MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2132901918 · doi:10.1300/j135v04n01_05

A Comparative Study of Parental Sensitivity Between Three Groups of Adolescent Mothers

2004· article· en· W2132901918 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel Paquette, Mark Zoccolillo, Marc Bigras, Marie-Eve Labelle, Rima Azar, Jacinthe Emery

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Emotional Abuse · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntergenerational Family Dynamics and Caregiving
Canadian institutionsMontreal Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyMaternal sensitivityIntervention (counseling)Clinical psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Given the central role that parental sensitivity may potentially play in the intergenerational transmission of social maladjustment, intervention regarding the parental sensitivity of mothers with social adaptation difficulties is vital. Our aim was to compare the parental sensitivity of 33 adolescent mothers in group homes with that of a school group of 63 adolescent mothers divided into two subgroups according to the presence or absence of a conduct disorder diagnosis. Our results revealed that the proportion of sensitive mothers was greater among the adolescents living in group homes (29%) than among the group of adolescent mothers with a conduct disorder diagnosis who did not live in group homes during the first four months of their children's lives (7%). In particular, we found a smaller proportion of unresponsive mothers in the first group than in the second. The lack of difference among the groups with regards to the numbers of controlling mothers may be explained by the greater difficulty experienced for group home staff members in detecting overly controlling behavior in mothers and taking appropriate action to avoid any risk of physical abuse of children.

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)0.001
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 score0.165
Threshold uncertainty score0.280

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.277 · 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

Citations1
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Emotional AbuseSame topicIntergenerational Family Dynamics and CaregivingFrench-language works237,207