Testing the capability of generative artificial intelligence for parent and caregiver information seeking

Abstract Objective This study explored the quality of generative artificial intelligence (AI) responses to common parenting questions across diverse sources of digitally available information. Background The recent rise of generative AI, such as ChatGPT and other large language models (LLMs), which generate answers by synthesizing publicly available information, raises questions about the quality of digital responses and the effect on parenting and outcomes for children. Method We hypothesized that querying a professionally prepared parenting newsletter would have higher quality responses than an LLM. We explored this by running 11 tests with five common parenting and caregiving topics about young children across controlled and open data sources. We analyzed three Cs (correctness, clarity, and connection), reliability (artificiality, credibility, and citation quality), and readability to assess the quality of LLM responses. Results ChatGPT largely provided correct and clear answers although citations were frequently absent and inaccurate. LLM responses often lacked emphasis on parent–child connection and developmental context, and reading level difficulty increased steeply. Conclusion Generative AI offers reasonably good answers to general parenting questions. However, parents and caregivers need to contextualize the information. Implications Topical experts may help meet nuanced parenting needs with cultural relevance and plain language, but AI can be useful for summarizing open‐access content.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Family Relations
Published
2025-03-19
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/fare.13167
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.31
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Testing the capability of generative artificial intelligence for parent and caregiver information seeking

Silvia Vilches, YaeBin Kim, Sidney Shapiro, Anne Clarkson
2 citations
Family Relations
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
1.31
article

Testing the capability of generative artificial intelligence for parent and caregiver information seeking

Silvia Vilches, YaeBin Kim, Sidney Shapiro, Anne Clarkson
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Abstract Objective This study explored the quality of generative artificial intelligence (AI) responses to common parenting questions across diverse sources of digitally available information. Background The recent rise of generative AI, such as ChatGPT and other large language models (LLMs), which generate answers by synthesizing publicly available information, raises questions about the quality of digital responses and the effect on parenting and outcomes for children. Method We hypothesized that querying a professionally prepared parenting newsletter would have higher quality responses than an LLM. We explored this by running 11 tests with five common parenting and caregiving topics about young children across controlled and open data sources. We analyzed three Cs (correctness, clarity, and connection), reliability (artificiality, credibility, and citation quality), and readability to assess the quality of LLM responses. Results ChatGPT largely provided correct and clear answers although citations were frequently absent and inaccurate. LLM responses often lacked emphasis on parent–child connection and developmental context, and reading level difficulty increased steeply. Conclusion Generative AI offers reasonably good answers to general parenting questions. However, parents and caregivers need to contextualize the information. Implications Topical experts may help meet nuanced parenting needs with cultural relevance and plain language, but AI can be useful for summarizing open‐access content.

Family RelationsVol. 74(3)
University of Lethbridge (CA), University of Nevada, Reno (US), University of Minnesota Rochester (US), Auburn University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 17%
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
1.31
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.