MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402334926 · doi:10.33422/hpsconf.v1i1.239

Intervention Proposal: Using Lego in Collaborative Play as an Intervention for Intergenerational Trauma in Chinese-Canadian Families

2024· article· en· W4402334926 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Huiqiao Hou

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Proceedings of the International Conference on Humanities, Psychology and Social Sciences. · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild Therapy and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)PsychologyPsychotherapistPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Intergenerational trauma is traumatic events experienced by ancestors which passed down through generations of descendants. While there has been published literature on intergenerational trauma, there lies a gap for culturally appropriate interventions for immigrant families that experience this type of trauma. This intervention proposal aims to utilise published research as well as Lego in therapy to bridge the gap in cross-cultural psychology by creating a treatment intervention for immigrant families experiencing intergenerational trauma, more specifically, Chinese immigrant families. Participant criterium are immigrant families with one or more children between the ages of eight to twelve-years-old and can commit to a minimum of 18 consecutive weekly sessions at two hours per week in a supervised therapeutic setting with a trauma-informed mental health professional. Sessions are divided into two interview sessions, 12 pre-determined Lego building tasks with increasing difficulty, and four free-building sessions. The supervising professional will conduct pre- and post- intervention interviews to assess the participants’ baselines, promote constructive and concise communication during sessions, and debriefing with the family after each session. Expected outcomes of this Lego intervention for immigrant families experiencing intergenerational trauma are improved interpersonal communication skills, increased levels of trust, a better recognition of emotions with higher levels of emotion regulation skills, and living in a healthier family environment.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.211
Threshold uncertainty score0.955

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Proceedings of the International Conference on Humanities, Psychology and Social Sciences.Same topicChild Therapy and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207