Associations between caregiver‐adolescent emodiversity and internalizing symptoms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Relationships between adolescents and primary caregivers play an important role in the development of internalizing (depressive and anxious) symptoms. We examined associations among caregiver-adolescent emotions and their emodiversity (their breadth and frequency) with adolescents' and caregivers' internalizing symptoms. A total of 181 adolescents (aged 13-17 years old) and their primary caregivers participated in a 14-day daily diary study between 2022 and 2023 where they reported their emotions at the end of each day. We used actor-partner interdependence models to examine whether positive and negative emotions and their emodiversity predicted each individual's and their family member's internalizing symptoms. Primary results concentrated on the actor effects of adolescents' and caregivers' mean levels of positive and negative emotions and their own internalizing symptoms. Greater negative emotion and lower positive emotion were associated with greater internalizing symptoms, for both caregivers and adolescents. Caregivers who showed greater positive emodiversity also showed greater internalizing symptoms. In contrast, relatively few partner effects were observed. Our findings point to the need for more research on the role of interpersonal emotions in daily life as they relate to internalizing symptoms. Although our sample captured diversity in ethnicity, results may not generalize across levels of socioeconomic status, gender identity, and caregiver education.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".