MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2514706994 · doi:10.1352/1944-7558-121.5.383

Sibling Relationships in Adolescence and Early Adulthood With People Who Have Intellectual Disability

2016· article· en· W2514706994 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFamily and Disability Support Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
KeywordsClosenessPsychologyDevelopmental psychologySiblingSibling relationshipFeelingYoung adultReciprocalBirth orderSocial psychologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cross-sectional (N = 106) and longitudinal (N = 35) samples of siblings (ages 11-38) reported on closeness and conflict in their relationships with sisters and brothers with intellectual disability. For closeness, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) distinguished feelings of emotional closeness from reciprocal sharing behaviors for these siblings. Age effects and changes over time indicated increasing emotional closeness and a general reduction in conflict from adolescence to young adulthood, with stable reciprocal sharing. Cross-sectionally, closeness was greater when siblings were involved in caregiving, and conflict was less when siblings no longer co-resided. Sibling constellation features (sex, birth order, age spacing) had limited effects at this developmental period. Findings support a combination of life-span developmental change and enduring attachment in these sibling relationships.

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.

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)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.256
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.255 · 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