Active Play as a Window Into the Worlds of Twins and Triplets With Autism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Research indicates that play can facilitate communication and emotional connection for children with autism and their parents. Currently, there is no research exploring the perceptions that parents of twins and triplets with autism have regarding their children’s play, despite these parents’ unique opportunity to observe and interpret the play behaviours of multiple same‐age, same‐diagnosis children raised in the same home environment. The purpose of this descriptive phenomenological study was to describe the value that parents of twins and triplets with autism place on active play. Method: The researchers used purposive sampling to recruit abroad sample of mothers ( N = 9) of twins and triplets with autism aged 4–11 years old. Participants took part in one semistructured online interview with the researcher which was then thematically analyzed. Results: One central theme emerged from our analysis. This theme is entitled active play as a “window into a child’s world” and contains five subthemes: (1) parent perceiving child’s strengths and weaknesses in active play, (2) parent facilitating active play experiences, (3) parent perceiving child’s intrinsic motivations for active play, (4) parent interpreting child’s active play behaviours, and (5) active play experiences as a medium for parent/child communication. Conclusions: These findings suggest that parents value active play because it affords them opportunity to observe their children’s characteristics through their active play behaviours (e.g., strengths and weaknesses) and use what they have learned to facilitate new active play experiences that encourage overall development. Through active play, parents also practice communicating verbally and nonverbally with their child.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".