The contribution of maternal executive functions and active coping to dyadic affective dynamics: Children with autism spectrum disorder and their mothers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".