Prepartum and postpartum mothers’ and fathers’ feelings of frustration in response to infant crying
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this cross-sectional study performed in Canada, we evaluated the frustration levels of prepartum and postpartum mother and father couple-pairs. Our goal was to determine if there were differences in frustration levels between mothers and fathers while listening to prolonged infant crying, and further, how frustration levels might differ between prepartum and postpartum samples. Using two discrete groups, prepartum (Sample 1; N = 48) and postpartum (Sample 2; N = 44) mother and father couple-pairs completed 600 s of listening to audio-recorded infant cry sounds. Participants continuously reported their subjective frustration using a computerized Continuous Visual Analog Scale (CVAS). There was no significant difference in frustration responses between mothers and fathers across both prepartum and postpartum samples. Postpartum mothers and fathers experienced greater frustration than their prepartum counterparts, and frustration increased faster in postpartum couples compared to prepartum couples. Informing first-time parents of the universal experiences of frustration to prolonged crying bouts that are characteristic of their infant's early weeks of life may lead to greater understanding towards their infant, and perhaps decreased instances of harmful responses.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".