MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2120588587 · doi:10.1207/s15374424jccp3502_9

The Timing of Parent and Child Depression: A Hopelessness Theory Perspective

2006· article· en· W2120588587 on OpenAlexaff
John R. Z. Abela, Steven A. Skitch, Philippe Adams, Benjamin L. Hankin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyDepressive symptomsDepression (economics)Association (psychology)Perspective (graphical)Clinical psychologyMultilevel modelDevelopmental psychologyTest (biology)PsychiatryCognitionPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examined whether children's inferential styles moderate the association between the onset of depressive symptoms in children and their parents. To provide a powerful test of our hypotheses, we utilized a high-risk sample (parents with a history of major depressive episodes and their children) and a multiwave longitudinal design. During the initial assessment, 140 children (ages 6 to 14) completed measures assessing depressogenic inferential styles. Parents and children also completed measures assessing current level of depressive symptoms. Following the initial assessment, children and parents were contacted every 6 weeks for the next year to complete measures assessing depressive symptoms. The results of hierarchical linear modeling analyses indicated that children who exhibited depressogenic inferential styles reported greater elevations in depressive symptoms following elevations in their parent's level of depressive symptoms than did children who did not exhibit such styles. The strength of this association was greater in girls.

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)0.002
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 score0.335
Threshold uncertainty score0.704

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.350 · 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

Citations48
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Child & Adolescent PsychologySame topicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207