Adolescent Autonomy Satisfaction and Parental Support to Autonomy in Mexico
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".