MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2329911315 · doi:10.1525/qcr.2013.2.3.255

Family Trajectories

2013· article· en· W2329911315 on OpenAlexaff
Tim Dun, Laura Sangster

Bibliographic record

VenueQualitative Communication Research · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFamily Dynamics and Relationships
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConversationGrandparentDevelopmental psychologyPsychologyTransition (genetics)ChildbirthSocial psychologyRhetoricSociologyTrajectoryPregnancyCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This qualitative study analyzed intergenerational relationships during a major transition: when the younger generation becomes parents. Using a modified version of the Retrospective Interview Technique, 25 new parents described unfolding changes in their relationships with one of the new grandparents (i.e., a parent or parent-in-law of the informant), beginning with the conversation when they announced the pregnancy. We found four trajectories of change. The analysis suggests that these four patterns both reproduce and challenge socially constructed expectations for new parenthood. Reflecting social expectations for substantial change, most participants’ pathways to new parent-grandparent relationships positioned birth as a central, pivotal event, a novel understanding of change in the research of turning points. In accordance with positive rhetoric in a pronatal society, nearly half of the new parents described a Peak trajectory, where childbirth was at or near the high point in the intergenerational relationship. The results also include Crisis (the inverse of the Peak trajectory), Chaotic, and Steady trajectories. Our findings add to current understandings of the ways in which social norms and expectations of childbirth may influence new parents’ intergenerational communication during this important transition.

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)0.003
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.001

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 head0.442
GPT teacher head0.579
Teacher spread0.136 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQualitative Communication ResearchSame topicFamily Dynamics and RelationshipsFrench-language works237,207