Helicopter Parenting of Minor Teenagers in India: Scale Development and Consequences
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
In this study, we develop a new scale for measuring helicopter parenting of teenagers in India using a sample of 425 teenage students (aged 13–17 years) in the New Delhi education system. The Minor Teen Helicopter Parenting Scale consists of two validated factors of helicopter parenting we label: Pressure and Intrusion. Both factors demonstrated high validity through factor analysis procedures and high levels of reliability (0.804 and 0.709, respectively). Both pressure and intrusion were associated with academic performance and well-being outcomes. Both factors were an improvement over the Helicopter Parenting Scale (HPS) for this age group. Analysis of the HPS did not yield an acceptable reliability (0.422) for these teenagers under the age of 18. Pressure was more related academic performance and school-related outcomes. Intrusion was more associated with general well-being, self-reported health, and happiness. Results suggest the new measure with two subscales is a more age-appropriate tool for assessing helicopter parenting in parents of children not yet in the college or university life stage. Implications for these findings are discussed and future research is considered.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it