What is the role of professional helping relationships in altering the trajectories of young people facing severe and multiple disadvantage?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This doctoral thesis is about the possibility that relationships between young people facing severe and multiple disadvantage and professional helpers— employed by not-for-profit organisations— can alter the life trajectories of the young people. Specifically, the research explored five sub-questions relating to the characteristics of the youth population, the nature of positive worker-young person relationships, the mechanism by which relationship alter young people’s trajectories, the qualities of workers who support young people in this context, and the impact of such relationships on the young people’s outcomes. Two data sets were used to address these questions. The first four questions were explored through qualitative research involving 30 young people and 35 workers employed by not-for-profit organisations (five in the U.S. and 11 in the U.K.) selected on the basis of their ability to relate to young people in difficult circumstances. Participants were interviewed about their relationships and the findings were analysed using thematic analyses. The fifth question was explored through secondary analysis of data from a Canadian randomised controlled trial of At Home/Chez Soi, a programme commonly known as Housing First, aimed at people facing severe and multiple disadvantage. In this sub-study, a mixed method design was employed. The findings shed light on the group characteristics that are fundamental to understanding their life trajectories, particularly highlighting the role of emotions (e.g., shame and feelings of unworthiness) in disconnecting young people from sources of support. This study revealed the family-like nature of such relationships and the workers’ use of personal rather than professional ethics to allow for the formation of such deep bonds. The research described a mechanism of change by which the helper-helped relationships exerted their influence via alterations of the young people’s emotions, cognition, and agency. The qualities of workers able to relate to young people in this context were found to map onto that mechanism. Evidence and possible reasons for the differential impact of relationships on the trajectories of people facing severe and multiple were described in the fifth paper. These findings have implications for developing a public policy response to young people facing severe and multiple disadvantage.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".