Baby Think It Over: using role-play to prevent teen pregnancy.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the effectiveness of Baby Think It Over (BTIO; Jurmaine, 1994), an infant simulation program that seeks to modify attitudes toward teen pregnancy and teen parenting. As in the study by Saltz, Perry, and Cabral (1994), the premise was that teens engage in unprotected sex because of a personal fable concerning pregnancy: "It can't happen to me." It was expected that participation in BTIO, a form of role-play, would encourage teens to acknowledge their own personal vulnerability to an unplanned pregnancy, and provide them with some insight into the experience of adolescent parenting. One hundred fourteen eleventh-grade students participated. After two to three days' experience with BTIO, teens in the intervention group were more likely to accurately assess their personal risk for an unplanned pregnancy than were teens in the comparison group. Qualitative analyses revealed that teens in the intervention group were significantly more likely to produce concrete examples of activities and consequences related to child-rearing than were teens in the comparison group. Findings of this study are discussed from the perspective of the health belief model (Rosenstock, 1974), and suggestions for further research with BTIO are made.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".