Ma's se persepsies van hoe afknouery gesinne beïnvloed : geesteswetenskappe
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Die doel van hierdie verkennende, kwalitatiewe ondersoek was om vas te stel hoe gesinne deur die krisis van afknouery geraak word. Gesinsisteemteorie (Broderick 1993) verskaf die teoretiese raamwerk vir die ondersoek. Die navorsingsvraag vloei logies voort uit gesinsisteemteorie, naamlik: Hoe raak die afknouery van 'n kind ook die ander gesinslede? Die studiepopulasie was gesinne met laerskoolkinders wat vir ses maande of langer geboelie is in die voorafgaande drie jaar, en wat in die Suid-Kaap woon. Agt-en-veertig ma's het as verteenwoordigers van hul gesinne aan die ondersoek deelgeneem. Elk het 'n biografiese vraelys voltooi en die volgende oop vraag beantwoord: Op watter manier het die afknouery julle gesin geaffekteer? Resultate wat deur middel van inhoudsontleding verkry is, het getoon dat gesinne op verskeie maniere deur die afknouery geraak is. Die kinders wat geboelie is, is veral geaffekteer deurdat hulle negatiewe emosies soos hartseer ervaar het, opstandig geword het by die huis, hulself onttrek het en/of nie wou teruggaan skool toe nie. Die meeste ouers is deur die afknouery geaffekteer deurdat hulle woede of ander negatiewe emosies ervaar het, en/of deurdat hulle bekommerd oor hul kind se welstand en toekoms geword het. Die afknouery het soms gesinne as geheel beinvloed deurdat dit konflik binne die gesin veroorsaak het, terwyl dit in ander gevalle die gesin nader aan mekaar gebring het. Die bevindinge van hierdie ondersoek vul 'n leemte in die literatuur oor hierdie onderwerp en kan sinvol aangewend word in die ontwikkeling van afknoueryvoorkomings- en intervensieprogramme. Mothers' perceptions of how bullying affects families Large-scale studies on the prevalence of bullying have been conducted in various countries, including Norway, Finland, Sweden, England, the Netherlands, Canada, Spain, Ireland, Australia, Japan and the United States of America (Espelage and Swearer 2003:365; Olweus 1994:1171). A study that was conducted in Norway, in which more than 130 000 learners between the ages of seven and sixteen completed the Olweus Bully/Victim Questionnaire, found that approximately 15% of all learners in the country had been involved in bullying, whether as bullies or as victims. With regard to other countries, the prevalence of bullying ranges from 11,3% in Finland to 49,8% in Ireland (Dake, Price and Telljohann 2003:173). In South Africa the prevalence of bullying is even higher, with as many as 58,2% of learners affected by it (Neser, Ovens, Van der Merwe et al. 2004:32). Although it is often argued that bullying is a relatively normal part of growing up (Greeff 2004:1), various studies have shown the negative consequences it entails (Smith 1999:68). For example, children who are bullied often experience somatic symptoms such as headaches and stomach aches (Swart and Bredekamp 2009:405), as well as symptoms of depression, such as suicidal thoughts (KaltialaHeino, Rimpela, Marttunen et al. 1999:351; Roland 2002:55). Although research on bullying has previously been conducted in South Africa, it focused primarily on the prevalence of bullying (De Wet 2005:82; Greeff 2004:1; Neser et al. 2004:30), as well as on learners' and teachers' experiences of bullying (Adam 2007:10; MacDonald and Swart 2004:33; Pillay 2004:5; Swart and Bredekamp 2009:405; Zeelie 2004:5). No studies on how families are affected by bullying were found in the South African literature. The research question for this study was, therefore: How are families affected by bullying?
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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.039 | 0.006 |
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".