MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2050936643 · doi:10.1080/10502550801973005

The Influence of Parental Separation and Divorce on Father–Child Relationships

2008· article· en· W2050936643 on OpenAlexaff
Brad Peters, Marion F. Ehrenberg

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Divorce & Remarriage · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFamily Dynamics and Relationships
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyDevelopmental psychologySocioeconomic statusPsychological resilienceStructural equation modelingDemographySocial psychologyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using a risk and resilience theoretical framework, this study examined the influence of parental divorce during childhood on father–child relationship quality in young adulthood. Relationship quality was measured using nurturant fathering and modified father involvement scales, and self-reports of current amount of face-to-face and verbal father–child contacts. Comparisons on these measures were made between 107 young adults from intact and 96 from divorced family backgrounds. The divorce group was also examined in isolation to explore how divorce-related factors—including structural, early contact, and interparental relationship factors—predict young adults' perceptions of their father–child relationship. Results demonstrate young adults from intact family backgrounds report a comparatively stronger father–child relationship. Among divorce group participants, structural factors (higher father socioeconomic status and joint custody) and early contact (greater percentage of time spent with father postdivorce) were predictors of higher scores on combined nurturant fathering and involvement measures. Greater early contact and stronger interparental relationship factors (low conflict and high contact and cooperativeness) similarly predicted current contact.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Citations57
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Divorce & RemarriageSame topicFamily Dynamics and RelationshipsFrench-language works237,207