The role of motherhood schemas and life transitions in reproductive intention formation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study provides a theory-based snapshot of the processes involved in women's fertility intention formation and decisions regarding the timing of motherhood. BACKGROUND: The trend to defer childbearing is linked with both empowering and challenging outcomes for women. The cognitive-social (C-S) model suggests that deliberative thinking regarding reproduction occurs following fertility-relevant life transitions, which results in fluctuations in motherhood schemas and fertility intentions. This framework was applied to explore fertility intention formation. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with twelve women who either had children or desired children. RESULTS: Two overarching themes central to the C-S model are discussed: (a) passive expectations and (b) deliberative intentions. Women's motherhood schemas were often underpinned by schematic structures (e.g. group norms and scripts) and material structures (e.g. observational influences). Life transitions and personal experiences tended to prompt deliberative thinking about motherhood plans. CONCLUSION: The results were generally consistent with the C-S model, but highlight complexities to consider when investigating fertility expectations and intentions.
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 | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".