Dynamics of parental criticism and emerging adult emotional functioning: Associations with depression.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
= 19.94, 84.5% women) completed a measure of baseline depression symptoms and daily assessments of perceived parental criticism, anger, anxiety, shame, sadness, and happiness across 30 days. Within-person results revealed that previous day perceived parental criticism predicted subsequent day EA anger (but not vice versa). This cross-lagged association only emerged for anger and not other emotions. Additionally, depression moderated this association, with higher depression symptoms increasing the strength of the association. Between-person results revealed that parental criticism was positively associated with mean/trait anger, anxiety, shame, sadness, but not happiness, as well as affect reactivity (innovation variance) for anger. Associations with affect inertia were not significant. Together, these findings suggest parental criticism is more strongly related to negative than positive emotions, is proximally associated with anger in particular, especially among EAs with increased depression, and may be related to aspects of emotion dysregulation. Family interventions aiming to target negative emotionality in EAs should focus on mitigating criticism or educating parents on the importance of considering psychological health such as depression symptomology when providing critical feedback to minimize heightened negative affect or decrease the likelihood of emotional dysfunction in EAs. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".