MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2090066596 · doi:10.1037/a0027366

Longitudinal associations between the quality of parent−child interactions and children's sleep at preschool age.

2012· article· en· W2090066596 on OpenAlexafffund
Stéphanie Bordeleau, Annie Bernier, Julie Carrier

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Family Psychology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyLongitudinal studySocioeconomic statusAttendanceMaternal sensitivityAutonomySleep qualityDemographyMedicinePsychiatryCognitionPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aimed to examine the prospective longitudinal links between the quality of mother-child and father-child interactions and preschoolers' sleep. Three dimensions of maternal interactive behavior were considered using 70 mother-child dyads, while the quality of father-child interactions was assessed using 41 of these families. Maternal mind-mindedness was assessed at 12 months during a mother-infant free-play sequence, maternal sensitivity was rated at 12 months based on observations performed throughout a home visit, maternal autonomy support was assessed at 15 months with a 10-min problem-solving situation, and the quality of father-child interactions was scored at 18 months, during father-child free play. Children's sleep was assessed at 3 and 4 years using a sleep diary completed by mothers during 3 consecutive days. Results indicated that, after controlling for family socioeconomic status and daycare attendance, the quality of both mother-infant and father-infant interactions was positively related to children's percentage of night-time sleep at preschool age. These findings add to previous literature in suggesting that early caregiving behavior by both mothers and fathers is related to subsequent child sleep.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.468

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.076
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.328 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations114
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Family PsychologySame topicSleep and related disordersFrench-language works237,207