Parenting in Immigration: Experiences of Mothers and Fathers from Eastern Europe Raising Children in the United States
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study examines the experiences of 50 immigrant mothers and fathers from Eastern European countries raising children in the United States. Qualitative analysis of in-depth personal interviews resulted in three themes related to: (1) issues of discipline and decline of parental authority; (2) opportunities to build a child’s selfesteem and confidence; and (3) a need to balance and integrate two cultures. This study illustrates the process of negotiation between two cultures that immigrant parents engage in and provides support for integration as an acculturation strategy. Narratives of immigrant parents demonstrate that they are changing their childrearing practices to give their children more choices and allow children more power in the family, while, at the same time, trying to maintain their authority and discipline. As a result of exposure to the host culture, these immigrant parents also report placing greater value on developing their children’s self-esteem and assertiveness as important qualities for successful adaptation to the new context. While selectively adopting new childrearing values and strategies, these parents report retaining some attitudes and practices from their original cultures in order to keep their children grounded in reality. Participants’ quotes provide rich descriptions of their experience of parenting in immigration and contribute to our understanding of the cultural factors guiding their childrearing decisions. This study may be useful to researchers and practitioners working with immigrants.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".