Validation of a revised parental phubbing scale for parents of young children in China
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
To examine the reliability and validity of revised Parental Phubbing Scale (PPS) and measure the level of parental phubbing, 701 Chinese children aged 3–6 years and their parents were investigated. The results indicated that (1) the construct validity of the PPS was supported by the best-fit one-factor model; (2) concurrent validity was established by demonstrating that the PPS was positively related to parental smartphone addiction; (3) the PPS was positively correlated with authoritarian parenting style, established the predictive validity; (4) internal reliability was satisfactory. The results also showed that fathers’ and mothers’ phubbing were at the intermediate level; moreover, phubbing levels were highest among parents aged 31–40. The findings conclude that PPS can be used as a reliable and valid measure to evaluate parents’ phubbing and also highlight the need for further research on mothers’ and fathers’ phubbing.
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 | 0.000 | 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