Dual process in parent–adolescent moral socialization: The moderating role of maternal warmth and involvement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: It has been argued that moral identity can be conceptualized as implicit and automatic or explicit and controlled dualities of cognitive information processing. In this study, we examined whether socialization in the moral domain may also exhibit a dual process. We further tested whether parenting that is warm and involved may play a moderating role in moral socialization. We assessed relations between mothers' implicit and explicit moral identity, warmth and involvement, and the prosocial behavior and moral values of their adolescent children. METHODS: Participants were 105 mother-adolescent dyads from Canada, with adolescents between 12 and 15 years of age and 47% girls. Mothers' implicit moral identity was measured using the Implicit Association Test (IAT), adolescents' prosocial behavior was measured using a donation task, and the remaining mother and adolescent measures were self-reported. Data were cross-sectional. RESULTS: We found that mothers' implicit moral identity was associated with adolescents' greater generosity during the prosocial behavior task, but only when mothers were warm and involved. Mothers' explicit moral identity was associated with adolescents' more prosocial values. CONCLUSIONS: Moral socialization may occur through dual processes, and as an automatic process may only take place when mothers are also high in warmth and involvement, setting the conditions for adolescents' understanding and acceptance of the moral values being taught and ultimately their automatic morally relevant behaviors. Adolescents' explicit moral values, on the other hand, may be aligned with more controlled, reflective socialization processes.
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 | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".