Parents' structuring of children's daily lives in relation to the quality and stability of children's friendships
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study focused on the implications of parents' structuring of their children's home lives for the friendships of their children. Participants were 224 elementary‐school children (108 girls and 116 boys) from four grade levels in two schools in Aix‐en‐Provence, France. Most of the families were of middle or high socio‐economic status. The participating children were seen twice during the same school year in order to assess the stability of their friendship choices and the quality of their friendships. We used Lautrey's (1989) questionnaire in order to assess the parents' styles in the structuring of family life and related child‐rearing practice. This questionnaire delineates three structuring styles: 1) rigid, characterized by considerable imposition of routines with little leeway for exceptional circumstances; 2) flexible, in which established routines can be modified as circumstances dictate; and 3) laissez‐faire, characterized by an absence of predictability and routine. We measured friendship quality by means of Friendship Quality Scale developed by Bukowski, Hoza, and Boivin (1989). This scale consists of 23 items representing five dimensions: companionship, help, security, closeness and conflict. This tool was designed to elicit children's perceptions of a specific relationship with a friend. Results indicated a significant link between parenting style and both of the dimensions of child friendship we studied. Children from homes characterized by a laissez‐faire style of parenting have friendships with more positive features than children from homes with flexible or rigid styles. We also found that friendships were generally less stable and rated as less positive than in similar studies conducted in other countries.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".