Gender and Child Behavior Problems in Rural Nepal: Differential Expectations and Responses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Whereas epidemiologic studies consistently identify different rates and types of problematic behavior in boys and girls, there has been little research examining the ecocultural context in which these gender differences in child behavior problems develop, especially in non-Western settings. This qualitative study in rural Nepal explored how behavioral expectations differed based on gender role, gender discrimination, inequity, and treatment of children based on their gender identity. We conducted semi-structured interviews with a total of 14 parents, school workers, and community leaders from a village in rural Nepal. Interview transcripts were coded by two authors using predetermined and emergent codes to identify expectations, behavior problems, and responses to behavior problems, stratified by gender. Authors then arranged codes into categories based on emergent themes. Four major themes in the interviews were identified: (1) self-reported gender non-bias; (2) differentiated role expectations; (3) gender, "goodness", and differential thresholds for problem behaviors; and (4) boys and girls require different responses for misbehavior. Results from our study in Nepal reflect nearly universal models of gender differences in behavior. Of particular importance in South Asia, patrilocal marital practices were used to frame gender differences in expectations. To protect girls' future potential to marry, local cultural practices provide girls with lesser opportunities and less cultural space to conduct themselves in a disruptive manner than boys. Greater understanding of differential expectations and responses to disruptive behaviors by gender will be important for culturally-appropriate equitable programming in child development.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".