Tácticas de resolución de conflictos conyugales y parentales en familias sur-brasileñas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
El objetivo del presente estudio fue investigar la relación entre tácticas de resolución de conflictos conyugales y parentales, reportadas por las madres y por los padres, en familias con niños de 4 a 6 años. Se trata de una muestra comunitária de familias provenientes del sur de Brasil, compuesta por 300 participantes (150 mujeres y 150 hombres), de parejas heterosexuales que respondieron individualmente a los siguientes instrumentos: Cuestionario Sociodemográfico, Revised Conflict Tactics Scales (CTS2) y Parent-Child Conflict Tactics Scales (CTSPC). Por medio de análisis estadísticos que involucran un conjunto de MANOVAS, se constató que las tácticas de resolución de conflictos parentales de Disciplina No Violenta, Agresión Psicológica y Punición Corporal combinadas distinguieron con éxito los grupos de madres y padres, en lo que se refiere a la práctica de Negociación, Agresión Psicológica y Violencia Física, en la relación conyugal. Los resultados remiten al efecto spillover, indicando que la tensión de las interacciones conflictivas de la pareja transborda la relación parental.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".