<i>The Strengths of Black Families</i> : Family Support, Fictive Kinship, and Congregation-Based Social Support Networks
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article provides a selected review of research literature on Black American families using Robert B. Hill’s classic book, The Strengths of Black Families. Hill’s framework identified several basic tenets for understanding Black family life, including (1) the importance of socio-historical context for understanding family development, (2) recognizing sociodemographic diversity within the Black population, and (3) promoting strengths-focused approaches in research and practice. Our selective review of research on extended family social support, fictive kin relationships, and congregation-based social support networks among Black Americans embodies these tenets. A portion of this research is based on nationally representative samples that reflect the sociodemographic diversity within the Black American population. Collectively, this work effectively demonstrates how advances in theory, methods, and data analytic approaches have contributed to research and scholarship that support Robert Hill’s vision of meaningful research about and for Black American families.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it