Examining longitudinal bidirectional effects between parent functioning and child functioning across socioeconomic contexts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Universality with respect to reliability and validity of psychosocial constructs and models is a key area of inquiry when seeking to leverage scientific findings for the public good, such as in designing policies or interventions. This study seeks to understand whether variance exists in models of bidirectional effects between parent functioning and child functioning across socioeconomic contexts. Using data from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study Kindergarten (ECLS-K) 2011 cohort this work examines a five-year period, beginning at the child’s Kindergarten year and ending at their fifth-grade year. Confirmatory factor analysis with longitudinal and multigroup invariance tests was conducted to first assess the appropriateness of the measurement models. Next, cross-lagged panel analysis with multigroup invariance tests were performed to identify whether variations were present according to socioeconomic privilege. Results demonstrated that the measurement model for child functioning, which has been used in previous works of literature, did not fit the group with low socioeconomic privilege, though was appropriate for groups with medium and high socioeconomic privilege. Further study of the medium and high socioeconomic privilege groups demonstrated variant models of bidirectional effects between parent functioning and child functioning. This work underlines and discusses the nuances of comparing populations, both from a measurement perspective and from a qualitative perspective.
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 | 0.009 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".