MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2340531237 · doi:10.18357/ijcyfs.71201615675

CAN I TELL JUST BY MYSELF? DISCUSSING A PARENTAL MENTAL DISORDER WITH A CHILD IN A RESEARCH INTERVIEW

2016· article· en· W2340531237 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Anu Leinonen, Jaakko Seikkula, Maarit Alasuutari

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Child Youth and Family Studies · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChildren's Rights and Participation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmbarrassmentPsychologyInterviewShameMental healthQualitative researchStigma (botany)Social psychologyDevelopmental psychologyPsychotherapistPsychiatrySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this single-case study, we focus on how to have a dialogue in a research interview with a child whose parent has been diagnosed with a mental disorder. The interactional context and the interviewer’s role in co-constructing the child’s accounts have been largely neglected in the qualitative psychological research on this subject. Stigma related to mental disorders is increasingly being recognized as a central issue for the entire mental health field. It is considered to have far-reaching effects on the social interaction of the stigmatized person and also to contaminate the interactions of those around that person. We examine how the stigma of a parental mental disorder arises and is negotiated in the dialogue between an 8-year-old girl and a female interviewer. The perspective of the study is micro-sociological and constructionist. Three categories of the child’s talk were identified: actively describing her position and voice in the ongoing dialogue, normalization of the parental problem and herself, and talking about shame and embarrassment.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.098
Threshold uncertainty score0.285

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.132
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Child Youth and Family StudiesSame topicChildren's Rights and ParticipationFrench-language works237,207