Understanding Adolescent Identity Construction in the Context of Living with a Parent with an Acquired Brain Injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adolescent identity construction is complex. Despite decades of research revealing various understandings of identity, it is unclear how disruptive phenomena influence identity construction, particularly during adolescence. Therefore, when adult participants from my master’s thesis talked about becoming different people as a result of their adolescent experiences of living with a parent with an acquired brain injury (ABI), I wondered how the occurrence of such a phenomenon could change identities and self. This wondering inspired my doctoral research studies and led me to ask the following research question: How might we understand adolescent identity construction in the context of living with a parent with an ABI? To respond to this question, I used hermeneutic inquiry guided by Gadamer’s (1960/2004) philosophical hermeneutics. I recruited volunteers from the Calgary area through emails to ABI and counselling service providers, posters, news media interviews, social media advertisements, and snowball sampling. I obtained nine adult participants (three males, six females) aged 20 to 38 years, who were adolescents (i.e., 10 to 19 years of age) at the time their parent incurred an ABI. Participants engaged in a one- to two-hour audio-recorded interview that was then transcribed verbatim. Analysis and interpretation of the data included reviewing interview transcripts, listening to the recordings, journaling thoughts and questions inspired by the interviews, discussing preliminary thoughts with supervisory committee members, and consulting the literature to create an understanding of the topic. Through this process, I created six interpretations that revealed how we might understand adolescent identity construction in the context of living with a parent with an ABI. These interpretations included: (a) using normal as a guiding concept in identity construction, (b) remaking home environments to construct identities, (c) adopting and rejecting roles resulting from parental ABI, (d) experiencing trust and betrayal in social relationships, (e) being unrecognized and/or forgotten, and (f) silencing in identity construction. Following a presentation of these interpretations, I discuss my synthesized understanding and the implications of the findings for theory, practice, and research.
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 | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".