MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2021311985 · doi:10.1080/07399331003599563

Daughters’ Obligation to Care in the Context of Past Abuse

2010· article· en· W2021311985 on OpenAlexaff
Judith Wuest, Jean Malcolm, Marilyn Merritt‐Gray

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Care For Women International · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObligationGrounded theoryContext (archaeology)DutyPsychologyDuty of careSocial psychologyMoral obligationNursingMedicineQualitative researchSociologyPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using theoretical sampling, we extended a previous grounded theory study of women's caring through interviews with 16 women currently giving care to parents who had abused them as children to more fully understand daughters' obligation to care in the context of past abuse. Past relationship was characterized by emotional distance, "never being good enough," degradation, control, and unpredictability. Obligation to care was grounded not only in duty to others but also in duty to self. Caregiving was seen as an opportunity for validation and reconciliation. These findings advance knowledge by illuminating how survivors of child maltreatment become caregivers for their abusers.

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 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)0.000
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.494
Threshold uncertainty score0.437

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.352 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations25
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth Care For Women InternationalSame topicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207