Measuring Children’s Perceptions of Parental Involvement in Conjoint Behavioral Consultation
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
Practitioners of Conjoint Behavioral Consultation rely on several sources of information to assist in planning and evaluation of consultation efforts. Parental involvement in the home is an important aspect in Conjoint Behavioral Consultation, yet there are few questionnaires available to practitioners to assess this important construct, particularly those that target children’s self-report. This study examined the factor structure and reliability of a new questionnaire to measure children’s perceptions of their parental involvement in learning. The Parental Support for Learning Scale: Child Form (PSLS) was administered to a sample of 231 children (aged 10–13 years). Exploratory factor analysis supported a four-factor structure representing parental involvement behaviors and emotional tone: (a) Parental Management of the Learning Environment, (b) Parental Participation With Homework, (c) Controlling Parental Involvement, and (d) Supportive Parental Involvement. Analysis showed satisfactory reliability coefficients. The four factors are discussed in relation to the relevant literature and Conjoint Behavioral Consultation, and future directions for further validation of the PSLS are discussed.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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