Bibliographic record
Abstract
The articles in this issue extend the study of child maltreatment to the years of emerging adulthood. This commentary examines their contributions through the lens of two prominent clinical-developmental frameworks: developmental psychopathology and positive youth development. The concepts of cumulative risk and resilience, both central to developmental psychopathology, are enriched by the findings of the college student studies in which the reach of child maltreatment is demonstrated through selective rather than global adaptation, with difficulties in romantic relationships and psychological well-being. The findings of the studies with youth in out-of-home care reinforce the negative cascades of adversity among severely abused youths and yet also demonstrate small windows of resilience. Positive youth development focuses on the competences needed for successful adaptation in the young adult years. The papers of this issue extend this framework to youth growing up with adversity and the findings highlight the importance of prosocial connections, self-regulation and healthy belief systems. Overall, the research reported in this issue opens up new avenues of investigation for the study of child maltreatment. Research with youth from diverse backgrounds, including youth justice and child protection agencies, should be encouraged. Longitudinal and experimental research designs are also critical to furthering research in this field. Clinical implications of the findings include attention to selective domains of distress among otherwise resilient youth, domains of resilience among severely abused youth, and opportunities to foster competences which contribute to positive youth development. Language: en
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".