"It's a hearing world" : parents' perspectives of the social and emotional well-being of children who are deaf and hard of hearing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Children with disabilities are known to experience bullying. This study explores parents’ perspectives of the social and emotional well-being of children who are Deaf and Hard of Hearing (DHH). A combination of social theories guided this research — the social model of disability, the ‘looking glass self’ theory, and the concept of bi-directionality. Qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted with 10 hearing, English-speaking parents of children with hearing loss. All parents voiced instances, based on their observations, where their children have had negative social experiences. Specific analyses of these experiences provided evidence of parental and child activities where threats of rejection and exclusion were minimized. As a result of previous experiences, children showed adaptive responses in order to avoid social situations that threaten their social and emotional well-being. Future implications for this research suggest that we prioritize the social and emotional well-being of children with disabilities, perhaps starting by creating conditions wherein these children are able to build friendships. Keywords: parents, children, Deaf, Hard of Hearing, well-being, friendship
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".