Family settings and children's adjustment: differential adjustment within and across families
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".