Challenges to coparenting posed by military life and strategies used by fathers and mothers to overcome them
Bibliographic record
Abstract
LAY SUMMARY Military life is known to challenge family member well-being, as well as parent-child and marital relationships. Although coparenting predicts parenting quality, parent-child and marital relationships, and family members’ well-being, research has rarely considered how it is challenged by military life and how parents overcome these challenges. Interviews with 15 fathers and 15 mothers from Canadian families headed by a military father and a civilian mother revealed various aspects of military life that impacted or complicated coparenting (absences, relocations, military culture, values and career, mothers’ occupations, and financial issues), mostly challenging parents’ abilities to jointly manage families and division of labour. Strategies to overcome challenges valued and encouraged father involvement, promoted agreement and joint decision making, and adjusted coparenting dynamics, thoughts, and perceptions. Although temporary or permanent maternal solo-parenting was reported, most strategies supported coparental collaboration. Findings suggest ways to support coparenting and the resilience of military 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 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".