Adolescents' satisfaction with academic achievement and the development of psychological resources: The moderating role of parental satisfaction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although a positive association between students' satisfaction with academic achievement and psychological well-being has been well-documented, less is known about whether this association is moderated by parental satisfaction with children's academic achievement. The objective of this study is to address this knowledge gap. This study utilized data from Wave 1 (2018) to Wave 3 (2020) of the Korean Children and Youth Panel Survey 2018 (KCYPS 2018), comprising a sample of 3,871 students from Grades 4 and 7. Children's and parents' satisfaction with academic achievement were considered as key independent variables. Psychological outcomes included depressive symptoms, life satisfaction, and self-esteem. Fixed effects models were estimated to account for unobserved time-invariant confounding factors. Children's satisfaction with academic achievement was significantly associated with a decrease in depressive symptoms ( b = −0.398) and an increase in life satisfaction ( b = 0.593) and self-esteem ( b = 0.643). The interaction model revealed that the association between students' satisfaction with academic achievement and psychological outcomes is strengthened when parental satisfaction is higher. Efforts to foster a positive attitude toward academic achievement in both students and parents can enhance adolescents' psychological well-being. Interactive communication between parents and children regarding academic achievement will be required.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".