MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3169086608 · doi:10.3390/children8060508

Examining Reciprocal Links between Parental Autonomy-Support and Children’s Peer Preference in Mainland China

2021· article· en· W3169086608 on OpenAlexaff
Na Hu, Muzi Yuan, Junsheng Liu, Robert J. Coplan, Ying Zhou

Bibliographic record

VenueChildren · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsReciprocalMainland ChinaAutonomyPreferenceChinaPsychologyMainlandSocial psychologyDevelopmental psychologyPolitical scienceGeographyEconomicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study examined the longitudinal relations between child perceptions of parental autonomy-support and peer preference in mainland China. Participants were N = 758 children (50.8% boys; Mage = 10.78 years, SD = 1.03 at Wave 1; Mage = 11.72 years, SD = 1.11 at Wave 2; Mage = 12.65 years, SD = 0.95 at Wave 3) from elementary and middle schools in Shanghai, P.R. China. Children were followed over three years from Grades 4–6 to Grades 6–8. Each year, children reported their perceived maternal/paternal autonomy-support and peer preference (being well-liked among peers) was measured via peer nominations. Among the results, peer preference positively predicted later perceptions of maternal and paternal autonomy-supportive parenting, whereas autonomy-supportive parenting did not significantly predict later peer preference. Results are discussed in terms of the interactions between parental autonomy-supportive parenting and children’s peer relationships in Chinese culture.

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 score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.938

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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations14
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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