Cultural influences on parental responses to children's pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is a scarcity of work examining the relationship between culture and pain-related caregiver behaviors. Moreover, no pediatric pain studies have examined the relationship between caregiver cultural values and pain-related caregiver behaviors nor discern if this process is mediated by caregiver parenting styles and moderated by ecosocial context. Based on cross-cultural developmental theories, this study hypothesized that ecosocial context would moderate the relationship between cultural values, parenting styles, and pain-related caregiver behaviors; and that parenting styles mediate the effect of cultural values on pain-related caregiver behaviors. A cross-cultural survey design was employed using a convenience sample of 547 caregivers of 6 to 12 year olds living in Canada (n = 183), Iceland (n = 184), and Thailand (n = 180). Multigroup structural equation modeling showed that ecosocial context did not affect which cultural model of parenting the caregiver adopted. Parenting styles mediated the relationship between cultural values and pain-related caregiver behavior. Vertical/horizontal individualism, collectivism, and authoritative- and authoritarian-parenting styles positively predicted solicitousness. Vertical individualism and authoritarian-parenting style positively predicted discouraging behavior, whereas other predictors did not. The findings support the sociocommunication model of children's pain by showing that cultural context does affect parents' behaviors. They also corroborate with others' claims of solicitousness universality in a pediatric pain context. However, solicitousness may have different cultural meanings among individuals and may be used in conjunction with discouraging behavior. The findings from this study have implications for the theory development about culture and pediatric pain, but do not provide specific clinical recommendations.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".