MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6959863470 · doi:10.11575/prism/36949

Parental Divorce: The Experience Among Second Generation Chinese-Canadian Women

2019· other· en· W6959863470 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2019
Typeother
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Identity (music)Interpretative phenomenological analysisParental investmentChild developmentChild rearingAdult developmentLife course approach

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As a Chinese-Canadian woman, my experience of parental divorce has increased my awareness of the effects of culture and gender on the development of personal identity. Although existing literature has acknowledged that parental divorce significantly impacts the lives of children within a western context, the consequences of parental divorce on the adjustment of children from Chinese families, including the long-term impact, is largely unknown. As parental separation is seen to sharply intersect with developmental pathways, it may have long term implications for the development of identity later on, particularly during emerging adulthood, a time of reflection on prior life experiences. The objective of this study was to explore second generation Chinese-Canadian women’s understanding of the experience of parental divorce during childhood, and its influence on identity development during emerging adulthood. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with six second generation Chinese-Canadian women who had experienced parental divorce in childhood. Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis was used to examine how individuals understand this experience, resulting in five overarching themes: (a) Parental Divorce Within the Chinese-Canadian Culture; (b) Influence of Parental Divorce on Family Relationships; (c) Influence of Parental Divorce on Romantic and Platonic Relationships; (d) The Process of Adjusting to Divorce; and (e) Developing Self-Identity. These findings are examined within the context of the relevant literature, and implications for future research and counselling are discussed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.122
Threshold uncertainty score0.245

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0250.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.233 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MIND→Same topicGenetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals→French-language works237,207→