MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2991098148 · doi:10.1002/jcop.22293

Social media use and parent–child relationship: A cross‐sectional study of adolescents

2019· article· en· W2991098148 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Community Psychology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChild Development and Digital Technology
Canadian institutionsChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDaughterOdds ratioOddsAssociation (psychology)DemographyConfidence intervalPsychologySocial mediaDevelopmental psychologyScreen timeMedicineLogistic regressionInternal medicineSociologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examined the association between social media use and parent-child relationship quality and tested whether this association is independent of total screen time. Data on 9,732 students (48.4% female) aged 11-20 years were obtained from a provincially representative school-based survey. Heavy use of social media (daily use of more than 2 hr) was associated with greater odds of negative relationships between mother-daughter (odds ratio [OR] = 1.79; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.27-2.52), father-daughter (OR = 1.56; 95% CI: 1.16-2.09), father-son (OR = 2.19; 95% CI: 1.58-3.05) but not mother-son (OR = 1.17; 95% CI: 0.88-1.55). Results were similar after further adjusting for total screen time. There were no significant associations between regular use of social media (2 hr or less) and parent-child relationships. These findings suggest that heavy use of social media is associated with negative parent-child relationships. Longitudinal research is necessary to disentangle the pathways between social media use and the parent-child relationship.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.352

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.140
GPT teacher head0.417
Teacher spread0.277 · 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