Association between maternal reflective function and preschool children’s cognitive abilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Children's cognitive abilities (e.g., working memory) are associated with mental health, adaptive behaviors, and academic achievement, and may be enhanced by parental reflective function (i.e., capacity to reflect on mental states, feelings, thoughts, and intentions in one's child and oneself). We evaluated associations between maternal reflective function and children's cognitive abilities alone and while controlling for parent-child attachment and interaction quality, and psychosocial (i.e., maternal depressive symptoms, adverse childhood experiences) and sociodemographic (e.g., socioeconomic status) factors. Our sample, recruited in Canada, was primarily white and included 73 mothers and their 4-5 year old preschool children. Maternal reflective function was measured with the Reflective Functioning Scale applied to the Parent Development Interview and the Parental Reflective Functioning Questionnaire. Multiple regression analyses revealed that maternal reflective function was associated with children's cognitive abilities. The Parent Development Interview rated child-reflective function was associated with children's higher verbal comprehension alone and while adjusting for covariates (e.g., parent-child interaction quality, socioeconomic status), and the Parental Reflective Functioning Questionnaire Interest and Curiosity with higher verbal comprehension while adjusting for parent-child interactions and attachment pattern. The Parental Reflective Functioning Questionnaire Certainty in Mental States was associated with higher working memory scores for children while adjusting for covariates. Full Scale IQ and Visual Spatial Index were not significantly associated with maternal reflective function. Associations were found between secure and disorganized attachment with higher verbal comprehension and lower working memory, respectively. These findings highlight the importance of high maternal reflective function to cognitive abilities in early childhood.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 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".