MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2779685482 · doi:10.1177/0265407517747417

Parenting goal pursuit is linked to emotional well-being, relationship quality, and responsiveness

2017· article· en· W2779685482 on OpenAlexafffund
Bonnie M. Le, Emily A. Impett

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Social and Personal Relationships · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPsychologyWell-beingDevelopmental psychologyFeelingScale (ratio)Emotional well-beingEmotional securityGoal pursuitQuality (philosophy)Parenting stylesSocial psychologyPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of the current research was to identify the goals underlying parental care and how they are linked to parents’ sense of emotional well-being, relationship quality, and responsiveness to their child’s needs. We examined the link between parenting goals and outcomes through surveying parents cross-sectionally (Studies 1 to 3), in a 10-day daily experience study (Study 4), and by conducting an internal meta-analysis of all four studies ( N total = 1,906). In Studies 1 and 2, parents were found to pursue four unique goals as captured by a new scale called the Parenting Goals Scale (PGS). The PGS measures the four goals of child love and security, child development, parent image, and child acceptance. In Study 3, each of the four goals was found to be meaningfully related to, while also being distinct from, other individual differences in parenting styles, other-focused orientations, self-focused orientations, and attachment styles. In a 10-day daily experience study (Study 4) as well as an internal meta-analysis across all four studies, each goal was found to be uniquely related to parents’ emotional well-being, relationship quality with their child, and feelings of responsiveness to their child’s needs. Daily and chronic pursuit of child love and security goals predicted greater emotional well-being, relationship quality, and responsiveness. In contrast, daily and chronic pursuit of parent image goals predicted poorer emotional well-being, relationship quality, and responsiveness, especially at the chronic level. Child development goals predicted poorer emotional well-being and relationship quality, especially at the chronic level. And finally, child acceptance goals predicted more positive emotions in daily life only. These associations largely held after controlling for parents’ reports of children’s mood and care difficulty. The current findings contribute to a growing body of research focused on understanding the joys and frustrations of parenting.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.130
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations16
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Social and Personal RelationshipsSame topicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207