Examination of the Feelings and Experiences of Postpartum Mothers Engaging with Social Media: A Qualitative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: This study examined how postpartum mothers experience social media within the context of mothering and their postpartum body. Methods: A subsample of 20 mothers (age 23–42) of infants aged 0–6 months who were exposed to body-focused social media posts as part of an experimental study designed to test social media’s impact on body dissatisfaction took part in semi-structured interviews. We used thematic analysis to identify themes and subthemes generated from the data. Results: We identified three themes in the study: (i) Social media provides a sense of connection with family and friends as a source of support, and connecting with others to gather information related to mothering and child-rearing; (ii) social media led mothers to engage in comparison regarding their bodies, lifestyles, and baby’s development; and: (iii) mothers do not always recognize the influence of social media on their feelings. Conclusions: Findings can help guide prenatal and postpartum interventions and equip healthcare professionals with the information needed to support postpartum mothers in maintaining a positive body image and mothering experience when engaging online.
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 | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".