Exploring Parent and Peer Support as a Predictor of Adolescent Adjustment During the COVID-19 Pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research has demonstrated that adolescents’ social relationships have been negatively impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic (Ayers et al., 2021). Considering adolescence is characterized by a need for peer belonging and autonomy from parents, isolation from peers has been particularly challenging (Magson et al., 2021). Prior literature has noted the ability of parent connectedness to promote resiliency and instill self-care practices (Bender & Ingram, 2018), and for peers to provide additional necessary support and feelings of belongingness (Brown & Larson, 2009). Information on whether the same outcomes can result during the pandemic remains unknown. The purpose of this study is to determine the impacts of adolescent peer and parent connectedness on health-related outcomes, specifically, exercise, alcohol use, cannabis use, and internalizing symptoms. Participants for this study included 493 students aged 15-19 (79.1% female) residing in Ontario, Canada who completed a survey in June 2021, a year after the initial COVID-19 lockdown and at the end of another stay-at-home order. It was hypothesized that adolescents with weaker parent connectedness would engage in less exercise, more alcohol use, more cannabis use, and would report higher levels of internalizing symptoms. Further, the adolescent-parent relationship would be moderated by peer connectedness in that negative health outcomes would be significantly reduced when teens have stronger peer connectedness. Findings indicated that, in line with hypotheses, weaker parent connectedness only predicted more cannabis use when peer connectedness was also low, and peer and parent support independently predicted internalizing symptoms. Strengths, limitations, implications, and future directions are discussed.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".