Establishment of Joint Attention in Dyads Involving Hearing Mothers of Deaf and Hearing Children, and Its Relation to Adaptive Social Behavior
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mounting evidence points to joint attention as a mediating variable in children's adaptive behavior development. Joint attention in interactions between hearing mothers and congenitally deaf (n = 27) and hearing (n = 29) children, ages 18-36 months, was examined. All deaf children had severe to profound hearing loss. Mother-child interactions were coded for maternally initiated and child-initiated success rates in establishing joint attention; mothers completed ratings of their children's adaptive behavior. Hearing mother-deaf child dyads had significantly lower maternally initiated success rates. No significant between-group differences on child-initiated success rates were shown. Maternal ratings of adaptive behavior were significantly lower for deaf children, and related positively and significantly to both child-initiated and maternally initiated success rates. The findings suggest that mother-child interactions that are low in successful establishment of joint attention might mediate the development of socioemotional problems evident in deaf children with hearing families.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".