MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402923076 · doi:10.1057/s41599-024-03774-z

Co-parenting, parental competence and problem behaviours in children: examining differential parental roles

2024· article· en· W4402923076 on OpenAlexaff
Baocheng Pan, Youli Wang, Chengli Zhao, Jiaxuan Miao, Yizhao Gong, Bowen Xiao, Yan Li

Bibliographic record

VenueHumanities and Social Sciences Communications · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersChina Postdoctoral Science Foundation
KeywordsDevelopmental psychologyPsychologyCompetence (human resources)Parenting skillsSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, the increase in child problem behaviours has become a significant public health concern. It is crucial to understand the complex dynamics between parental co-parenting, parenting competence, and child problem behaviours to develop effective interventions. This study explored the intricate relationship between parental co-parenting, parenting sense of competence, and child problem behaviours in a sample of 407 parent-child pairs from Shanghai, China. Findings indicated that neither maternal nor paternal perceived co-parenting significantly predicts child problem behaviours directly. However, maternal parenting sense of competence emerges as a significant mediator between maternal perceived co-parenting (both supportive and non-supportive) and child problem behaviours. This highlights the pivotal role of mothers as primary caregivers in shaping parenting dynamics and child outcomes. Conversely, paternal parenting sense of competence does not mediate the relationship between paternal perceived co-parenting and child behaviours, suggesting a nuanced dynamic within paternal care-giving roles. The study underscores theoretical contributions, validating the theory of inconsistent compensation effect and emphasizing the primary caregiver effect within the Chinese family context.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.313
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.089
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.247 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHumanities and Social Sciences CommunicationsSame topicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207