MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W238627804 · doi:10.1037/e509012013-218

Mothers Experiences of a Child with Learning Disabilities: A Phenomenological Study

2004· dataset· en· W238627804 on OpenAlexaff
Judith Moody

Bibliographic record

VenuePsycEXTRA Dataset · 2004
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFamily and Disability Support Research
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyInterpretative phenomenological analysisLearning disabilityDevelopmental psychologyPhenomenological methodQualitative researchSociologyEpistemologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Learning disabilities have a significant impact not only on the affected individual but also on other family members. The mother often is the most affected family member as she tries to understand her child's difficulties while trying to discover the nature of the problem. Learning disabilities are usually not identified until school entry or even later depending on the nature of the disability. The goal of this phenomenological study is to understand what it is like to be a mother of a child with a learning disability. Ten mothers participated in the study and were asked to describe their experiences to gain insight into this mothering experience. Unstructured individual interviews were conducted. Thematic analysis was conducted using van Manen's approach. Six themes were identified from the data analysis: searching for answers, easing the child's struggle, need for assistance and understanding, no time for self, isolating and lonely life, and an uncertain future. Mothers indicated the experience was emotional, challenging, and stressful. This research adds to the body of knowledge on mothering in the area of learning disabilities.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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: Dataset · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0070.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.325 · 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
GenreDataset

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

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsycEXTRA Dataset→Same topicFamily and Disability Support Research→French-language works237,207→