Parental Accuracy Regarding Adolescent Daily Experiences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: There is evidence that parents play an important role in their adolescent's health and well-being, but the links between specific daily processes and biological mechanisms relevant to health remain to be determined. In this study, we examined the role of parental accuracy-that is, whether parents who are more accurate about their adolescents' daily experiences have adolescents with better psychological functioning and inflammatory regulation. METHODS: In a 2-week daily diary study of 116 parent-adolescent dyads, we examined whether parental accuracy about their adolescent's daily demands and the positivity of their day together were associated with markers of psychological functioning and with regulation of the inflammatory response in terms of glucocorticoid sensitivity (the extent to which cortisol is able to dampen the production of inflammatory proteins) in adolescents. RESULTS: Adolescents whose daily experiences were perceived more accurately by their parents reported better psychological adjustment (lower stress and depression) and a greater sensitivity of their immune cells to anti-inflammatory signals from cortisol (i.e., diminished production of inflammatory proteins when cells were stimulated with the combination of a bacterial product [lipopolysaccharide] and cortisol; |β| range, 0.38-0.53, all p values <.041). CONCLUSIONS: Greater parental accuracy regarding adolescents' daily experiences is associated with better adolescent psychological adjustment and a more sensitive anti-inflammatory response to cortisol. These results provide preliminary evidence that parental accuracy regarding their adolescent's daily experiences may be one specific daily parent factor that plays a role in adolescent health and well-being.
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 | 0.012 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".