HOME-BASED PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT IN CHILDREN WITH AND CHILDREN WITHOUT INTELLECTUAL DISABILITIES IN TÜRKIYE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines home-based parental involvement in children with and children without intellectual disabilities, with a particular focus on the factors influencing parental involvement in the activities and play of children. The data were collected from 223 mothers using the Parent Interview Form. The findings reveal that both parents engaged significantly more in activities with children who had intellectual disabilities than with children who did not. Mothers reported that, in general, they were more involved than the fathers were in their children’s activities and play. Family income, mothers’ education level, and the number of children at home were shown to be crucial factors in parental involvement. The results may guide interventionists as to which activities and types of play parents should be encouraged to participate in more with their children, especially those with intellectual disabilities. Key points are: (a) parents of children with intellectual disabilities demonstrated greater involvement than did parents of children without disabilities; (b) the most common activity among parents of children with intellectual disabilities was going out with their children while reading aloud was the least common; (c) physical play was preferred by parents of children with intellectual disabilities and by fathers of children without disabilities; and (d) a noteworthy correlation exists between the frequency of parental involvement with children with intellectual disabilities and two key factors: the number of children in the family and the mother’s education level.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".