Parental Relationship with Twins from Pregnancy to 3 Months: The Relation Among Parenting Stress, Infant Temperament, and Well-Being
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: The transition to parenthood, from pregnancy to postpartum period, is a critical process, particularly for couples expecting twins. There is very little literature regarding the links between anxiety, depression, dyadic adjustment, parental stress, and infant temperament spanning from pregnancy to postpartum. This study has two aims: first, to examine whether mothers’ and fathers’ anxiety, depression, and dyadic adjustment, assessed at the sixth month of pregnancy and three months postpartum, are associated with infants' negative affectivity and parenting stress; second, to examine whether there is any difference between fathers’ and mothers’ levels of parenting stress and perception of the twins’ temperament, as well as to evaluate, separately for mothers and fathers, whether the levels of parenting stress and perception of child temperament differ for each twin. Method: The study participants were 58 parents (29 couples) and their healthy 58 twin babies (51.7% boys, 48.3% girls). Mothers’ ages ranged from 30 to 44 years, (MAge = 36.3 years, SD = 3.2 years), and fathers’ ages ranged from 32 to 52 years, (MAge = 38.2 years, SD = 4.4 years). The parents, during the pregnancy period and three months after delivery, filled out the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale, the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory, and the Dyadic Adjustment Scale. Three months after delivery they also filled out the Parenting Stress Index—Short Form and the Infant Behavior Questionnaire Revised. Results: The analyses showed a significant correlation between parental anxiety/depression symptoms and infants’ negative affectivity and parenting stress (in both mothers and fathers). Moreover, compared to fathers, mothers reported higher scores on specific dimensions of the infants’ negative affectivity, (t (28) = -2.62 and p < .05; t (28) = 2.09 and p < .05), and parenting stress, (t (28) = 2.19 and p < .05; t (28) = 2.23 and p < .05), but only for Twin 2. Finally, the results showed that mothers' perceptions of child temperament vary between two twins, (e.g., distress to limitations: t(28) = 2.08 and p <.05). Discussion: This study highlights the peculiarity of twin parenthood during the fourth trimester. In particular, the differences between twins’ mothers’ and fathers’ perceptions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".