MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Transnational Infancy: A New Context for Attachment and the Need for Better Models

2010· article· en· W1596351023 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueChild Development Perspectives · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFamily Support in Illness
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlobalizationImmigrationPsychologyContext (archaeology)Developmental psychologyMental healthPolitical sciencePsychiatryGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Researchers have paid little attention to the effects of a rapidly globalizing world on infants and toddlers, even though some features of globalization may have a significant impact on their development and well-being. For example, fragmentation occurs in many North American and European transnational families when infants are separated from parents and cared for by geographically distant relatives, as is the case when new immigrants temporarily leave their infants in their country of origin or send them back to be cared for by relatives. There is much reason to believe that such separations can have an adverse effect on attachment, the emotional development of children, and the adjustment of parents. Yet Western mental-health models may not accurately capture the full complexity of these new realities, nor adequately address risk and resiliency factors in clinical contexts. This article argues that it is the time to devote attention to the experience of infants and toddlers who exist in transnational environments, as these very young children may well be the most overlooked participants in globalization. This article proposes a model to support an emergent field of research, policy making, and practice.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.612
Threshold uncertainty score0.772

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.272 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it