Comparing the apple of my eye: Parental reactions to academic social comparisons of their elementary school‐aged children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The current study examines parents’ reactions to making social comparisons of their children on school‐related domains. Parents ( N = 117; ages 25 to 49; 94% women) of elementary school‐age children (ages 5 to 10; 57.3% girls) were recruited online from Facebook parenting groups and several school districts in Atlantic Canada. Participants were randomly assigned to make either an upward, a downward, or a lateral social comparison about their child’s ability in school. Participants reported the time since the event in comparison, their emotional reactions, their evaluations of their child’s ability in the domain, and how important they perceived the domain to be for their child’s future. Domain importance and evaluations of the child’s abilities also were measured prior to making the comparison. Significant differences based on social comparison condition were found for temporal distance, post‐comparison domain importance, and post‐comparison assessments of the child’s ability in the domain. The effect of social comparison on post‐comparison domain importance was not mediated by post‐comparison assessments of the child’s ability, suggesting a direct effect of comparisons on perceived domain importance. These findings suggest that the act of social comparison caused parents to reevaluate the importance of the domain of comparison and their child’s abilities in that domain. Implications for parents and educators are discussed.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".