MAKING CHILDREN LAUGH: PARENT–CHILD DYADIC SYNCHRONY AND PRESCHOOL ATTACHMENT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current study examined whether dyadic synchrony of father-child and mother-child interactions in a playful context were associated with attachment organization in preschool children. One hundred seven children (48 boys, Mage = 46.67 months, SD = 8.57) and their mothers and fathers (counterbalanced order of lab visits) participated in a playful interaction without toys (Laughing Task procedure). Playful interactions were coded based on the degree to which the dyads demonstrated a variety of behavior representing dyadic synchrony and task management. Children's attachment behavior toward fathers and mothers was observed in a modified separation-reunion procedure adapted for the preschool period. Results demonstrate that mothers and fathers are similar in their effort to arouse and engage their child in a playful context, but mothers achieved a greater synchrony with their child. Disorganized attachment to either mother or father is linked with a lack of synchrony in dyadic interaction. Findings are in contrast with prevailing theory, suggesting that despite gender-related differences in parental playful behaviors, dyadic synchrony is equally important in both mother- and father-child relationships for the development of organized social and affectional bonds.
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 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".