Parents’ perspectives on the role of kin in child-rearing: a qualitative study on Greenland’s universal parenting programme MANU
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nurturing care and protection from parents and community in the early years of life are fundamental for a child's development. The article aims to explore what relations parents see as meaningful in their child's upbringing and how these are shaped, and how these perspectives are reflected in MANU. MANU is a universal parenting programme in Greenland. Ten of 40 interviews with parents were selected for the analysis of this article's objective. Five grandparents were interviewed. Grandparents are the child's closest extended family members and provide support to parents. Parents placed between one to 19 extended family members in their child's network. Eating and being in nature together, along with familial and intergenerational connectedness, were deemed valuable and important aspects in child-rearing. Parents' own experiences in childhood can influence and complicate how parents place their new family within the extended family. The MANU materials address aspects in the role of kin that parents and grandparents described in interviews. The format and delivery of MANU aims to be universal and mostly addresses Western epistemologies, but both Western and Inuit epistemologies coexists in Greenland. This article creates a window into the existing context parents navigate in. It is important that initiatives are built within this context to ensure they are relevant to families.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".