"Making the child understand:" Socialization of emotion in urban India.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Using a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods, this study examined mothers' socialization of child emotion in suburban middle-class families in Gujarat, India. In particular, a community sample of 602 children, 6 to 8 years, was screened for emotional/behavioral problems using a parent-report measure standardized with this population. Based on the screening, four groups of children were formed: those with internalizing problems (n = 31), externalizing problems (n = 32), and somatic complaints (n = 25), and an asymptomatic control group (n = 32). Mothers of children across groups completed a previously pilot-tested, forced-choice, self-report questionnaire of their emotions and behaviors in response to their children's anger, sadness, and physical pain, and an individual open-ended interview further exploring their socialization behaviors, immediate goals, and expectations from their children. Quantitative data revealed that mothers of children in internalizing, externalizing, and somatic complaints groups reported more negative emotions (anger, disappointment, embarrassment, restlessness) and punitive/ minimizing behaviors than the control group, with the somatic-complaints group also reporting less sympathy and emotion-/ problem-focused behaviors than the control group. Qualitative data provided a culturally grounded overarching framework to understand emotion socialization in this sample, and suggested variation across groups with respect to the type of mothers' behaviors, along with expectations for appropriate behavior.
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 | 0.001 | 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".