The Relationship Between Parenting Styles and Behavioral Disorders in LD Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study has been conducted with the objective of evaluating the role of parenting styles in prediction of behavioral disorders in children with Learning Disability (LD). This study is a descriptive work conducted using correlation methods in kind of prediction model and statistical population in this study consists of children with learning disability (LD) referring to Educational and Rehabilitation Centers for Specific Learning Disorders of Tehran during academic year 2014-15. Using purposeful and voluntary sampling method, 130 people were selected as sample size. Data collection instrument in this study includes Bumerind parenting style questionnaire and Child Behavior Checklist for ages 6-18 Achenbach system of empirically based assessment (CBCL). Data analysis was done using Pearson correlation and multivariate regression using SPSS. The results obtained from the study showed that there is no significant correlation between authoritarian and authoritative parenting style and any components of behavioral disorders of LD children and only permissive parenting style has negative and significant correlation with externalized disorders of LD children.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".