Mentalizing in first-time fathers: reflective functioning as a mediator between attachment representation and sensitivity
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sensitivity in parent-child interaction is essential for child development. Since fathers are increasingly involved in childrearing, identifying factors leading to paternal sensitivity is crucial. We examined the relation between attachment representation and reflective functioning (RF) as factors influencing paternal sensitivity in a longitudinal study including N = 40 first-time fathers (Mage = 33) and their 6-month-old children. We used the Adult Attachment Interview during pregnancy to assess paternal attachment representation and general RF, the Parental Development Interview to assess fathers’ parental RF, and the Emotional Availability Scale to measure sensitivity at child’s age of 6 month. Data show that secure paternal attachment representation, high general and parental RF are associated with higher levels of paternal sensitivity. Further, parental RF mediates the association between attachment representation and paternal sensitivity. These findings contribute to the identification of a causal interplay in that they suggest an explanatory effect of RF on the association between fathers’ attachment representation, and sensitivity.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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 it