Parents, preschoolers, and napping: the development and psychometric properties of two Nap Belief Scales in two independent samples
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Most children cease napping between 2 and 5 years old. Little is known about the predictors of this cessation. Parents' sleep-related beliefs aid in understanding children's nighttime sleep behaviors, but few index daytime sleep beliefs. Methods Two measures of parents' napping beliefs were developed and evaluated-the Parents' Nap Beliefs Scale (14 items) and the Reasons Children Nap Scale (19 items). Canadian parents of 1–5-year-old children completed these questionnaires and other sleep-related measures in independent pilot (n = 201) and replication (n = 702) samples. In the replication sample, a subsample of parents also completed 1–3 weeks of daily sleep diaries. The samples were representative of the Canadian population by ethnicity and region. Results In both samples, both measures demonstrated strong construct validity, convergent and divergent validity, and internal consistency. The Parents' Nap Beliefs Scale was composed of two factors: (a) Positive Beliefs and (b) Negative Beliefs about napping. The Reasons Children Nap Scale was composed of two higher order factors and five lower order factors: (a) Encouragement Reasons (Child related; Parent related) and (b) Discouragement Reasons (Child prefers not to nap; Child functions well without a nap; Scheduling). Discussion Future research should (a) test these scales as longitudinal determinants of children's nap behavior and cessation, (b) evaluate parental Nap Beliefs in non-Western cultures, and (c) adapt these scales for use with childcare providers.
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 | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".