MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2038591743 · doi:10.1037/a0022428

Patterns of adjustment among siblings exposed to intimate partner violence.

2011· article· en· W2038591743 on OpenAlexafffund
Caroline C. Piotrowski

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Family Psychology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFamily Dynamics and Relationships
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSiblingPsychologyHostilityDevelopmental psychologyCluster (spacecraft)Sibling relationshipClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research explored and compared patterns of adjustment in siblings exposed to intimate partner violence. The quality of family relationships were investigated as potential mechanisms that accounted for heterogeneity in these patterns. Participants included 47 sibling pairs and their mothers recruited from the community. Mothers and children reported on child adjustment measures and the quality of family relationships. Five cluster patterns were identified for both younger and older siblings, replicating three identified in previous research: primarily internalizing symptoms, a combination of internalizing and externalizing symptoms, and an asymptomatic cluster. There was little overlap in cluster membership within families; most siblings differed in terms of their pattern of adjustment. The quality of family relationships varied significantly across clusters. Overall, asymptomatic siblings reported the most positive family relationships. Maternal warmth differed across clusters for both older and younger siblings, while maternal hostility varied across clusters for older but not younger siblings. The quality of sibling relationships also differed across clusters for older but not younger siblings. These findings underscore the importance of examining differential sibling experiences within violent families, and demonstrate the significance of family relationships as a mediating mechanism influencing heterogeneous child adjustment.

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)0.001
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 score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score0.326

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations26
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Family PsychologySame topicFamily Dynamics and RelationshipsFrench-language works237,207