Parental Approval, Active Mediation, and Adolescent Online Social Behavior: Differences by Parent-Child Gender Pairs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adolescents across the globe spend a significant amount of time engaging in online social behavior (OSB). Parents play an important role in influencing adolescent online behavior, however, there is limited understanding about what influences parent’s management of their children’s online behavior. The current study was designed to examine the complex associations between parents’ attitudes about OSB, active parental mediation of adolescent’s online behavior, and adolescent OSB using a diverse U.S. sample. Further, whether these associations are moderated by parent-child gender was examined. Results add insight into how, and under what circumstances fathers and mothers differentially monitor their adolescents’ online behavior and what that means for adolescents’ actual online behavior. Results also provide a preliminary understanding of the role parents’ approval of OSB plays in adolescent OSB and how this association is moderated by parent-child gender. This research helps lay the groundwork for developing strategies targeted toward shaping and/or changing parents’ attitudes about their sons’ and daughters’ OSB in ways that support mediation strategies and responsible adolescent OSB.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".