Coparenting Quality During COVID-19: Exploring Gender Differences Using a Mixed Methods Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to examine potential differences in coparenting quality during the COVID-19 pandemic among mothers and fathers using an embedded mixed methods approach. The objectives were to compare mothers' and fathers' scores on the Coparenting Relationship Scale among 150 mother-father dyads, and to examine mothers' and fathers' perceptions of how COVID-19 influenced their coparenting quality using thematic analysis of 159 mothers' and 75 fathers' responses to an open-ended coparenting survey question. While total coparenting quality scores did not differ among mothers and fathers, fathers had significantly higher scores on the division of labour and endorsement subscales, and mothers had significantly higher scores on the undermining subscale. The qualitative thematic analysis identified five key themes: gendered changes to division of labour, increased hostility, increased teamwork, less alone time, and increased stress. Efforts to mitigate adverse pandemic outcomes on families should address coparenting quality.
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 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 | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".