“A Healthy Black Identity” Transracial Adoption, Middle-Class Families, and Racial Socialization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In May of 2008 the Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute issued a report that questioned whether or not transracial adoption is truly in the best interest of the child, thus newly igniting the controversy over transracial adoption. While the research on this controversial topic is substantial, most studies (including those cited in the Donaldson Report) are limited in their scope. Drawing from in-depth, semi-structured interviews with middle-class young black adults, this study offers a broader perspective on transracial adoption by focusing on a range of parent/child race relationships in a class context. The impact of racialized family structure on black identity development is examined by comparing the experiences of young black adults raised in families with two black parents (monoracial), one white and one black parent (biracial), and two white parents (transracial). This article also addresses a void in the literature by focusing on the impact socioeconomic class has on identity formation, particularly middle-class black identity. Results indicate that the formative experiences of young black adults who differ in terms of racialized family structure but share a classstatusarelargely similar. These similarities challenge a number of assumptions that have been made in prior transracial adoption research.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".