MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Relationship Between Parent‐Infant Bed Sharing and Marital Satisfaction for Mothers of Infants

2012· article· en· W2109352356 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueFamily Relations · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience of respiration and sleep
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsModerationPsychologySocial psychologyDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigated the relationship between marital satisfaction and time spent bed sharing with infants in a community sample of 81 bed sharing mothers. Time spent bed sharing did not significantly predict variance in marital satisfaction when considering bed sharers as a whole. Moderation analysis, however, showed the interaction between time spent bed sharing and group classification either as “intentional,” defined as parents who endorse the ideology of bed sharing, or “reactive,” defined as parents who do not plan to bed share but bed share as a reaction to infant nighttime problems, explained a significant increase in variance in marital satisfaction , ΔR 2 = .075, F (1, 75) = 7.31 , p = .008. None of the intended mediator variables (satisfaction with bed sharing, fatigue, and sexual satisfaction) were significantly correlated with time spent bed sharing. Results highlight the importance of recognizing the differences between intentional bed sharers and reactive bed sharers.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.549

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.120
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.210 · 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