Emotion socialization as a dynamic process across emotion contexts.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Emotion-related socialization behaviors that occur during parent-child interactions are dynamic. According to Eisenberg, Cumberland, and Spinrad's (1998) model, ongoing parental reactions to emotions and discussions of emotion indirectly shape children's socioemotional competence throughout childhood and adolescence. Typically developing adolescents-girls especially-are at increased risk for developing internalizing symptoms. We examined if and how emotion dynamics of mother-daughter interactions contribute to adolescent girls' internalizing symptoms. We applied grid-sequence analysis (Brinberg, Fosco, & Ram, 2017) to observational data obtained while N = 96 typically developing adolescent girls (Mage = 13.99 years) and their mothers engaged in 5 different emotionally-laden discussions. We identified patterns of expressed emotions that unfolded during each discussion and examined how interdyad differences in those patterns were associated with mothers' and daughters' internalizing symptoms. Dyads differed with respect to whether mothers or daughters tended to regulate positive emotion expressions. Interdyad differences in moment-to-moment dynamics of happy/excited and worried/sad discussions were associated with adolescent girls' social anxiety symptoms, although differences in emotion dynamics of proud, frustrated/annoyed, and grateful discussions were not. Taken together, results illustrate how methodological innovations are enabling new examination and detailed description of parent-child emotion socialization dynamics. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".