MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000695615 · doi:10.1300/j087v43n01_03

Changes in the Self-Concepts of Divorced Women

2005· article· en· W2000695615 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nehami Baum, Giora Rahav, Dan Sharon

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Divorce & Remarriage · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFeelingPsychologyQuarter (Canadian coin)Longitudinal studySample (material)Perceived controlDevelopmental psychologyLongitudinal sampleSocial psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study, conducted on a heterogeneous sample of 70 divorced custodial mothers in Israel, explores changes in the self-concept of divorced women. Findings showed that most of the study participants saw themselves as having changed, and improved, in the surveyed aspects of self-concept. Comparing their present situation to that before their divorce, most reported that they became more independent, more in control of their lives, and more responsible for themselves. They reported feeling greater self-esteem, more competent, and more likely to regard the tasks facing them as challenges. Moreover, they perceived these changes as very important and satisfying. On the other hand, a quarter of the divorced women saw themselves either as unchanged or as having changed in an undesirable way. The findings support the view that self-concept can change in adulthood, as well as the claim that divorce brings not only loss but also opportunity for self-development. Further study using a prospective, longitudinal design is recommended.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.340
Teacher spread0.318 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations38
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Divorce & RemarriageSame topicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207