Parents’ Attitudes About Gender Roles In Caregiving And Practices: Perspectives From A Community-Led Parenting Empowerment Program In Rural Kenya And Zambia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: This study was part of a project funded by the Hilton Foundation in partnership with Episcopal Relief and Development to conduct implementation research in rural communities in Kenya and Zambia. This involves testing the feasibility and effectiveness of community-based parenting empowerment in improving nurturing care of young children in rural communities in Zambia and Kenya. Few studies have investigated fathers’ roles in nurturing care of young children (birth-age to 3), particularly responsive care and stimulation (i.e. providing opportunities for early learning) in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Fathers are often perceived to be mainly responsible for the provision of the family's economic needs. However, past studies have demonstrated that fathers’ involvement in parenting has great significance for the child’s holistic growth and development.Methods: Qualitative interviews and discussions with caregivers (primary caregivers and secondary caregivers) with children below three years, program volunteers (ECD Promoters and faith leaders), Moments That Matter Program implementers and government officials involved in the program implementation. The study reported in this paper aimed to establish the effects of the parenting empowerment program on more gender-equal attitudes about gender roles in parenting and actual caregiving practices by fathers (who are not the primary caregivers), after participating in the Moments That Matter (MTM) Program in Kenya and Zambia for 24 months. Qualitative data were collected at three-time points (baseline, midline and endline). Results: The findings show that the MTM Program resulted in improved gender-equal parenting attitudes and practices among mothers/other primary caregivers and fathers. Study participants reported that most fathers were actively involved in parenting and caregiving due to their participation in the MTM Program. Conclusion: The study findings provide evidence that targeted parenting programs can influence changes in perceived gender roles in parenting.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".