Mothers’ Perceptions of Interactions in Animal-Assisted Activities with Children Exposed to Domestic Violence in Shelters: A Qualitative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This qualitative study explores the perceptions of mothers who are victims of domestic violence regarding their children’s interactions during animal-assisted activities conducted over three months in a residential shelter. Utilizing a semi-structured interview approach, six mothers from diverse national backgrounds, aged 24 to 48 years, participated in the research. The study identifies perceived benefits, behavioral changes, and challenges encountered during the sessions. Content analysis revealed four main categories: (A) Parents’ perceptions of their children’s previous contact with pets; (B) initial expectations of parents regarding their children’s participation in the intervention; (C) mothers’ observations during the intervention sessions with the animals; and (D) mothers’ reflections after the intervention. Findings indicate benefits for children’s behavior and development, perceived improvements in socio-emotional skills and communication, as well as a positive emotional experience for the mothers throughout the process. The results underscore the significance of animal-assisted activities in promoting the well-being of children and their families. The study emphasizes the importance of integrating family perspectives in evaluating therapeutic interventions and offers insights for structuring more inclusive and effective animal-assisted intervention programs.
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 | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| 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".