MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061111244 · doi:10.1177/030857590703100407

Inside the Foster Family: What Research tells us about the Experience of Foster Carers' Children

2007· article· en· W2061111244 on OpenAlex
Robert C. Twigg, Tracy Swan

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 & Fostering · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChild Welfare and Adoption
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of NewfoundlandUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFoster careFoster parentsWelfareWelfare systemPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyNursingMedicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although foster care is the main source of out-of-home care for children and young people, little is known about the dynamics of the foster family. This article by Robert Twigg and Tracy Swan focuses on one subsystem of the foster family system, the foster parents' own children. Fourteen research studies (nine published, five unpublished) were reviewed. These involved approximately 232 respondents, ranging in age from seven to 32 when interviewed, nearly equal numbers of males and females. Findings include benefits of fostering, impact of fostering on foster carers' children, responses to loss of role and parental attention, and the impact of the child welfare or foster care system. The authors conclude with several recommendations designed to make fostering a more positive experience.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.663
Threshold uncertainty score0.928

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.280 · 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