Cited by 29Attachment and Relationship DynamicsFamily Dynamics and RelationshipsIntergenerational Family Dynamics and Caregiving

Understanding Young Adults’ Reports of Contact with their Parents in a Digital World: Psychological and Familial Relationship Factors

Stein, Catherine H., Osborn, Lawrence A., Greenberg, Sarah C.·2016·Journal of Child and Family Studies

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10826-016-0366-0

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 44 · Cited by 29

Authors
Stein, C. H., Osborn, L. A., & Greenberg, S. C.
Affiliations
Bowling Green State University (US)
Corresponding author
Stein, Catherine H.
Venue
Journal of Child and Family Studies
Published
2016-01-27
Volume
25
Issue
6
Pages
1802-1814
ISSN
  • 1062-1024 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-2843
OpenAlex
W2291483582
Cited by
29
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 2
FWCI
4.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Child and Family Studies (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Family Dynamics and Relationships
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Intergenerational Family Dynamics and Caregiving
Keywords
young adults, parental contact, university students, family relationships, felt obligation, family satisfaction, self-esteem, depressive mood, psychological well-being, communication technology, text messaging, telephone calls, social media, video chat

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review