Links Between the Mother–Adolescent and Father–Adolescent Relationships and Adolescent Depression: A Genetically Informed Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the unique roles of support and conflict in the relationship with the mother and the father in predicting changes in adolescents' depressive symptoms over a 1-year period. Potential moderating effects of genetic factors (Gene × Environment interaction) and sex were also investigated. This study utilized a design of twins raised in the same family, based on a sample of 121 monozygotic and 88 dizygotic same-sex twin pairs (418 individuals; 52.2% girls) assessed in Grade 8 (M = 14.09, SD = .29) and in Grade 9 (M = 15.07, SD = .26). Depressive symptoms and the parent-adolescent relationship quality were measured with self-report questionnaires. Multilevel regressions revealed that a lack of support in the father-adolescent relationship predicted increased depressive symptoms among all adolescents, whereas conflict in the father-adolescent relationship predicted increased depressive symptoms more strongly as adolescents' genetic vulnerability for depressive symptoms increased. Moreover, a high level of support in the relationship with the mother predicted increased depressive symptoms in boys-but not girls-with a high genetic risk for such problems. In line with a diathesis-stress model of psychopathology, these findings suggest that relationship quality with both parents might impact girls' and boys' depressive symptoms but that these associations depend to some extent on adolescents' genetic vulnerabilities.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".