PARENTAL MONITORING, MEDIA LITERACY, AND MEDIA VIOLENCE: A PRELIMINARY EVALUATION OF THE FOURTH R PARENT MEDIA VIOLENCE WORKSHOP
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>As youth's lives have become increasingly infused with all types of media, debates regarding the effect of violent media on youth have emerged. Within this debate, parental monitoring has been identified as an important protective factor against some negative outcomes. Accordingly, the Fourth R Parent Media Violence Workshop was developed to educate parents about the importance of setting rules around media use and to encourage parents to monitor their children's media consumption. Two waves of data were collected six months apart (nTime 1=226, nTime 2=52) with parents who attended the workshop, and results indicate that parents engaged in enhanced, appropriately restrictive and active monitoring practices following the workshop. A significant decrease in children's media consumption was also reported between Time 1 and Time 2. The results provide preliminary evidence to suggest that even short, one-time intensive workshops for parents can move parents' behaviours in the intended direction and positively impact their monitoring strategies.</p>
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".