Parental Mediation of Media Messages Does Matter: More Interaction About Objectionable Content Is Associated With Emerging Adults’ Sexual Attitudes and Behaviors
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
An online survey of undergraduates explored the effects of recalled parent-child interaction regarding media on their critical thinking skills, beliefs about alcohol and sex, and current reports of attitudes and risky sexual behaviors. Students from a northwestern university completed the questionnaire three times during the fall of 2011. Effective parental mediation was found to be a protective factor against the negative effects of objectionable content on sexual attitudes and behaviors through its effect on critical thinking toward media content and expectancies. Participants whose parents critiqued media portrayals reported a higher level of critical thinking. More critical orientation toward media decreased the effects of objectionable content on expectancies and sexual behaviors. On the other hand, participants whose parents endorsed media portrayals reported lower levels of critical thinking. Developing critical thinking toward media is an effective approach to helping young people make good decisions about their health. Although viewers' understanding of media content may be biased by the emotional aspect of decision making, critical thinking was shown to decrease the appeal of mediated messages on behaviors. Parents play an important role in developing children's critical thinking skills, and those who mediate their children's media use can establish behaviors that will prove beneficial to their children later in life.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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