MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2982203865 · doi:10.1177/1362361319854653

The contribution of maternal executive functions and active coping to dyadic affective dynamics: Children with autism spectrum disorder and their mothers

2019· article· en· W2982203865 on OpenAlexaff
Anat Zaidman‐Zait

Bibliographic record

VenueAutism · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFamily and Disability Support Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersEuropean Commission
KeywordsPsychologyCognitive flexibilityDevelopmental psychologyCoping (psychology)AutismAutism spectrum disorderCognitionExecutive functionsAffect (linguistics)Working memoryFlexibility (engineering)Inhibitory controlClinical psychologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Parenting is a cognitive, emotional, and behavioral endeavor, where parents' control capacities, including executive functions and active control coping, help parents to guide and regulate interactions with their children; yet limited research investigates how these capacities are associated with parent-child affective regulation processes during parent-child interactions. This study examined whether maternal executive functions (sustained attention, interference inhibitory control, working memory) and active engaged coping were related to dyadic affective flexibility and positive mutual affective interactions between mothers and their young children with autism spectrum disorders (N = 40). Dyadic flexibility and mutual positive affect were measured using dynamic systems-based modeling of second-by-second affective patterns during a mother-child interaction. The results showed that higher levels of maternal sustained attention and inhibitory control were related to increased dyadic affective flexibility. In addition, higher levels of maternal sustained attention and higher use of engaged coping were related to dyadic mutual positive affect. The findings highlight the importance of maternal cognitive control capacity in promoting adaptive parent-child dyadic regulatory processes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.076
Threshold uncertainty score0.391

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.254 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAutismSame topicFamily and Disability Support ResearchFrench-language works237,207