Maternal regulation of child affect in externalizing and typically-developing children.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Temporal contingencies between children's affect and maternal behavior play a role in the development of children's externalizing problems. The goal of the current study was to use a microsocial approach to compare dyads with externalizing dysregulation (N =191) to healthy controls (N = 54) on maternal supportive regulation of children's negative and positive affect. Children were between the ages of 8 and 12 years. Mother-child dyads participated in conflict and positive discussions, and child affect and maternal supportive affect regulation were coded in real time. First, no group differences on overall levels of mother supportive regulation or child affect were found. Second, three event history analyses in a 2-level Cox hazard regression framework were used to predict the hazard rate of (a) maternal supportiveness, and of children's transitions (b) out of negative affect and (c) into positive affect. The hazard rate of maternal supportiveness, regardless of child affect, was not different between groups. However, as expected, the likelihood of mothers' supportive responses to children's negative affect was lower in externalizing than comparison dyads. In addition, children with externalizing problems were significantly less likely than typically developing children to transition out of negative affect in response to maternal supportiveness. The likelihood of both typically developing children and children with externalizing problems transitioning into positive affect were not related to specific occurrences of maternal supportiveness. Results of the current study show the importance of temporal dynamics in mother-child interactions in the emergence of children's externalizing problems.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".