MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3206355571 · doi:10.1111/cdev.13695

A mediation meta-analysis of the role of maternal responsivity in the association between socioeconomic risk and children’s language

2021· review· en· W3206355571 on OpenAlexafffund
Sahar Borairi, Pasco Fearon, Sheri Madigan, André Plamondon, Jennifer M. Jenkins

Bibliographic record

VenueChild Development · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLanguage Development and Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Toronto
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsSocioeconomic statusPsychologyMediationAssociation (psychology)Developmental psychologyMeta-analysisLanguage developmentEnvironmental healthPsychotherapistMedicinePopulationSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This meta-analysis tested maternal responsivity as a mediator of the association between socioeconomic risk and children's preschool language abilities. The search included studies up to 2017 and meta-analytic structural equation modeling, allowed us to examine the magnitude of the indirect effect across 17 studies (k = 19). The meta-analysis included 6433 predominantly White, English speaking children (Mage = 36 months; 50% female) from Western, industrialized countries. All paths in the model were statistically significant, notably, the indirect effect was significant (b = −.052), showing that maternal responsivity may be a proximal intervening variable between socioeconomic risk and children's language development. Moderator analyses found that the indirect effect was stronger for sensitive parenting than warmth and when parenting was assessed in the family home.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
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: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.033
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.290 · 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

Citations42
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChild DevelopmentSame topicLanguage Development and DisordersFrench-language works237,207