Travail de groupe avec des hommes et aide mutuelle : l’exemple d’un service pour des pères séparés ayant des difficultés d’accès à leurs enfants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article présente les résultats d’une recherche portant sur l’expérience de groupe telle qu’elle est perçue par des pères ayant des difficultés d’accès à leurs enfants. Ils ont fait appel aux services d’un organisme communautaire proposant un groupe de soutien ouvert pour des pères dans leur situation. En étudiant les récits recueillis auprès de quatorze pères et de deux intervenants, on constate la présence de plusieurs dynamiques d’aide mutuelle. L’analyse des entrevues permet de faire des liens entre la conceptualisation de l’aide mutuelle et les témoignages des pères, puis d’élaborer de nouvelles pistes d’intervention auprès de groupes d’hommes.This article presents research findings on group experience as perceived by fathers facing children custody issues. They used the services of a community organization that offered an open group for fathers in their situation. By studying interviews with 14 fathers and 2 practitioners, we note the presence of several dynamics of mutual aid. The analysis of the interviews indicates links between the conceptualization of the mutual aid and the testimonies of the fathers as well as describing new ways of intervention, especially with men’s groups.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".