MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2054988701 · doi:10.1002/imhj.21316

Forgotten survivors of intimate‐partner violence: The role of gender and mothering in infant development

2012· article· en· W2054988701 on OpenAlexaff
Ketan Tailor, Nicole Létourneau

Bibliographic record

VenueInfant Mental Health Journal · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntimate Partner and Family Violence
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsModerationPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyGross motor skillDomestic violenceMotor skillPoison controlInjury preventionMedicineSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although gender and mothering are critical factors in the development of infants exposed to intimate-partner violence (IPV), the majority of research has focused on school-age and adolescent populations. The aim of this study was to investigate the moderating effect of gender in the relationship between mother-infant interaction and infant development in families of IPV. Maternal report was used to measure infants' cognitive and social functioning while mother-infant interaction quality was assessed through an observational measure. Participants consisted of 44 mothers and their infants (4-43 months of age). While male infants showed poorer fine motor, problem-solving, and personal-social skills than did their female counterparts, comparable gross motor and communication skills were demonstrated. Moderator analysis for gender indicated that the association among maternal cognitive growth fostering and gross motor skills was significantly stronger for boys than it was for girls. No other moderator effects were detected. Analysis examining age, gender by age, and infant competencies did not reveal significant effects. Implications for clinical practice are considered, with special attention paid to women as mothers.

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)0.003
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 score0.106
Threshold uncertainty score0.468

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.316 · 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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInfant Mental Health JournalSame topicIntimate Partner and Family ViolenceFrench-language works237,207