Family settings and children's adjustment: differential adjustment within and across families
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
BACKGROUND: Children in stepfamilies and single-parent families exhibit elevated levels of behavioural and emotional problems compared with children in intact (biological) families, but there is variation within and across these family types. AIMS: To examine the sources of variation in children's behavioural and emotional problems across diverse family settings. METHOD: Levels of behavioural and emotional problems in children from diverse stepfamilies and single-parent families were compared with children living with both biological parents. Psychosocial risks were measured at the individual child and family levels. RESULTS: Behavioural and emotional problems were elevated in children in stepmother/complex stepfamilies and single-parent families, but not in simple stepfather families, relative to 'biological' families. Psychopathology associated with family type was explained by compromised quality of the parent-child relationship, parental depression and socio-economic adversity. Sibling similarity in behavioural and emotional problems was most pronounced in high-risk family settings. CONCLUSIONS: Family type is a proxy for exposure to psychosocial risks; the extent of family-wide influence on children's development may be strongest in high-stress settings.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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