children's Self-Regulated Learning

2003· article· en· W1999600709 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Research in Childhood Education · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicParental Involvement in Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPermissivePsychologyParenting stylesStyle (visual arts)Developmental psychologySelf-regulated learningSelf-controlSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Self-regulated learning is an important aspect of student learning and academic achievement. Certain parenting styles help children develop self-regulated learning and encourage them to exert control over their own learning. The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between Chinese parenting style and children's involvement in self-regulated learning. Self-report measures of parenting style and children's self-regulated learning were administrated to a sample of 177 grade 4 students and their parents. Pearson product-moment correlation and regression analysis revealed that authoritative parenting style was significantly and positively related to students' self-regulated learning, whereas authoritarian parenting style was significantly and negatively related to students' self-regulated learning. The results of this study also indicate that a permissive parenting style may display a slight, but not significant, negative impact upon students' self-regulated learning; and a training parenting style may display a slight, but not significant, positive impact upon students' self-regulated learning.

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 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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.431

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.385 · 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