Running head: THE ROLE OF PARENTAL CONFLICT The Role of Parental Conflict and Self-Efficacy in Friendship Satisfaction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the interaction among parental conflict, self-efficacy, and friendship satisfaction levels. It was predicted that self-efficacy would be a mediating variable between parental conflict and outcomes, specifically ability to have successful friendships. Participants included 235 undergraduate students from a small Midwestern college. Parental conflict was measured by Straus ' Father-Mother Conflict Tactics Scale. Self-efficacy was evaluated using the Friendship Self-Efficacy Scale created specifically for use in this study. Friendship satisfaction was evaluated using the McGill Friendship Questionnaire-Respondent's Affection. As predicted, results indicated that the type of parental conflict to which a child is exposed relates to the ability to have successful friendship later in life. More specifically, reasoning conflict was positively related to friendship satisfaction. In addition, it was found that a young adult's friendship self-efficacy predicted friendship satisfaction above and beyond the effects of the demographic variables and conflict levels. Implications for mental health professionals are discussed. (Contains 14 references and 2 tables.) (Author) Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document.
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".