Resilience in Families with Children and Adult Members with Intellectual Disabilities: Tracing Elements of A Psycho‐Social Model
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim This paper seeks to illumine how families with children and adult members with intellectual disabilities manage to manifest a buoyant and durable capacity over time. It is therefore concerned centrally with the idea of resilience. Method Drawing from diverse theoretical literatures from child development and protection and gerontology, the paper begins with a review of constructions of resilience. In an attempt to assess where there seems to be support for resilience in families, the core of the paper tests empirical evidence about positive experiences of families supporting children and adults with intellectual disabilities against the theoretical literature on resilience. Result and Conclusions The findings are used to suggest conditions under which resilience is produced and maintained, and to identify emergent elements of a psycho‐social model of resilience in families with children and adult members with intellectual disabilities.
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 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 | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it