MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122198786 · doi:10.1177/0192513x11402946

Mothers’ and Fathers’ Perceptions of Mutuality in Middle Childhood: The Domain of Intimacy

2011· article· en· W2122198786 on OpenAlex

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

VenueJournal of Family Issues · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAttachment and Relationship Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClosenessPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyPleasurePerceptionConstruct (python library)Qualitative researchSocial psychologySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigated parents’ experiences of closeness in their interactions with their children in middle childhood. Structured, open-ended interviews were conducted with mothers and fathers from 23 families (46 participants) with children aged between 7 and 11 years ( M = 9.2 years). Qualitative analyses indicated that parents’ experiences of close interactions were consistent with an underlying construct of parent—child intimacy. Parents reported that they experienced closeness predominantly during interactions where they perceived mutuality and shared pleasure. Parents were strategic in creating both intimate interactions and contexts for intimacy. Children were perceived to contribute to intimacy by initiating and responding to parental bids for intimate interactions.

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)0.001
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 score0.163
Threshold uncertainty score0.244

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.318 · 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