Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adolescence is a developmental period characterized by significant biological, cognitive, and psychosocial development. Adolescents also increasingly seek autonomy from parents as they establish peer and romantic relationships. Despite earlier beliefs that the relevance of attachment with parents diminishes during adolescence, evidence shows that attachment security within the parent–teen relationship continues to play a key role in determining adolescent health. While the function of attachment relationships with parents changes dramatically from infancy to adolescence, teens continue to turn to their parents for a secure base and benefit from the security within the relationship well into early adulthood. In particular, attachment security with parents plays a critical role in the formation of adolescent emotion regulation strategies, peer and romantic relationships, and autonomy development. Security within the parent–teen relationship represents a balance between autonomy and connectedness—a balance that often involves conflict and requires negotiation between parents and their teens. Just as in earlier stages of development, the capacity of parents to respond to the needs of their teens with sensitivity and attuned provision of a secure base and safe haven remains paramount. Evidence‐informed, attachment‐based interventions that are designed to promote attachment security within the parent–teen relationship are discussed in this entry.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.109 | 0.022 |
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".