The New Friends Vignettes: Measuring parental psychological control that confers risk for anxious adjustment in preschoolers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This investigation examined the links between preschoolers’ internalizing problems and anxiety-related social difficulties and two aspects of maternal and paternal psychological control: overprotection and critical control. Some 115 mothers and 92 fathers completed the New Friends Vignettes (NFV), a new measure of psychological control and supportive parenting designed to assess parenting relevant to young children’s internalizing problems and anxiety. Children’s anxious behaviors with peers at daycare or preschool were observed, mothers reported on preschoolers’ internalizing problems, and teachers reported on children’s internalizing problems and isolated behaviors. The NFV scales demonstrated good internal consistency and one-year test—retest reliability for mothers and fathers, and moderate convergent validity with observed parenting for mothers. Maternal overprotection and paternal critical control predicted more internalizing problems and anxious adjustment in preschoolers, with some associations being stronger for sons than daughters. Conversely, paternal supportiveness predicted fewer internalizing difficulties at preschool in daughters only. Children’s anxious behaviors predicted increasing paternal overprotection, and their internalizing problems at home and preschool tended to predict increasing maternal overprotection and critical control. Results support the reliability and validity of the New Friends Vignettes, and are indicative of parent differences in socialization processes, gender differences in risk for internalizing problems, and possible bidirectional pathways of influence in the socialization of internalizing trajectories.
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 | 0.000 | 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".