MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3026980264 · doi:10.1111/cars.12277

Depressive Symptoms and Father Involvement in Canada: Evidence from a National Study

2020· article· en· W3026980264 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kevin Shafer, Andrew J. Renick

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Review of Sociology/Revue canadienne de sociologie · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFamily Dynamics and Relationships
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDepressive symptomsPsychologyPsychiatryClinical psychologyMedicineAnxiety

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Paternal involvement in instrumental and emotional parenting behaviours benefits families and children. While fathers have become more involved in childrearing over the past several decades, significant variability in paternal involvement with children remains. Yet, little work has focused on the facilitators and barriers to involved fathering and work in the Canadian context is particularly sparse. This study focuses on one potentially important factor, depressive symptoms, and its relationship with multiple dimensions of father involvement among Canadian men. Using national quantitative data from the Survey of Canadian Fathers-Enquête des Pères Canadiens (n = 2,099) and ordinary least squares regression models, we focus on the relationship between depressive symptoms and six measures of fathering behavior. Results indicate that depression is significantly associated with most behaviours, but these results diverge from studies in other countries and contexts. Overall, our findings underscore the importance of context-specific studies on parenting and the need for additional work on fathering and mental health in Canada.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.110

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.006
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.105
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations8
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Review of Sociology/Revue canadienne de sociologieSame topicFamily Dynamics and RelationshipsFrench-language works237,207