A Matter of Timing? Effects of Parent-Adolescent Conflict on Adolescent Negative Affect and Depressive Symptoms on Six Timescales
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Development is an iterative dynamic process that unfolds over time. Few theories, however, discuss the speed of developmental processes. Therefore, decisions about measurement timing often rely on arbitrary or practical choices, disregarding the timescale dependency of results. As an exemplary case, this preregistered study assessed reciprocal associations between parent-adolescent conflict and ill-being (i.e., negative affect and depressive symptoms) with daily, weekly, biweekly, monthly, bimonthly, and three-monthly intervals. A 100-day diary study (N=159, M=13.31 years, 62% girls, 89% Dutch, Data collection: 2020-21) and a 26-wave biweekly study (N=253, M=14.37 years, 72% girls, 96% Dutch, Data collection: 2019-20) were used. By aggregating measurements multiple timescales could be assessed within the same dataset. Multilevel structural equation modelling revealed that conflict predicted depressive symptoms one month (β=.09) and three months later (β=.13). Reversely, negative affect predicted conflict one week later (β=.07) and depressive symptoms predicted conflict two weeks later (β=.08). Thus, transactional processes may function differently at different timescales, which has implications for expanding developmental theories about the timescales of relevant 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 | 0.005 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 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".