Understanding child supervision among South Korean immigrant families: A qualitative phenomenological approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Child supervision impacts the health and well-being of children and families, including for migrants adapting to life in Canada. Their supervisory practices may change during this transition, and influence the mental health, safety, and development of children. Limited research has been conducted on how South Korean immigrant families negotiate child supervision and caregiving in a new country within the last five years, given the transformative effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on supervision practices. Methods: This study explores the views and experiences of supervision amongst South Korean immigrant parents and adolescents residing in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) in Canada. Individual interviews with fifteen parents and ten adolescents aged 14-17 were conducted. Results: Results highlight the primary role of academic institutions in providing supervision in South Korea, and parents’ high control over children’s activities. In Canada, parents lacked supervision support due to absence of extended family and of trust in their neighbours. Parents and adolescents understood and experienced supervision differently. Parent-child communication was considered an important aspect of supervision, particularly with adolescents. Conclusions: Understanding how South Korean immigrant parents and adolescents make meaning of “child supervision” can help public health professionals, community organizations, and schools to identify necessary support and services to address their needs and challenges.
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 | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".