Supportive communication with parents moderates the negative effects of electronic media use on life satisfaction during adolescence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives To examine the impact of electronic media (EM) use on teenagers’ life satisfaction (LS) and to assess the potential moderating effect of supportive communication with parents (SCP). Methods Data were drawn from the cross-national Health Behaviour in School-aged Children (HBSC) study (2009/2010) in Canada, England, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Israel, The Netherlands, Poland and Scotland. Sample size: 53,973 students aged 11–15 years. Results More hours per day spent on the computer were associated with lower LS; more EM communication with friends with higher LS. This relationship became negative if EM use reached and exceeded a certain threshold. SCP moderated the effect of EM communication with friends, but not computer use for the total sample. SCP seems to be more important than computer use or EM communication with friends for LS and it seems to buffer negative effects of EM use. Conclusions Communication with parents seems to buffer the negative effects of EM use on LS during adolescence. Higher computer use was related to lower LS, but “optimal” frequency of EM communication with friends was country specific.
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 | 0.006 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".