The determinants of parental childrearing behavior trajectories: The effects of parental and child time-varying and time-invariant predictors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
“Why do parents parent the way they do?” remains an important question since it concerns both scientific issues, such as the stability or change of childrearing behavior, and clinical issues, such as the way to promote positive parenting in evidence-based programs. Using an accelerated design, the aim of this study was to examine several parental and child predictors of childrearing behavior trajectories among 373 mothers and 356 fathers of 2- to 9-year-old children. Hypotheses were drawn from Belsky (1984) and subsequent studies of the determinants of parenting. The parental and child predictors were assessed and analyzed as time-varying (parental self-efficacy beliefs and child externalizing behavior) or time-invariant (parental educational level and personality traits) predictors, according to their conceptual properties. The results show a linear decrease in both supportive and controlling childrearing behavior in mothers and an improvement in supportive but a decrease in controlling childrearing behavior in fathers over time. Moreover, the results support the idea that childrearing behavior is determined by multiple factors, in particular the parents’ self-efficacy beliefs and the child’s behavior. Finally, the results confirm the hypothesis of a greater influence of child predictors than of parental ones in the case of mothers, while the reverse hypothesis of a greater predictive power of parental variables than of child ones is confirmed for fathers. The results are discussed both for research and clinical purposes.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".