The role of interparental relationship variability in parent–child interactions: Results from a sample of mothers of children with autism spectrum disorder and mothers with neurotypical children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objective The goal of this study was to examine how variability in interparental relationship functioning predicts the quality of parent–child interactions in daily life among families in which a child had autism spectrum disorder (ASD), and families of neurotypical children. Background Parent–child interactions predict a host of key outcomes for children, and one contributor to the health of parent–child interactions is the quality of the relationship between the parent couple. Yet, prior research has exclusively focused on how average levels of parental relationship functioning predicts parent–child interactions, which neglects the importance of variability in the interparental relationship. Method Drawing on a sample of 167 mothers, one group with a child with ASD ( n = 85), and the other group with a neurotypical child ( n = 82), we examined how weekly variability in mothers' relational experiences with their partner predicted their interactions with their children in daily life using multilevel modeling. Results The association between interparental relational variability and mother child‐interactions depended on mean levels of interparental relational functioning. Specifically, when mothers reported poor average relational functioning across a particular week, greater variability in their relationship across this same period was associated with benefits for mother–child interactions. This pattern was not seen in those with healthy interparental functioning. Moreover, moderation analyses suggested relational variability may be especially relevant for parent–child interactions of mothers of neurotypical children. Conclusion These results suggest that the association between variability in parents' relational experiences and parent–child interactions depends upon mean levels.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".