Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Validates the Polish Daily Coparenting Scale's effectiveness in assessing coparenting quality among parents, suggesting its practical applications.
Objective To adapt and validate the Polish Daily Coparenting Scale (D‐Cop PL) and to test its utility for modeling day‐to‐day coparenting quality. Background Daily coparenting quality varies across daily contexts; brief, ecologically valid tools to capture within‐person change are scarce. Methods A 7‐day diary study with 178 dual‐income Polish parents of young children was conducted. Confirmatory factor analysis tested the two‐factor structure (positive and negative daily coparenting dimensions), reliability, and convergent validity; measurement invariance examined factorial equivalence across mothers and fathers. Generalized Additive Models for Location, Scale, and Shape (GAMLSS) estimated same‐day daily associations between coparenting quality: parental negative mood, emotional closeness, work hours, and child‐induced parenting stress. Results The two‐factor model fit well, with strong loadings and internal consistency, and showed factorial invariance across gender. Convergent validity with broader coparenting quality assessments was supported. Daily correlates were theory‐consistent: higher negative mood was associated with lower same‐day coparenting quality; greater emotional closeness was associated with higher daily coparenting quality; partner work hours related to slightly lower daily coparenting quality; parenting stress showed a small nonlinear association with daily coparenting quality. Conclusion The D‐Cop PL is a valid, reliable, and sensitive instrument for assessing within‐person variation in daily coparenting quality. Implications In the Polish context, the scale may support monitoring and evaluation of daily coparenting quality in research, applied educational, and clinical contexts. This is important as coparenting is inherently experienced by individuals and families as a daily and momentary process.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jankowska et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: