Children's Understanding of Marital Conflict and the Marital Relationship
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Children's understanding of marital conflict and the marital relationship was investigated in 60 children of 5, 7, and 9 years old. Age differences were hypothesized in four areas of children's understanding of marital conflict and the marital relationship, based on the development between 5 and 9 years of age of children's abilities to (a) analyse complex sequences of behavior in terms of the mental states of protagonists and (b) integrate multiple social roles. The four areas investigated were: conceptions of marital conflict, conflict resolution, family triangulation, and integration of the spousal and parental roles. Children were read stories involving family interactions. Open-ended questions were asked about their understanding of these interactions and a coding scheme was devised that reflected theoretical concepts. Nine-year-olds differed from 5-year-olds on all aspects of their understanding of marital conflict and the marital relationship, and 7-year-olds showed levels of understanding between 5- and 9-year-olds. Younger children were less likely than older children to explain marital conflict in terms of the divergent goals of each parent, to understand conflict resolution as dependent on one person changing their beliefs or goals, to understand that parents were simultaneously spouses and parents and to understand the nature of triangulation. Marital conflict is interpreted very differently by children of different ages.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".