Julkaisuarkisto

Background: Research has long identified class differences in the development of child behavioral difficulties; however, adjudicating between competing subcultural and resource-based explanations has been problematic because of the difficulty in separating mechanisms from pre-existing risk factors.

Objective: We use variation in financial strain, experienced by households in Ireland during the Great Recession, to examine whether stable subcultural characteristics or dynamic resources best accounted for differences in child behavioral difficulties.

Methods: This paper uses hybrid ‘between–within’ models to disentangle the effects of financial strain from existing class differences in determining child behavioral difficulties, using longitudinal data from Cohort98 of the Growing Up in Ireland study (N = 6,039; 51.2% female; ages 9–17) compiled before, during, and after the Great Recession in Ireland.

Results: Analysis indicates that class differences in child behavioral difficulties are largely accounted for after adjusting for mean financial strain and parental depression. Change in financial strain is associated with increased internalized and externalized behavioral difficulties in both boys and girls.

Contribution: Our findings militate against a purely subcultural understanding of class differences in child behavioral difficulties, given subcultural values are argued to be independent of changes in resources. By contrast, support is found for a resource-based explanation, with increasing financial strain associated with higher levels of behavioral difficulties.

Curiosity is critical for learning and selective information processing, but it is unclear how it affects eye-movement patterns during reading. We tracked participants’ (n=56) eye movements in a task with 18 health-related questions. Each question was followed by up to 15 statements from three quality categories: scientific relevant (SR), scientific irrelevant (SI), and non-scientific relevant (NR). The statements were concealed in three boxes according to evidence quality. Participants could click on any box to reveal a new statement until they had read all the statements or were ready to answer the question. After reading a statement, participants rated their state curiosity and how useful the statement was for answering the question. The SR statements were rated highest on usefulness and were read most frequently, suggesting that participants were able to detect that these statements had the highest evidence quality. For a more comprehensive view on curiosity, we also measured participants’ trait curiosity with a questionnaire. We found that state curiosity correlated negatively with the thrill-seeking dimension of trait curiosity. Eye movements during statement reading were analyzed at the word-level, controlling for the effects of word length and frequency. Higher state curiosity was associated with lower word-skipping rates and longer total fixation duration on words, irrespective of evidence quality. However, the increase of total fixation duration with state curiosity was steeper for low quality (SI and NR) than high quality (SR) statements. Together, these results suggest that curiosity is related to a careful reading strategy, particularly for low-quality statements.

Understanding who shares academic publications on Twitter is critical to interpretingaltmetrics as signals of scholarly or societal impact. Prior studies have used diverse and oftenincompatible user classification schemes, making synthesis difficult. This study presents asystematic review and meta-analysis of 23 empirical studies (covering 79,014 Twitter users,over 20 million tweets, and more than 5 million tweeted publications) to estimate category-specific engagement across three metrics: user counts, tweets, and tweeted publications. Wedeveloped a harmonized categorization scheme encompassing 11 user types and applied bothrandom effects models (REM) and beta-binomial hierarchical models (BBHM) to estimateproportions, account for study-level variation, and model uncertainty. Across all indicators,individual users were the most active, comprising 66% of users, 55% of tweets, and 50% oftweeted publications. BBHM further enabled in-category vs. out-of-category comparisons andrevealed engagement differences not detected by REM.t-tests on study-level means confirmedsignificant differences between academic individuals and other user types. Despitemethodological heterogeneity, results consistently show that academic and nonacademicindividuals statistically equally dominate Twitter engagement with scholarly content. Ourfindings support the need for standardized user classification schemes and demonstrate thevalue of Bayesian modeling for synthesizing altmetric data in study variation and sparsity.

In this study, I examine how Karl (in Swedish: Carl, in Latin: Carolus) Mesterton (1715‒1773) discusses and refers to earlier philosophy and theology in a dissertation De aeternitate Dei, ‘On the Eternity of God’ (1752). Mesterton was a professor of theology and a professor of logic and metaphysics at the Academy of Turku. He followed Wolffianism, which is based on the thoughts of the German philosopher Christian Wolff (1679‒1754). The research question is in what manner does Mesterton discuss and refer to earlier philosophy and theology in his De aeternitate Dei. This study is qualitative, and reflects how earlier philosophy and theology were conceived by Mesterton in the dissertation. In a broader context, the study is related to the question of how early modern research about the late antiquity and Middle Ages transpired in the Finnish territory in the eighteenth century. The conclusion of this study is that although Mesterton discusses and frequently refers to medieval theology and philosophy, he does not discuss medieval philosophy and theology in detail, and therefore his method of treatment is shallow. In addition, he shows no criticism; however, this was the usual practice at the academy.

Sosiaali- ja terveydenhuollon palveluja paljon käyttävillä asiakkailla tarkoitetaan määrällisesti paljon ja monia kertoja samaa palvelua käyttäviä asiakkaita. Perhekeskuksen monialaisia palveluja paljon käyttävät lapsiperheet voivat olla lisäksi useamman toimialan tai palveluryhmän palvelujen samanaikaisina käyttäjinä. Heidän palvelutarpeensa ovat toistuvia, intensiivisiä, syvälle juurtuneita, pitkäaikaisia ja vaikeasti määriteltäviä. Tämän tutkimuksen tarkoituksena oli kuvata paljon palveluja käyttävien lapsiperheiden oma näkökulma palvelutarpeistaan. Tutkimukseen osallistui 18 paljon palveluja käyttävää lapsiperhettä Etelä-, Länsi- ja Itä-Suomen alueilta. Teemahaastattelut toteutettiin pääosin perheiden kotona toukokuun 2021 ja tammikuun 2023 välisenä aikana. Haastatteluaineisto analysoitiin induktiivisella temaattisella analyysillä. Paljon palveluja käyttävien lapsiperheiden vanhempien esiintuomat palvelutarpeet muodostuivat neljästä kokonaisuudesta: 1) lapsiperheen erityishaasteiden tunnistaminen ja voimavarat tuen selvittämisessä, 2) palvelutarpeita peittävät kielteinen palveluasenne, ikävät lapsuuden kokemukset ja ohjauksen puute, 3) vanhemman mielenterveyden ja riippuvuuksien huomioiminen osana palvelusuunnitelmaa ja 4) vanhemman tarve tulla kuulluksi ja kannatelluksi monien ristiriitaisten tunteiden keskellä. Palvelutarpeiden tunnistaminen vaatii ymmärrystä perheiden haastekerrostumista. Tämän tutkimuksen tulosten perusteella tarvitaan tutkimustietoa perhekohtaisten palvelutarpeiden ennakoinnin merkityksestä, integroiduista perhepalveluista ja niiden vaikuttavuudesta. Syvällinen ymmärrys lapsiperheiden palvelutarpeista auttaa perhekeskuspalveluiden toimijoita tarvekohtaisessa tunnistamisessa ja palvelujen kohdentamisessa.