PARENT-CHILD COMMUNICATION AND FRIENDSHIP: PREDICTORS OF TRUANT BEHAVIOR IN ADOLESCENTS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study aimed to investigate the relationship between parent-child communication, friendship functions & truancy among adolescents. It was hypothesized that there is likely to be relationship between parent-child communication, friendship functions, and truancy. Furthermore, the parent-child communication and friendship function will likely predict the truancy in adolescents. In this regard, to conduct this study, correlational research design and purposive sampling technique were used to recruit the sample of (N= 300) school and college students in the age range 13-19 years. For this purpose, the Parent-Child Communication Scale, McGill Friendship Questionnaire–FF and Truancy Questionnaire were used for the study. The results discovered significant positive relationship between parent-child communication, truancy and also amid friendship functions and truancy in the adolescents. Furthermore, parent-child communication and friendship functions positively predicted truancy in adolescents. The results of study provide significant information in extracting the desired information, reching conclusion and making suitable decisions about the research issues underconsiderations. The findings can increase parents' awareness regarding importance of communication with their children to reduce truancy.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".