Daily Parenting and Adolescent Maladjustment: A Two‐Wave Multi‐Informant Daily Diary Study Before and During the COVID‐19 Pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic posed major challenges to parent-adolescent relationships under global stressors. Scant research has examined changes in the daily links between parenting behaviors and adolescent maladjustment before and after the onset of the pandemic. This study investigated the within-day associations between two parenting behaviors-positive parenting and psychological control-and three adolescent maladjustments-conduct problems, emotional problems, and negative affect-before and during COVID-19 through a two-wave multi-informant month-long daily diary study. METHODS: = 737 and 754) the pandemic. RESULTS: Positive parenting and conduct problems decreased, while emotional problems increased from before to during the COVID-19 pandemic. Multi-level modeling showed that positive parenting was negatively linked with conduct problems and negative affect on the same day, whereas psychological control was positively linked with conduct problems and negative affect on the same day. Based on adolescent-reports, the onset of the pandemic suppressed the negative relation between positive parenting and negative affect, and amplified the positive relation between psychological control and emotional problems. CONCLUSIONS: These findings provide crucial evidence for changes in the daily links between parenting behaviors and adolescent maladjustment from before to during the pandemic. Family-based interventions should target daily parenting behaviors during periods of stress and uncertainty to promote adolescent adjustment.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".