Mothers’ and Fathers’ Early Relationship With Their Infant: Similar Yet Temporally Discordant Themes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To examine first-time mothers' and fathers' themes in their relationship with their infant, how these themes change during the first four months postpartum, and similarities and differences in mothers' and fathers' themes.Participants: Eighteen first-time mother-father couples were separately interviewed at one; six and 16 weeks postpartum. Data Analysis: Audio-taped, transcribed interviews were analysed using a Grounded Theory approach.Results: Our findings reveal a common set of themes for mothers and fathers in relation to the infant : 1: Discovery,2: Physical Proximity, 3: Emotional Closeness, 4: Initiation of Complementary Interactions and 5: Commitment to Love and Care. However, there was a striking lack of concordance between mothers and fathers for these themes at each point in time.Conclusions: Mothers' and fathers' experience of the early relationship with their infant is unique. Focussing on maternal as well as paternal ways of experiencing the early relationship with their infant sets the way to understanding early developing relationships in the family context.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".