Parental history of positive development and child behavior in next generation offspring: A two-cohort prospective intergenerational study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This study examined whether positive development (PD) in adolescence and young adulthood predicts offspring behavior in two Australasian intergenerational cohorts. The Australian Temperament Project Generation 3 Study assessed PD at age 19–28 (years 2002–2010) and behavior in 1165 infants (12–18 months; 608 girls) of 694 Australian-born parents (age 29–35; 2012–2019; 399 mothers). The Dunedin Multidisciplinary Health and Development Parenting Study assessed PD at age 15–18 (years 1987–1991) and behavior in 695 preschoolers (3–5 years; 349 girls) and their New Zealand born parents (age 21–46; 1994–2018; 363 mothers; 89% European ethnicity). In both cohorts, PD before parenthood predicted more positive offspring behavior (βrange = .11–.16) and fewer behavior problems (βrange = −.09 to −.11). Promoting strengths may secure a healthy start to life.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".