MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2892808427 · doi:10.1177/0731121418801807

The Different Roles of Parents and Friends: Support for Divorce and Repartnering Following Martial Dissolution among Latina and White Women

2018· article· en· W2892808427 on OpenAlex
Catherine B. McNamee, Lisa Smyth

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueSociological Perspectives · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFamily Dynamics and Relationships
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersQueen's UniversityQueen's University BelfastNational Science Foundation
KeywordsSympathyWhite (mutation)Social psychologyPsychologyPeriod (music)Gender studiesSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

What role do significant others play in orientations to repartnering following divorce? Situated within critical role theory, and focusing on 23 white and Latina divorcees from Texas (the United States), this paper examines orientations toward repartnering in the light of distinct friend and parent expectations. While friends were sources of sympathy and affirmation, parents were more interventionist, indicating moral expectations. Parents either encouraged repartnering as the route to a happy future, or discouraged it on grounds that first marriage creates sacred, unbreakable bonds. The former response was more common among whites, and the latter more common among Latinas. The paper argues that the expectations of friends and parents are taken account of during this transitional period, in positive and negative ways, as orientations toward marriage, divorce, and repartnering were explained and justified.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.953

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.290 · 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