| Title |
Does Father Know Best? A Formal Model of the Paternal Influence on Childhood Social Anxiety
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Child and Family Studies, December 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10826-010-9441-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Susan M. Bögels, Enrico C. Perotti |
| Abstract |
We explore paternal social anxiety as a specific risk factor for childhood social anxiety in a rational optimization model. In the course of human evolution, fathers specialized in external protection (e.g., confronting the external world) while mothers specialized in internal protection (e.g., providing comfort and food). Thus, children may instinctively be more influenced by the information signaled by paternal versus maternal behavior with respect to potential external threats. As a result, if fathers exhibit social anxiety, children interpret it as a strong negative signal about the external social world and rationally adjust their beliefs, thus becoming stressed. Under the assumption that paternal signals on social threats are more influential, a rational cognitive inference leads children of socially anxious fathers to develop social anxiety, unlike children of socially anxious mothers. We show in the model that mothers cannot easily compensate for anxious paternal behavior, but choose to increase maternal care to maintain the child's wellbeing. We discuss research directions to test the proposed model as well as implications for the prevention and treatment of child social anxiety. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 180 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Norway | 1 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 177 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 29 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 29 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 29 | 16% |
| Researcher | 19 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 11 | 6% |
| Other | 26 | 14% |
| Unknown | 37 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 88 | 49% |
| Social Sciences | 17 | 9% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 5% |
| Neuroscience | 7 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 15 | 8% |
| Unknown | 41 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 November 2014.
All research outputs
#3,498,571
of 23,867,274 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Child and Family Studies
#278
of 1,463 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,011
of 185,567 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Child and Family Studies
#1
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,867,274 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,463 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 185,567 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them