MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2159321312 · doi:10.1002/imhj.20244

Maternal and child characteristics as antecedents of maternal mind‐mindedness

2010· article· en· W2159321312 on OpenAlexaff
Isabelle Demers, Annie Bernier, George M. Tarabulsy, Marc A. Provost

Bibliographic record

VenueInfant Mental Health Journal · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAttachment and Relationship Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-RivièresUniversité LavalUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaternal sensitivityPsychologyTemperamentDevelopmental psychologyTheory of mindPerceptionValence (chemistry)Mental stateCognitionSocial psychologyPersonalityCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article compares an expanded descriptive measure of maternal mind-mindedness to the original measure. We included assessments of the valence and richness of descriptions given by 106 mothers when asked to talk about their 18-month-old child (55 boys), in addition to assessing the proportion of mind-related descriptors. Contrary to previous findings, the proportion of mental descriptors was not associated with maternal sensitivity. However, the expanded measure revealed a significant positive link between positive mind-mindedness and maternal sensitivity, and between richness of the description and maternal sensitivity. We then investigated predictors of positive maternal mind-mindedness. Maternal state of mind regarding past attachment experiences, psychological adjustment, and perception of the child's temperament were considered. The findings revealed that attachment state of mind and parenting stress constitute independent predictors of positive mind-mindedness. These findings suggest that mind-mindedness is associated not only with parental state of mind but also to current factors related to parenthood.

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)0.008
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
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.380 · 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

Citations102
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInfant Mental Health JournalSame topicAttachment and Relationship DynamicsFrench-language works237,207