Child‐father attachment in early childhood and behavior problems: A meta‐analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This meta-analytic study examined the associations between child-father attachment in early childhood and children's externalizing and internalizing behavior problems. Based on 15 samples (N = 1,304 dyads), the association between child-father attachment insecurity and externalizing behaviors was significant and moderate in magnitude (r = 0.18, 95% CI: 0.10, 0.27 or d = 0.37, 95% CI: 0.20, 0.55). No moderators of this association were identified. Based on 12 samples (N = 1,073), the association between child-father attachment insecurity and internalizing behaviors was also significant, albeit smaller in magnitude (r = 0.09, 95% CI: 0.02, 0.15; or d = 0.17, 95% CI: 0.03, 0.31). Between-study heterogeneity was insufficient to consider moderators. When compared to the effect sizes of prior meta-analyses on child-mother attachment and behavior problems, the quality of the attachment relationship with fathers yields a similar magnitude of associations to children's externalizing and internalizing behaviors. Results support the need to consider the role of the attachment network, which notably includes attachment relationships to both fathers and mothers, to understand how attachment relationships contribute to child development.
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 | 0.005 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.010 | 0.021 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".