Bibliographic record
Abstract
While praise is considered an important element in moulding children's behaviour and is central to parent-training advice in the UK today, the literature from nonwestern cultures suggests that some communities do not view praise as positive. There is currently a dearth of systematic knowledge about how minority ethnic parents in Britain view praise. This qualitative study used thematic analysis to explore the childrearing beliefs of immigrant parents from South Asian backgrounds living in inner-city London, with a focus on their constructions of praising their preschool children. The emerging themes suggest that participants see young children's behaviour as instinctual and view instruction as the main parenting strategy required. Demonstrations of physical warmth and tangible rewards were widely used. While verbal praise was used to encourage compliance, these parents advised caution, saying that praising children risked the development of psychological attributes that were culturally judged as dysfunctional. There was relatively little emphasis on the individual child's ability but more on its effect on others in the hierarchy. These themes have some fundamental implications for the practice of clinical psychology in multicultural communities.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".