Work–family conflict and parental strain among Canadian Armed Forces single mothers: The role of coping
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Single-parent military families experience a combination of single-parenthood stressors and military life–related stressors, including work–family conflict and parental strain. Previous research has suggested that ineffective coping strategies in relation to maintaining work–family balance and dealing with parental strain may contribute to psychological distress among single military mothers. Methods: To address the research limitations, an electronic survey was administered to single Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) mothers in 2014. This study examined the role of work–family conflict, parental strain, and coping in the well-being of CAF single mothers ( N = 223). We expected that work–family conflict, parental strain, and coping strategies would play an important role in the well-being of single CAF mothers and that coping strategies would also moderate the path between single-parenthood difficulties (work–family conflict and parental strain) and psychological well-being. Results: Hierarchical regression analyses demonstrated that work–family conflict and parental strain have strong negative impacts on the well-being of single CAF mothers. Although coping strategies serve as important and unique predictors of well-being, they do not buffer the impact of military life–related stress on single mothers. Discussion: Recommendations for mitigating the impact of work–family conflict and parental strain for single mothers in the CAF are offered.
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 | 0.000 | 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".