Realistic Orientation and the Transition to Motherhood
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
Current models of adjustment suggest that well-being is characterized by an optimistic, sometimes unrealistically positive self-view and worldview. In contrast, we propose that a Realistic Orientation—giving frequent thought to both positive and negative possibilities—better prepares people for difficult events. Two studies are presented assessing the effect of a Realistic Orientation in the context of the transition to motherhood. In Study 1, 181 women pregnant with their first child were assessed on their orientation to motherhood, optimism, and depression. Regression analyses indicate that a Realistic Orientation significantly predicts adjustment over and above optimism. In Study 2, 69 women expecting their first child were interviewed pre- and postpartum. Relative to those categorized as Positively- or Negatively-Oriented, those women categorized as Realistically-Oriented reported greater decreases in depressive symptoms from prepartum to postpartum. When the transition was accompanied by many unexpected negative surprises, those who had thought more about negative possibilities prepartum showed a decrease in depressive symptoms whereas those who had not given as much thought to the negative possibilities showed an increase in depressive symptoms. The data converge to suggest that an orientation to future events that includes frequent thoughts of both positive and negative possible outcomes promotes resilience in the face of adversity.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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