The Effects of Intimacy and Parental Bonding on the Psychological Well-Being of University aged Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated whether students who had high perceived parental bonding and low fear of intimacy would have a more positive level of psychological well-being. Additionally, the study sought to determine any differences between a single parent household and a two parent household. The sample consisted of 93 female undergraduate students in University in London, Ontario. An independent t-test revealed there was no significant differences in bonding between a single parent household and a two parent household. A multiple regression analysis revealed that perceived parental bonding and fear of intimacy were significant predictors of psychological well-being. A significant positive correlation was found between parental bonding and psychological well-being. Furthermore, a significant negative correlation was found between parental bonding and fear of intimacy. Additionally, a significant negative correlation was found between fear of intimacy and psychological well-being. These findings suggest that parental bonding and fear of intimacy are foundational for an individual’s psychological well-being as an adult.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".