MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2195841079 · doi:10.1080/14616734.2015.1115113

Do infant behaviors following immunization predict attachment? An exploratory study

2015· article· en· W2195841079 on OpenAlexafffund
Rachel Horton, Rebecca Pillai Riddell, Greg Moran, Diana Lisi

Bibliographic record

VenueAttachment & Human Development · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAttachment and Relationship Dynamics
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of TorontoYork University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchOntario Ministry of Research and InnovationOntario Ministry of Research, Innovation and Science
KeywordsPsychologyStrange situationDevelopmental psychologyInsecure attachmentOperationalizationAttachment theoryImmunizationLongitudinal studyClinical psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: The relationship between infant behaviors during routine immunization, pre- and post-needle, and infant attachment was explored. METHODS: A total of 130 parent-infant dyads were recruited from a larger longitudinal study and videotaped during routine immunization at 12 months and the Strange Situation Procedure (SSP) at 14 months. Six infant behaviors were coded for 1-minute pre-needle and 3-minutes post-needle. Attachment was operationalized according to the secure/avoidant/resistant/disorganized categories. RESULTS: As expected, none of the pre-needle behaviors predicted attachment. Proximity-seeking post-needle significantly discriminated attachment categorizations. Secure infants were more likely to seek proximity to caregivers post-needle in comparison with avoidant and disorganized infants. Proximity-seeking following immunization was positively correlated with proximity-seeking during the SSP and negatively correlated with avoidance and disorganization during the SSP. CONCLUSIONS: Infant proximity-seeking during immunization is associated with attachment security and parallels behaviors observed during the SSP. More research is needed to identify behavioral markers of disorganization.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.346 · 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

Citations13
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAttachment & Human DevelopmentSame topicAttachment and Relationship DynamicsFrench-language works237,207