MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388340021 · doi:10.1111/chso.12811

Youth provisioning in <scp>low‐income</scp> families: Reconsidering theories of poor attachment

2023· article· en· W4388340021 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Lea Caragata

Bibliographic record

VenueChildren & Society · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFamily Support in Illness
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsProvisioningFocus groupLow incomeQualitative researchDevelopmental psychologyQualitative propertyPsychologyWork (physics)Demographic economicsSociologySocial psychologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper explores the relationships between low‐income single mothers and their adolescent and early adult children utilizing qualitative interview and focus group data with youth from three Canadian cities. The research explored youth provisioning roles in these families. Provisioning, a concept widely understood in the global south, refers to labour used to sustain low‐income families and includes emotional labour, care work, trade and exchange and paid labour. Findings from this study identified strong expressions of positive attachment and close relationships between youth and their family members. The paper queries whether positive attachment may be built through roles where youth see themselves as integral parts of a family team and where their contributions are acknowledged. These findings invite us to explore and perhaps challenge the oft‐reported correlations between living in a low‐income, lone mother‐led family and poor childhood outcomes and poor attachment. Can these outcomes be mediated and can the provisioning roles youth undertake possibly be such mediators?

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.229
Threshold uncertainty score0.823

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChildren & SocietySame topicFamily Support in IllnessFrench-language works237,207