CAN I TELL JUST BY MYSELF? DISCUSSING A PARENTAL MENTAL DISORDER WITH A CHILD IN A RESEARCH INTERVIEW
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".