Personal Strengths and Traumatic Experiences Among Institutionalized Children Given Up at Birth (Les Enfants de Duplessis???Duplessis??? Children)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We examined childhood and early adult strengths and adverse experiences of a group of orphans given up at or near birth and raised in Quebec institutions into early adulthood. A follow-up interview of 81 adults (41 women, 40 men) at a mean age of 59.2 years included retrospective assessments of childhood experiences. Most participants reported multiple early adverse experiences, including, in descending order, unfair rules and excessive punishment, physical abuse, emotional neglect, witnessing violence, verbal abuse, physical neglect, sexual abuse, and serious illness. Adverse experiences were mainly due to lay caretakers, not peers or nuns. Twelve childhood strengths, such as self-protectiveness and athletic talent, were scored at each of four age periods, yielding a median score equivalent to one strength at each period. Over half had significant childhood attachments, but of limited intimacy. Childhood variables correlated with their respective variables in later adulthood. Overall, these older adults reported a high prevalence of adverse or traumatic childhood experiences, counterbalanced by modest levels of individual strengths and attachment relationships. Institutionalization of children--if unavoidable--must build in effective safeguards against adverse experiences.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".