The family ties that protect: Expanded-self comparisons in parent–child relationships
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We examine whether individuals react to social comparisons involving their parent or child as they would to comparisons involving the self. Individuals reported high self–other overlap for mother and child, but not father (Pilot Study), suggesting that individuals may experience mother’s and child’s outcomes as their own. After recalling upward comparisons, high-overlap children (undergraduate students; Study 1) protect their perceptions of their mother, but not father, and parents (with children 18 or younger; Studies 2–3), regardless of overlap, protect their perceptions of their child: They changed the meaning of threatening upward comparisons by rating domains as less important and attributing less responsibility to family members. Finally, we examined self-attributions to rule out the alternative explanation that individuals use these strategies to protect themselves because they feel personally responsible for family members’ outcomes. These studies suggest that individuals experience mother, but not father, comparisons as if they were directly involved but only if they are high in overlap. In contrast, parents experience child comparisons as if they were comparing themselves directly regardless of overlap.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".