MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145757928 · doi:10.1111/infa.12079

The Relation between Mothers' Mirroring of Infants' Behavior and Maternal Mind‐Mindedness

2015· article· en· W2145757928 on OpenAlexafffund
Ann E. Bigelow, Michelle Power, Maria Bulmer, Katlyn Gerrior

Bibliographic record

VenueInfancy · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAttachment and Relationship Dynamics
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMirroringMentalizationPsychologyTheory of mindTask (project management)Developmental psychologyPresentation (obstetrics)Social psychologyCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Maternal mind‐mindedness, which is a measure of maternal mentalization involving mothers' speech, was examined as a predictor of mothers' mirroring of infant behavior during interaction. Five‐month‐old infants and their mothers engaged in a Still‐Face Task in which the mother's mirroring of the infant's behavior was assessed. After the task, the mother was shown a video of her infant in the task and asked to comment on what was happening for her infant; her comments were assessed for mind‐mindedness. Maternal mind‐mindedness when mothers were asked to reflect upon what was happening for their infants during the task predicted mothers' mirroring behaviors while engaged with their infants in the task. Maternal mirroring behavior may be a manifestation of maternal mentalization that is salient to infants.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.009
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.350 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations33
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInfancySame topicAttachment and Relationship DynamicsFrench-language works237,207