MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386548856 · doi:10.1177/23780231231192392

The Effects of Head Start on Low-Income Mothers

2023· article· en· W4386548856 on OpenAlexaff
C. Yeh, Geoffrey T. Wodtke

Bibliographic record

VenueSocius Sociological Research for a Dynamic World · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Labor, and Family Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDisadvantagedHead startEarly Head StartLow incomeHead (geology)PsychologyDemographic economicsDevelopmental psychologyEconomicsEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Head Start is a federal antipoverty program that provides free childcare, preschool, and related services to disadvantaged families. Research on Head Start has focused almost exclusively on impacts among children. Using data from the Head Start Impact Study, a nationally representative field experiment, the authors estimate treatment effects on maternal employment, economic hardship, and depression. The authors find that Head Start admission generates some improvements among Black mothers but not among other subpopulations. In analyses accounting for treatment intensity, noncompliance, and program substitution, the authors find suggestive evidence that Head Start participation may lead to even greater improvements in these outcomes specifically among Black mothers who would otherwise look after their children at home and when they participate in the program full-time. In conclusion, Head Start likely improves outcomes for some groups of low-income mothers, but these effects are heterogeneous, and they may be small, dose-dependent, or otherwise difficult to detect for many women.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.094
GPT teacher head0.438
Teacher spread0.345 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocius Sociological Research for a Dynamic WorldSame topicGender, Labor, and Family DynamicsFrench-language works237,207