The Social Ecology of Parental Monitoring: Parent–Child Dynamics in a High‐Risk Peruvian Neighborhood
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While parental monitoring is understood to protect adolescents from engaging in risk behaviors, little is known about how the family dynamics involved in parental monitoring differ across sociocultural contexts. We sought to gain an in-depth understanding of parent-child relationship dynamics and parental knowledge of adolescents' activities in an urban Peruvian neighborhood with high levels of crime and adolescent substance use. We conducted 15 in-depth interviews and two focus groups with adolescents and 12 in-depth interviews with mothers sampled from a secondary school in Callao, Peru. Our findings emphasize the importance of parent-child confianza (trust) as a foundation for parental awareness of adolescents' lives and activities. Participants in our sample characterized confianza as encouraging adolescent disclosure and shaping how parental solicitation and rules were interpreted by adolescents. Participants described how confianza was rooted in features of the parent-child relationship, including shared parent-child time, parental affection, adolescent perceptions of parents' ability to give good advice, and awareness of how parents would react to delicate topics. Participants linked these family dynamics, in turn, to economic hardship, parental feelings of sacrifice and stress, perceptions of neighborhood risk, and gender norms limiting fathers' involvement in caregiving. Results have implications for the planning and adaptation of family-based prevention programs for use in high-risk contexts in Latin America.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it