MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041540667 · doi:10.1080/15374416.2013.862803

Maternal and Paternal Attributions in the Prediction of Boys' Behavior Problems Across Time

2014· article· en· W2041540667 on OpenAlexaff
David Williamson, Charlotte Johnston

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAttributionPsychologyStrengths and Difficulties QuestionnaireDevelopmental psychologyClinical psychologySocial psychologyMental healthPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examined the extent to which mother and father attributions for child behavior problems predict child behavior problems over time, accounting for the other parent's attributions, initial child problems and the child's attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) status. Parents of 7- to 12-year-old boys with (n = 26) and without (n = 38) ADHD participated. Parents completed the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) as a measure of their son's behavior problems as well as the Written Analogue Questionnaire, reporting their attributions for child behavior problems. Parents completed the SDQ a second time 7 months later. Both mother and father attributions were associated with child behavior problems at Time 1 and again 7 months later. However, when ADHD status and the other parent's attributions for child behavior were controlled, only father attributions predicted child behavior problems, and continued to be uniquely predictive of child behavior problems at Time 2 even with initial child behavior problems controlled. Father attributions provide unique information above and beyond mother attributions when considering current and future child behavior problems.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.333 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations28
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Child & Adolescent PsychologySame topicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207