The Influence of an Authoritarian Parenting Style on Depressive Symptoms and Social Support Among Thai Undergraduates: The Mediating Role of Self-Esteem
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of the research was to investigate the mediating influence of self-esteem on the link between authoritarian parenting style, and social support, and depressive symptoms among Thai undergraduates. A cross-sectional study to employ a multi-stage random sampling approach, 439 students were selected from a university in central Thailand. Self-report questionnaires, including the Thai version of the patient health questionnaire for adolescents, the parenting style questionnaire, and Rosenberg’s self-esteem scale, were utilized as research instruments. Descriptive statistics and structural equation modeling were used to explore the magnitude of direct and indirect effects on the depressive symptoms among the sample. The findings demonstrated that the modified model exhibited an acceptable fit with the data, revealing that a lower level of depressive symptoms is directly associated with lower levels authoritarian parenting style and higher levels of perceive social support and indirectly associated with these two variables through the mediating effect of self-esteem. The model accounted for 31% of the overall variance in prediction of depressive symptoms among undergraduate students. The findings highlighted the value of promoting self-esteem and social support in interventions targeted at preventing or addressing depressive symptoms in university students.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".