Decision-Making Influence in the Family: A Comparison of Turkish Families in Germany and in Turkey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In a longitudinal study including 200 Turkish male adolescents from two regions in Germany and 100 in Turkey, power attributions and power discrepancies in decision-making influence between positions in familial dyads were explored. The power attributions were measured by assessing the childrens ratings of their own and their parents influence in decision-making in four main domains: financial issues, childrens affairs and general family decisions. Discrepancy measures were computed for each familial dyad separately (father-mother; father-child; motherchild). Furthermore, the impact of personal resources and normative social attitudes on the attributions were explored. The results show that the family power structure as perceived by male adolescent children are influenced by the cultural context favoring father dominance in Turkish families independent of cultural context. Furthermore, the attributions of decision-making showed a reversed relationship to fathers resource of education. The more educated the fathers the less powerful they were perceived by their sons. With increasing age the sons attributed more power to themselves in Germany but less power to their parents in Turkey. Thus, during adolescent development sons use two different mechanism for reducing power discrepancies between themselves and their parents depending on cultural context. Turkish mothers seem to profit from fathers empathetic parenting style in Germany but not in Turkey. The results were interpreted as favoring a nonnative resource theory that takes into account that with some levels of resources, e.g. education, different social normative attitudes are associated; these attitudes may counterbalance a positive linear resource effect.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".