Exploring Parenting Decisions Among South Korean Mothers with Preschool-Age Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This descriptive study employed qualitative content analysis to explore the parenting decisions of South Korean mothers with preschool-age children. The parenting decisions of such mothers and the factors influencing them were discussed in two focus group interviews conducted in December 2014 and January 2015. The researchers applied conventional content analysis to the interview transcripts in accordance with the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Studies. The three major themes identified were “how parenting decisions are made,” “barriers to parental decisions,” and “mothers’ needs in order to make parenting decisions.” Participants reported that making parenting decisions was difficult in their daily lives and asserted that South Korea lacked an adequate parenting support system. Given this deficiency, South Korean mothers tended to seek parenting information from people close to them and from the internet, and this information had a primary influence on their parenting decisions. Mothers expressed a need for government policies, recognition of their maternal status, guidance, and training to support their parenting decisions. In this regard, a more comprehensive support system should be provided by the South Korean government to help mothers navigate parenting decisions for their preschool-age children. This system should address all the systems of ecological theory in order to maximize its benefits to South Korean mothers.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".