MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3124789587 · doi:10.1111/cdev.13545

Paternal Sensitivity and Children’s Cognitive and Socioemotional Outcomes: A Meta-Analytic Review

2021· review· en· W3124789587 on OpenAlexafffund
Michelle Rodrigues, Nina Sokolovic, Sheri Madigan, Yiqi Luo, Victoria Silva, Shruti Misra, Jennifer M. Jenkins

Bibliographic record

VenueChild Development · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Toronto
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSocioemotional selectivity theoryPsychologyModerationCognitionDevelopmental psychologyCognitive skillExecutive functionsMeta-analysisSocial psychologyPsychiatryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In a series of meta-analyses, paternal sensitivity was associated with children's (age range: 7 months-9 years) overall cognitive functioning (N = 3,193; k = 23; r = .19), including language skills (k = 9; r = .21), cognitive ability (k = 9; r = .18), and executive function (k = 8; r = .19). Paternal sensitivity was not associated with children's overall socioemotional functioning (N = 2,924; k = 24; r = -.03) or internalizing problems, but it was associated with children's emotion regulation (k = 7; r = .22) and externalizing problems (k = 19; r = -.08). In the broad cognitive functioning, executive function, broad socioemotional functioning, and externalizing problems meta-analyses, child age was a significant moderator.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.014
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations142
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChild DevelopmentSame topicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207