Intergenerational communication regarding Indian Residential Schools: Implications for cultural identity, perceived discrimination, and depressive symptoms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two studies assessed the nature of parental communication about the trauma of Indian Residential Schools (IRSs) in relation to the psychological distress of their adult offspring, and whether the link between parental communication and distress was mediated by offsprings’ greater awareness of collective discrimination or sense of pride in cultural identity. In Study 1, an online survey of Indigenous participants from across Canada ( N = 498) demonstrated a curvilinear relation between the extent to which parents talked about their negative IRS experiences and the severity of depressive symptoms among offspring, among whom symptoms were particularly pronounced with more frequent communication. This relation was mediated by greater perceived discrimination. A similar, but inverse, association was found when parental communications conveyed positive construals of their IRS experiences. Study 2 ( N = 134) further demonstrated an association between direct communications from IRS survivors and offspring wellbeing in that, either the absence of, or especially frequent communications were related to more severe depressive symptoms among offspring. However, hearing about parental IRS experiences from someone other than the parent was not related to offsprings’ depressive symptoms. Qualitative analyses indicated that direct communications from parents tended to provide excessive detail, whereas parental silence was associated with speculation and feelings of isolation or resentment among offspring of IRS survivors. Taken together, the results suggest that either insufficient or excessive parental communication about trauma might undermine offspring wellbeing, whereas moderate levels of communication that provide positive meaning and promote cultural pride or diminish perceptions of personal discrimination could be beneficial.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".