MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2325890141 · doi:10.1300/j087v42n01_04

Communication

2004· article· en· W2325890141 on OpenAlexaff
Madeleine Beaudry, Jean-Marie Boisvert, Marie Simard, Claudine Parent, Marie‐Claude Blais

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Divorce & Remarriage · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAttachment and Relationship Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversité du QuébecUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStepfamilyPsychologyAssertionContext (archaeology)PopulationSocial psychologyDevelopmental psychologyMarital relationshipDemographySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In theory, good couple communication is associated with experiencing less serious problems and a high level of marital satisfaction. However, is this assertion true in the context of stepfamilies? Indeed, couples in stepfamilies often experience, from the outset, certain difficulties that may be due not to their communication skills, but rather to events originating from outside marital dynamics such as the presence of children and former spouses. The goal of this study is to verify whether the specific challenges faced by stepfamilies are as significant as communication difficulties in predicting marital satisfaction. The results reveal that spouses' communication skills play a major and significant role in predicting marital satisfaction for both men and women. Moreover, there is a significant relationship between the presence of children from a previous union and certain difficulties experienced by male spouses. The implications of these results, as well as the difficulties of recruiting from this population are discussed.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.741
Threshold uncertainty score0.866

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2590.092

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.366 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations36
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Divorce & RemarriageSame topicAttachment and Relationship DynamicsFrench-language works237,207