Retrospective Reports of Parental Socialization of Physical Pain During Childhood Predicting Emerging Adults’ Current Coping With Pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although a bulk of the literature has examined the methods by which people cope with physical pain, little attention has been devoted to how people learn to respond to pain. The current study examined the relation between college students’ reports of parental socialization of pain during childhood and their current coping with pain. One hundred twenty-four (65.3% female) college students reported on two methods of parental socialization they experienced during childhood: a) their mothers’ direct responses to their physical pain and b) mothers’ modeling of how they coped with their own pain. College students also reported on their own current coping strategies regarding physical pain. Results indicated that retrospective reports of mothers’ active coping with their own pain and mothers’ promotion responses to their child’s pain during childhood significantly positively predicted college students’ current active coping. These findings suggest the relevance of both methods of pain socialization (parental modeling and parents’ direct responses) for college-age children’s current coping with pain.
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) | 0.000 | 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".