Understanding the rationales behind childbearing: A qualitative study based on extended theory of planned behavior
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Childbearing is the most important determinant of population fluctuations and its studies are more important than other population phenomena. Many factors are associated with childbearing, but individual factors associated with it have been less studied in a specific framework. The present study aimed to explore and identify the factors related to childbearing based on extended theory of planned behavior (ETPB). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This qualitative study was conducted among married women <35 years of age and married men whose spouses were under 35 years of age and lived in the City of Hamadan, Iran, in 2019. The data were collected by semistructured and face-to-face in-depth interviews and continued until the data saturation was reached. Overall, 15 interviews were conducted with 17 people. The data were analyzed, using a directed content analysis approach. RESULTS: The data analysis resulted in the extraction of 28 main codes, 9 subcategories, and 4 themes, which were correspond to constructs of the theory, consisting of attitudes, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control, and social support in the field of childbearing. The main predictors were attitude toward childbearing and perceived control. CONCLUSION: The findings of this study showed that ETPB has a potential to explain the intention and behavior of childbearing. The ETPB makes it possible to understand many of the factors associated with childbearing. The results of this study could be the basis for designing appropriate data collection instrument in quantitative studies and vast surveys.
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 | 0.004 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".