Bibliographic record
Abstract
A good understanding of parenting principles helps clinicians to advise parents how to optimally support their child's brain development. Parenting principles include co-regulation, attachment, and the five universal parenting strategies that produce self-regulation and attachment. This primer provides updated knowledge translation from evidence-based literature, by integrating interpersonal neurobiology with parenting intervention research. Secure attachment to the parent decreases a child's stress responses and increases their emotion regulation skills. The child needs support from their parent when stress exceeds their self-regulation skills. Emotion regulation is foundational for all aspects of cognitive and interpersonal functioning. Parent empathy and problem-solving are required to support development of the child's self-regulation and problem-solving, which in turn foster communication of empathy toward others and development of other skills. The warmth and structure of the five universal parenting strategies provide a straightforward conceptualization of authoritative parenting, which builds secure attachment and self-regulation described by interpersonal neurobiology. Parenting principles are simple to remember when integrating the five universal parenting strategies (attention and empathy, predictable daily routines, consistent sequence within the routines, household rules, and coaching skills) with the four S's of attachment (Seen + Soothed + Safe for Secure attachment).
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.053 | 0.027 |
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".