MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2914767242 · doi:10.3138/jcfs.47.3.343

Resilience in Gay and Lesbian Parent Families: Perspectives from the Chrono-System

2016· article· en· W2914767242 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Liana Kruger, Carien Lubbe-De Beer, Anna-Barbara du Plessis

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Comparative Family Studies · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFamily Support in Illness
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLesbianHeteronormativityPerspective (graphical)Gender studiesSociologyPsychological resiliencePsychologySocial psychologyQueer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores resilience in gay and lesbian parent families from a chrono-system perspective, which refers to the development of resilience through time. Resilience is characterised differently by different cultures. In one sub-culture, research on the experiences of children raised in gay or lesbian parent families in South Africa shows that the children often feel vulnerable facing societal heteronormativity), even though gay and lesbian parent families often work diligently to create a sense of belonging within the society in which they live. However, many family studies have either ignored general familial bonding with society or dealt with it only generally. With the significant impact of South African legal transformation over time regarding gay and lesbian parent families’ position in society, a chrono-system perspective of factors that influence resilience in gay and lesbian parent families becomes relevant for theory building and psychological support.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.011
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.270 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Comparative Family StudiesSame topicFamily Support in IllnessFrench-language works237,207