Listening to Indigenous Girls' Experiences of Warmth and Caring: A Qualitative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Indigenous Girls in Canada face the results of centuries of compounded social, economic, psychological, and spiritual harms due to the disrupting force of colonization, which still carries harms today and reveals itself in gaping disparities between the wellbeing of Indigenous children and the general population of children in Canada. Indigenous scholars frame the residential school system as morphing into the child welfare system (Blackstock, 2007). Family relationships were ruptured under colonization, residential schools, and the child welfare systems. All of these disruptions created intergenerational trauma, leaving children to navigate life with memories of the threads of caring moments they have received from significant relationships. The present study focused on the voices of 16 Indigenous girls and their memories of caring moments. Half of the girls in this study had been referred to services at an Anishinaabe family care center (i.e., an Indigenous child and family mental health care centre); the other half were girls from the surrounding communities. The purpose of this study was to listen to the girls voices regarding what they have received from significant people in their lives. An inductive thematic analysis of interview transcripts with eight clinically referred girls and eight community girls revealed four overarching themes: 1) Moments of Love, Warmth, and Care, 2) Relationship Expectations, 3) The Development of Socioemotional Capacities, and 4) View of Self as Caring. The model derived from these themes elaborates how moments of warmth and care create developmental experiences of growth (i.e., Relationship Expectations, Socioemotional Skills) that enable the girls to view themselves as caring. Implications for culturally competent interventions with First Nations girls 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 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 | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.025 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".