Comparative Analysis of Parenting Styles and their Impact on Children's Well-Being: A Cross-Cultural Perspective in Malaysia, China, and Taiwan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: This research provides an in-depth comparative analysis of parenting styles and their associated communication patterns in Malaysia, Taiwan, and the Chinese mainland. It also explores how they affect children's well-being through social and emotional development. The study examined the evolving parenting styles in four areas: language and verbal communication, non-verbal communication, gender roles and gendered communities, and family communication. Methods: A comprehensive literature search focused on journal articles published between 2018 and 2023. The scientific databases employed for this search encompassed reputable platforms such as Web of Science (WOS), Scopus, PubMed, and Google Scholar. Results: In the language and verbal communication domain, this research offers insights into how parents utilize language as a tool for discipline and emotional expression, indicating a gradual transition in communication styles from authoritarian to democratic. Non-verbal communication sheds light on the nuanced yet impactful ways emotions and norms are conveyed, encompassing eye contact and body gestures. Gender roles and gendered communities unveil a shift in perspectives from traditional to more egalitarian. As these countries or regions progress socially and economically, a transformation in the perception and implementation of gender roles is observed, influencing parenting strategies and children's self-concept. This paper amalgamates these aspects within the realm of family communication to underscore the growing influence of mutual communication and open dialogue in enriching parent-child relationships. Conclusion: The paper concludes that parenting styles are evolving with changing social norms, indicating the adaptability and responsiveness of parents to dynamic social dynamics, ultimately proving advantageous to children's development.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".