MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030663949 · doi:10.1300/j145v10n01_04

Parenting Styles and Attributions and the Behavior of Children in the “No” Stage in Adoptive and Biological Families

2006· article· en· W2030663949 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAdoption Quarterly · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChild Welfare and Adoption
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAttributionPsychologyToddlerDevelopmental psychologyChild rearingSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In a search for reasons why older adopted children are reported to have more problems than biological children, parents of an internationally adopted toddler in the “No” stage were compared with biological parents and their toddlers. Mothers and fathers responded to questionnaires pertaining to their attributions concerning child behavior, their child-rearing styles and practices, and their daughters' problems. Results showed that adoptive parents made as many positive attributions about children's behavior and reported fewer child problems than did biological parents. They agreed about child-rearing styles and practices and parental responsibility for children's negative behavior. Most parents endorsed authoritative parenting. Few differences between the two groups emerged. The higher incidence of psychological problems found among older adoptees does not appear to have roots in the “No” stage.

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 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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.099
Threshold uncertainty score0.806

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.250 · 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