Grandparental care and early childhood development: A decade’s worth of insight from three Singaporean cohorts.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Singapore's aging population and the geographical proximity of Singaporean families may contribute to comparatively high rates of grandparental caregiving. This study describes the prevalence of grandparental caregiving and investigates concurrent and longitudinal effects of grandparental care on infant and preschool-aged children's preacademic, executive function, and socioemotional outcomes for the first time in Singapore. In the present study, grandparental caregiving was operationalized as time spent and as children's preferences for their grandparents. Data from three longitudinal studies conducted over the past decade were used (259 from Growing Up in Singapore Toward Healthy Outcomes [GUSTO], 122 Singapore Preconception Study of Long-Term Maternal and Child Outcomes [S-PRESTO], and 39 from Singapore Parenting and Cognition in Early Childhood [SPACE]). Results suggested that grandparental care may be on the decline in recent years and most of the grandparental care-child outcome associations were not significant. Still, when effects were observed, the majority were negative when time spent was considered and positive when preference was considered. Furthermore, maternal sensitivity significantly moderated the association between grandparental care and child outcomes, exemplifying the importance of considering children's larger caregiving network when examining the effects of grandparental care. A greater understanding of how to support grandparental caregiving for optimal child outcomes will be beneficial. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".