Professionals’ positive perceptions of fathers are associated with more favourable attitudes towards including them in family interventions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: This Université du Québec en Outaouais study examined professionals' attitudes towards fathers, their perceived self-efficacy when working with them and their perceptions of the importance of including fathers in family interventions. METHODS: Professionals in Québec, Canada, working in childcare fields such as education, social services, health, community services and management answered a self-report questionnaire between 2013 and 2015. The 296 respondents (90% females) had a mean age of 39 (20-65), were from urban, semi-urban and rural settings and provided services to families with children up to five years of age. RESULTS: Social service professionals perceived fathers more negatively than did other professionals. Even though male professionals perceived fathers more negatively, they felt more confident working with them than did their female counterparts. Positive perceptions of fathers were associated with more favourable attitudes towards including them in family interventions, and this association was mediated by the professionals' perceptions of their own self-efficacy. CONCLUSION: The most negative attitudes were reported by social service professionals. Male professionals viewed fathers more negatively but were more confident working with them than were female colleagues. Improving professionals' perceptions of fathers could help to promote their inclusion in family interventions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".