Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fatherlessness seems to have instigated a growing political and social debate in recent years (Daniels, 1998). At the core of this debate lies the questions of whether fatherlessness today is more widespread than it has been historically, and whether the necessity and efficacy of fathers is important in the changing landscape of family paradigms (Daniels, 1998). In the last thirty years, research has defined fatherlessness in terms of parental marital status, father abandonment, and father death (Daniels, 1998; Gallagher, 1998; Popenoe, 1996). Some psychoanalysts extended the definition to include the emotional absence (Blundell, 2002), or emotional unavailability of the father (Lamb & Tamis-LeMonda, 2004). Research suggests that children raised by both biological parents have greater socio-economic success (McLanahan & Teitler, 1999), seem to have an intellectual advantage (Research Center for Minority Data, 2009), and are less prone to encounter emotional problems than single-parented children (Cockett and Tripp, 1994). These factors reflect the deficit model of fatherlessness that dominated child development research prior to the 1970s (Hawkins and Dollahite, 1997). More current research focused on the benefits of father involvement and purported that fathers who are more involved in the lives of
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.878 | 0.722 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".