Associations between parental civic engagement, negative beliefs toward civic engagement and youths' future civic attitudes and behaviors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Civic engagement (CE) in adolescence is associated with a higher level of engagement in adulthood and is reported to be beneficial to youth's development and societal well-being. Parents are among the most influential factors in adolescents' lives. This study examined the associations between parents' own civic participation, their negative beliefs toward youth CE and their child's future CE. While prior research documented positive associations between parental civic behaviors and youth CE, the role of parental negative beliefs has remained unexplored and could act as an additional barrier to adolescents' CE. METHODS: A total of 234 adolescents (65% girls; mean age = 13.77) and their parents (79% mothers; mean age = 44.20), residing in the Canadian province of Quebec from 2016 to 2019, were recruited for this cross-sectional study. Parents completed measures of their civic activities and their negative beliefs regarding youth CE. Adolescents completed measures of future civic attitudes and behaviors. RESULTS: Hierarchical regressions revealed significant positive cross-sectional associations between parental civic behaviors and their child's future civic attitudes and behaviors. However, parental negative beliefs toward youth CE were negatively associated with youths' future civic attitudes and behaviors, even after considering parental civic behaviors and family socioeconomic status. Adolescents' age did not moderate these relationships. CONCLUSION: These findings highlight the significant role that parents could play in shaping CE of future generations. Interventions promoting youth CE should thus target both adolescents and their parents.
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 | 0.003 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".