Reciprocity of Intra-Family Dyadic Relations from Adolescents’ Perspective
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to analyze how adolescents perceiving their parents in acceptance or tight control dimensions construed their intra-family dyadic relations in terms of reciprocity through Repertory Grid Technique. Results showed that majority of adolescents evaluated their relationships with their parents positively. However, they evaluated their parents’ relationships with them negatively. The relationship perceived most negative in the family was the element 'your mother’s current relationship with you’, while the least likened reciprocal relationship was found to be the reciprocal relationship with the mother. It was concluded that adolescents who perceived their parents as accepting found more similarities in their mother's relationship with themselves and with their siblings. These adolescents also viewed their relationship with both parents as similar. As for the adolescents who perceived their parents as exercising strict control, they rated their relationship with their fathers as more reciprocal. The findings in this study were discussed within the framework of Personal Construct Theory.
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.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it