MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3080324453 · doi:10.3138/jcfs.51.2.05

Adolescent Autonomy Satisfaction and Parental Support to Autonomy in Mexico

2020· article· en· W3080324453 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rosario Esteinou, Alejandro Vázquez-Arana, Esther Guerrero

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Comparative Family Studies · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutonomyPsychologySocial psychologyOrdered logitDevelopmental psychologyOddsOrdinal regressionLogistic regressionPolitical scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Based on cross-sectional data from a national survey of Mexican adolescents aged 14 to 17 years, we analyzed parents’ support to their autonomy and their satisfaction. Acknowledging independence and volitional functioning as two dimensions of autonomy, we approached the following questions: whether adolescents were satisfied with the autonomy granted by their parents; whether parents supported both dimensions of autonomy; which variables predict such satisfaction; and whether there were differences according to the sex of the parents and the adolescents. We carried out two ordinal logit regression models and odds ratio for each parent and found that adolescents were satisfied with their parent’s support to autonomy, except to being out of home alone; there are strong gender differences in autonomy satisfaction, as girls are 50% less likely to be satisfied; predictors also differ according to the sex of parent, either in their level of contribution or in the area where support is provided. Being out alone and choosing friends were predictors in both parents’ models. Choosing dressing-style predicts autonomy satisfaction in the mother’s model while choosing romantic partners predicts it in the father’s. In the volitional dimension, the variables of what is right or wrong in the mother’s model and trust in adolescent’s abilities in decision-making in the father’s model contributed more to satisfaction. We discuss these findings in terms of the distribution of jurisdictional areas of decision-making between parents and adolescents.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.525

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.119
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Comparative Family StudiesSame topicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207