ASSESSING THE ASSOCIATION BETWEEN CARE QUALITY AND HOUSEHOLD CHORE RULES IN RESIDENTIAL CARE INSTITUTIONS IN JAPAN
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The performance of household chores by children in Japanese residential care institutions has been widely accepted as a practice that fosters children’s independence and self-sufficiency. However, children coming from neglectful or dysfunctional families often require sensitive, individualized care, which they did not receive from their family of origin. While a shift away from large-scale institutions has begun, with smaller units or group homes now accounting for 40% of all care institutions, it is not clear that family-like, individualized care has been achieved in these smaller group homes. This study involved 61 participants aged 10 to 15 years and their care workers from six residential care institutions in the greater Tokyo area. It explored what aspects of care quality were related to the presence of certain characteristics of traditional management-oriented care: fixed rules for household chores and lack of choice in daily living. Care workers were asked whether children washed their own dishes, did their own laundry, chose their own clothes when shopping, and had mandatory events to attend in the residential care institutions. Care quality was assessed using the Early Adolescent HOME (Home Observation for Measurement of Environment) developed for Japanese residential care institutions (EA-HOME-JP). The findings suggest that care workers should re-examine their intentions in setting and applying household chore rules while exploring which aspects of child care, including regulatory activities and modeling, should be emphasized in order to actualize family-like and individualized care in institutions.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".