Dataset Information

The Young Parenting Inventory (YPI-R3), and the Baumrind, Maccoby and Martin Parenting Model: Finding Common Ground.

ABSTRACT: The parenting typology of Baumrind, Maccoby and Martin is based on variations in warmth and control and consists of three negative parenting styles labelled authoritarian, neglectful, and permissive. This parenting typology is based on normal variations of parenting but did not include dimensions arising from deviant parenting (e.g., abuse and neglect). A parenting typology has emerged based on the schema therapy model through the development of the Young Parent Inventory (YPI-R3), which represents a fuller range of maladaptive parenting spanning the deviant to normal range of the parenting continuum. Using six international, community, nonclinical samples with separate ratings for mothers and fathers from the USA, n = 259, 281; South Africa, n = 318, 372; Nigeria, n = 328, 344; India, n = 277, 289; Singapore, n = 592, 628; and Malaysia, n = 222, 229, results showed that the best second order higher factor solution of the ten YPI-R3 subscales was a three factor solution that runs parallel to, and resembles, the three negative parenting styles of Baumrind, Macobby and Martin. This factor structure was also shown to be a consistent and cross-culturally acceptable model among the countries from which the samples were drawn. The resemblance and implications of both parenting models were discussed.

SUBMITTER: Louis JP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8870261 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The Young Parenting Inventory (YPI-R3), and the Baumrind, Maccoby and Martin Parenting Model: Finding Common Ground.

Louis John Philip JP

Children (Basel, Switzerland) 20220126 2

The parenting typology of Baumrind, Maccoby and Martin is based on variations in warmth and control and consists of three negative parenting styles labelled authoritarian, neglectful, and permissive. This parenting typology is based on normal variations of parenting but did not include dimensions arising from deviant parenting (e.g., abuse and neglect). A parenting typology has emerged based on the schema therapy model through the development of the Young Parent Inventory (YPI-R3), which represe ...[more]

PMID: 35204880

Similar Datasets

Project description:Ecosystem-based management involves the integration of ecosystem services and their human beneficiaries into decision making. This can occur at multiple scales; addressing global issues such as climate change down to local problems such as flood protection and maintaining water quality. At the local scale it can be challenging to achieve a consistent and sustainable outcome across multiple communities, particularly when they differ in resource availability and management priorities. A key requirement for consistent decision support at the community level is to identify common community objectives, as these can form the basis for readily transferable indices of ecosystem benefit and human well-being. We used a keyword-based approach to look for common terminology in community fundamental objectives as a basis for transferable indices of human well-being and then compared those commonalities to community demographics, location, and type. Analysis centered on strategic planning documents readily available from coastal communities in the conterminous United States. We examined strategic planning documents based on eight domains of human well-being, and found that Living Standards and Safety and Security were the most commonly addressed domains, and Health and Cultural Fulfillment were the least. In comparing communities, regional differences were observed in only one well-being domain, Safety and Security, while community type yielded significant differences in five of the eight domains examined. Community type differences followed an urban to rural trend with urban communities focusing on Education and Living Standards, and more rural communities focused on Social Cohesion and Leisure Time. Across all eight domains multivariate analysis suggested communities were distributed along two largely orthogonal gradients; one between Living Standards and Leisure Time and or Connection to Nature, and a second between Safety and Security and Social Priorities (Education/Health/Culture/Social Cohesion). Overall these findings demonstrate the use of automated keyword analysis for obtaining information from community strategic planning documents. Moreover, the results indicate measures and perceptions of well-being at the local scale differ by community type. This information could be used in management of ecosystem services and development of indices of community sustainability that are applicable to multiple communities with similar demographics, regional location, and type.

Project description:Adaptive capacity, one of the three determinants of vulnerability to climate change, is defined as the capacity of species to persist in their current location by coping with novel environmental conditions through acclimation and/or evolution. Although studies have identified indicators of adaptive capacity, few have assessed this capacity in a quantitative way that is comparable across tree species. Yet, such multispecies assessments are needed by forest management and conservation programs to refine vulnerability assessments and to guide the choice of adaptation measures. In this paper, we propose a framework to quantitatively evaluate five key components of tree adaptive capacity to climate change: individual adaptation through phenotypic plasticity, population phenotypic diversity as influenced by genetic diversity, genetic exchange within populations, genetic exchange between populations, and genetic exchange between species. For each component, we define the main mechanisms that underlie adaptive capacity and present associated metrics that can be used as indices. To illustrate the use of this framework, we evaluate the relative adaptive capacity of 26 northeastern North American tree species using values reported in the literature. Our results show adaptive capacity to be highly variable among species and between components of adaptive capacity, such that no one species ranks consistently across all components. On average, the conifer Picea glauca and the broadleaves Acer rubrum and A. saccharinum show the greatest adaptive capacity among the 26 species we documented, whereas the conifers Picea rubens and Thuja occidentalis, and the broadleaf Ostrya virginiana possess the lowest. We discuss limitations that arise when comparing adaptive capacity among species, including poor data availability and comparability issues in metrics derived from different methods or studies. The breadth of data required for such an assessment exemplifies the multidisciplinary nature of adaptive capacity and the necessity of continued cross-collaboration to better anticipate the impacts of a changing climate.

Project description:BackgroundIt may take 15 years or longer before research evidence is integrated into clinical practice. This evidence-to-practice gap has deleterious effects on patients as well as research and clinical processes. Bringing clinical knowledge into the research process, however, has the potential to close the evidence-to-practice gap. The NEUROTRANS-Project attempts to bring research and practice together by focusing on two groups that usually operate separately in their communities: general practitioners and neuroscientists. Although both groups focus on dementia as an area of work, they do so in different contexts and without opportunities to share their expertise. Finding new treatment pathways for patients with dementia will require an equal knowledge exchange among researchers and clinicians along with the integration of that knowledge into research processes, so that both groups will benefit from the expertise of the other.MethodsThe NEUROTRANS-Project uses a qualitative, multi-stage research design to explore how neuroscientists and general practitioners (GPs) approach dementia. Using a grounded theory methodology, it analyzes semi-structured interviews, case vignettes, focus groups with GPs in Saxony-Anhalt, Germany, and informal conversations with, and observations of, neuroscientists from the German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases in Magdeburg.ResultsThe NEUROTRANS-Project identified a clear division of labor between two highly specialized professional groups. Neuroscientists focus abstractly on nosology whereas general practitioners tend to patient care following a hermeneutic approach integrating the patients' perspective of illness. These different approaches to dementia create a barrier to constructive dialogue and the capacity of these groups to do research together with a common aim. Additionally, the broader system of research funding and health care within which the two groups operate reinforces their divide thereby limiting joint research capacity.ConclusionsOvercoming barriers to research collaboration between general practitioners and neuroscientists requires a shift in perspective in which both groups actively engage with the other's viewpoints to facilitate knowledge circulation (KC). Bringing 'art into science and science into art', i.e. amalgamating the hermeneutic approach with the perspective of nosology, is the first step in developing joint research agendas that have the potential to close the evidence-to-practice gap.

Dataset Information

The Young Parenting Inventory (YPI-R3), and the Baumrind, Maccoby and Martin Parenting Model: Finding Common Ground.

Publications

The Young Parenting Inventory (YPI-R3), and the Baumrind, Maccoby and Martin Parenting Model: Finding Common Ground.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets