Parenting style patterns and their longitudinal impact on mental health in abused and nonabused adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: While the impact of parenting styles on adolescents' mental health is well documented, no study has used latent person-oriented methods to analyze the effects of parenting style trajectories, experienced by physically abused and nonabused adolescents from early to middle adolescence, on mental health outcomes. Method: In this longitudinal study, we used latent transition analysis (LTA) to detect parenting patterns and their trajectories among 1,709 adolescents from 44 high schools in Switzerland across three data waves (2021-2023) by applying a multigroup comparison between physically nonabused and abused adolescents. Using multinomial regression, we tested the effects of the detected parenting patterns on adolescents' mental health. Results: Along with the two known patterns, termed "supportive" and "negative" parenting, two new parenting patterns which we termed "absent" (low levels on all tested parenting styles) and "ambiguous" (middle to high levels on all tested parenting styles) emerged as playing a key role in the perceptions of adolescents with and without parental abuse experience longitudinally. These four patterns developed in diverse ways: Supportive parenting decreased for abused adolescents over time but remained stable for the nonabused adolescents. The absent parenting level was stable over time among abused adolescents when compared to the outcomes experienced by adolescents subjected to the negative parenting pattern. Furthermore, we found a remarkable decline in the number of nonabused adolescents in the absence pattern from Wave 1 to Wave 3. Further, we also found that abused adolescents reported more negative parenting than nonabused adolescents. Additionally, we found that supportive parenting was beneficial for adolescents' mental health whereas negative, ambiguous, and absent parenting all had detrimental effects. Conclusions: These findings highlight the beneficial association of supportive parenting and the detrimental effects of negative, ambiguous, and absent parenting. This also suggests that we must consider a more complex approach that involves examining a blend of different parenting styles when analyzing adolescent mental health.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".