MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4319841832 · doi:10.1080/15388220.2022.2162534

The Influence of Parenting Dimensions and Junior High School Students’ Involvement in Bullying

2023· article· en· W4319841832 on OpenAlexafffund
Christina M. Rinaldi, Okan Bulut, Tracy Muth, Maria Di Stasio

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of School Violence · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBullying, Victimization, and Aggression
Canadian institutionsMacEwan UniversityUniversity of Alberta
FundersAlberta Centre for Child, Family and Community Research
KeywordsAggressionPsychologyIntervention (counseling)Interpersonal communicationDevelopmental psychologyParenting stylesPoison controlHuman factors and ergonomicsSuicide preventionInjury preventionInterpersonal relationshipClinical psychologySocial psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bullying by peers remains a serious problem facing adolescents. A key social support for adolescents is their parents. The unique contributions of specific dimensions comprising authoritative parenting, and adolescents’ involvement in bullying situations was investigated. Self-report data were collected from 125 grade 7 students and 100 grade 8 students (60% female; mean age = 12.74 years). Model testing indicated a positive relationship between parent support, beliefs against aggression, high levels of communication, and low levels of bullying and victimization, both in self-reports, and in effectiveness of problem-solving in hypothetical bullying situations. Results indicate that warm, supportive parenting influences the way adolescents consult with their parents about how to manage conflict, deal with bullying issues, and identify solutions to interpersonal problems. The implications of these findings may influence the comprehensiveness of prevention and intervention models that focus on the aspects of parental education.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.332

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.297 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of School ViolenceSame topicBullying, Victimization, and AggressionFrench-language works237,207