MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2150841980 · doi:10.1037/a0034693

Socioeconomic status and parenting in ethnic minority families: Testing a minority family stress model.

2013· article· en· W2150841980 on OpenAlexaff
Rosanneke A. G. Emmen, Maike Malda, Judi Mesman, Marinus H. van IJzendoorn, Mariëlle J. L. Prevoo, Nihal Yeniad

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Family Psychology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsPolicyWise for Children & Families
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStressorPsychologySocioeconomic statusAcculturationEthnic groupCongerTurkishDevelopmental psychologyEarly Head StartDistressClinical psychologyDemographyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

According to the family stress model (Conger & Donnellan, 2007), low socioeconomic status (SES) predicts less-than-optimal parenting through family stress. Minority families generally come from lower SES backgrounds than majority families, and may experience additional stressors associated with their minority status, such as acculturation stress. The primary goal of this study was to test a minority family stress model with a general family stress pathway, as well as a pathway specific to ethnic minority families. The sample consisted of 107 Turkish-Dutch mothers and their 5- to 6-year-old children, and positive parenting was observed during a 7-min problem-solving task. In addition, mothers reported their daily hassles, psychological distress, and acculturation stress. The relation between SES and positive parenting was partially mediated by both general maternal psychological stress and maternal acculturation stress. Our study contributes to the argument that stressors specific to minority status should be considered in addition to more general demographic and family stressors in understanding parenting behavior in ethnic minority families.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.128
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.077
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.263 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations136
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Family PsychologySame topicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207