MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W6995639664

Parents, watching: introducing surveillance into modern American parenting

2010· dissertation· en· W6995639664 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff

Notice bibliographique

RevueIowa Research Online (University of Iowa) · 2010
Typedissertation
Langueen
DomaineBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
ThématiquePlant and Fungal Interactions Research
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésPopularityQuarter (Canadian coin)AnxietyPoint (geometry)Social mediaPhone
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

During the last quarter of the twentieth century, there has been a significant expansion in the means by which parents in the United States might use technologies to watch their children. Watching and worrying about children are not new to the job of parenthood, but the ways of watching now available to parents represents a change of degree so great as to represent a change in kind. The parental gaze has become technologized. This dissertation investigates what happens when man-made devices insert themselves into this most basic of human endeavors.\nParenting desires, social expectations, and technological capacities have co-evolved in the United States to a point where the norms of parental watching are increasingly technology-based. This is a "mixed methods," cross-case study. It delves into the particulars of three distinct media while looking for patterns of use and effects across the different technologies. The core of this investigation is three case studies of particular surveillance technologies that all came to prominence, in terms of their popularity or frequency of use, in the United States in the last thirty years. The three subjects of these case studies--fetal ultrasound, Eisenberg, Murkoff, and Hathaway's 1984 pregnancy advice and guide book What to Expect When You're Expecting, and baby monitors--are all media that offer parents the opportunity to be better and less anxious parents by enhancing their powers of parenting observation. They form an optical--textual--acoustic triad that demonstrates the breadth of media that are enlisted into surveillance practices.\nThese new anxiety technologies change thinking, perceptions, and attitudes. They serve both to introduce new human capacities and to direct and to mold existing capacities. They have also helped to change our ideas of what is possible. A few overarching characteristics of American parental thinking have helped to pushed surveillance to prominence. Middle class American parents of the last quarter of the twentieth century have come to feel that the world is a more dangerous place for their children. They perceive their offspring as more vulnerable to dangers and as less capable of avoiding these dangers on their own. Parents also feel an increased sense of personal responsibility for the safety of their children. It is not that that contemporary parents have warmer or deeper feelings toward their children, but rather that contemporary parents believe that they both can and should control a much broader range of dangers to their children than parents in the past believed they could control.\nThe "anxiety technologies" of this study serve in part to bring home to their users the riskiness of parenting and the vulnerability of the fetus/infant. These technologies have come to promote responsibility expansion, efficiency orientation, and risk focus for parents. While these technologies do provide parents with a great deal more focused information, many of the perceived enhancements in powers to effect outcomes are presumptive, illusory effects of actual increases in information. Information without influence is as likely to contribute to anxiety as to power.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Expérimental (laboratoire) · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,707
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,026
Tête enseignante GPT0,350
Écart entre enseignants0,324 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeExpérimental (laboratoire)
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2010
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueIowa Research Online (University of Iowa)Même sujetPlant and Fungal Interactions ResearchTravaux en français237 207