The Impact of Coparenting on Mothers’ COVID-19-Related Stressors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To test and explore whether more positive coparenting will significantly predict lower COVID-19-related stress across family configurations and dynamics and across both higher- and lower-income mothers, we developed and circulated an online survey among mothers from the U.S. and Canada. Coparenting was measured using the Coparenting Across Family Structures (CoPAFS) short form (27 items) scale, comprised of factors representing five coparenting dimensions: communication, respect, trust, animosity, and valuing the other parent. Items specific to COVID-19 stressors assessed the types of stressors each parent faced. The sample consisted of 236 North American mothers, mostly white (n = 187, 79.2%) and aged 30–50 years. The surveyed mothers reported a consistent and significant relation between more positive coparenting and less COVID-19-related stressors whether parents were living together or not, married or divorced, and with a lower or higher income level, suggesting the importance and centrality of positive coparenting as a key factor for family well-being. Coparenting was especially predictive among mothers who were never married and those with lower incomes.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".