Divulgation de l’orientation sexuelle, soutien de la famille d’origine et adaptation conjugale chez des mères lesbiennes ayant eu leur(s) enfant(s) dans le contexte d’une relation hétérosexuelle. Étude exploratoire
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lesbian couples differ from heterosexual couples in that they must develop their relationship within an environment that is generally unsympathetic to homosexuality, a fact that could accentuate the importance of family support. Furthermore, the disclosure of their sexual orientation by lesbian couples could also affect the support given by family members. The present study examines the effect of coming-out and family support on the relationship adjustment of lesbian mothers whose children were born within a heterosexual context. It was expected that family support would mediate the relationship between coming-out and relationship adjustment. Fifty-five lesbian mothers currently in a relationship answered questions about their perception of family support, on their coming-out behaviour and their relationship adjustment. Results revealed a positive relationship between coming-out and family support, and between family support and relationship adjustment, however no association was found between coming-out and relationship adjustment. The mediation model was therefore not confirmed. Finally, the authors discuss the implications of these results.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".