Challenges and coping with COVID-19: perspectives of emerging adults and their mothers
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Emerging adulthood (spanning ages 18–25 years old) is a critical time of developmental transition. Although the COVID-19 pandemic led to multiple disruptions in the lives of emerging adults (EAs), little research examined the impacts from the perspectives of both EAs and their parents, who were spending increasing amounts of time together, particularly during the early pandemic stages. From May to July 2020, we interviewed 27 EAs and 12 mothers who were recruited from an ongoing longitudinal study. Themes were derived using conventional qualitative content analysis. Mothers and EAs described challenges and impediments of COVID-19 that fell under three larger categories: Challenges related to COVID-19, Coping Resources and Strategies, and Parental Support. Both mothers and EAs recognized that COVID-19 had led to disruptions in the developmental trajectories of EAs, requiring significant adjustment and coping. They reflected on the increased time together as both an impediment (i.e. to physical and mental health, unhealthy coping) and an opportunity (i.e. for bonding, healthy coping). Our findings highlight the need to address the significant challenges faced by EAs as a result of the pandemic, as well as the role of parents as important sources of support for their EA children during times of stress and crisis.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it