Adult Generativity and the Socialization of Adolescents: Relations to Mothers’ and Fathers’ Parenting Beliefs, Styles, and Practices
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mothers, fathers, and their adolescent children participated in two studies investigating the relations between Erikson's concept of generativityin adulthood and patterns of parenting. Study 1 involved 77 mothers and 48 fathers of 1st-year university students; Study 2 was part of an investigation of socialization processes in 35 families with an adolescent, aged 14-18. Parental generative concern was assessed by the Loyola Generativity Scale (LGS) of McAdams and de St. Aubin (1992) in each study. In both studies, mothers demonstrated positive relations between scores on the LGS and an authoritative style of parenting, as well as between generativity and more positive, optimistic views of adolescent development. In Study 2, these more positive views in turn mediated some aspects of autonomy-fostering practices used with the adolescent. Variations in fathers' levels of generative concern were less consistently related to these indices of parenting, however.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".