The effect of different soothing interventions on infant crying and on parent–infant interaction
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Conducted in the home environment, this study examines the effects of three complementary soothing techniques on the duration of infant crying and on caregiver–infant interaction. In one group, the caregivers apply massage; in another, they provide supplemental carrying to their infants, and in the last, the caregivers both massage and provide supplemental carrying. Measurements, for the one control and three treatment groups took place prenatally (third trimester) and in the first 16 weeks postpartum for parental perception of infant temperament, parental sense of competence, parent–infant interaction, and the duration of infant crying. Whereas analyses indicate no statistically significant differences between groups in reducing infant crying, results approached significance ( p ≤ .06) in favor of the combined supplemental carrying/massage group. These results challenge accepted beliefs that tactile stimulation and/or supplemental carrying enhance parental sense of competence, positive parental perceptions, and interactions with infants. Practitioners can apply these conclusions when counselling parents on the advisability of selecting any one complementary soothing technique. ©2002 Michigan Association for Infant Mental Health.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it