1977
DOI: 10.1177/104438947705800705
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Single Parent Adoptions

Abstract: An investigation consists of a comparative evaluation of questionnaire responses with similar data collected from a sample of adoptive couples

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

1
9
0
4

Year Published

1979
1979
2012
2012

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
1
9
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…[12]) when f ∼ f c , and to a creep motion of the interface when f ≪ f c . Indeed it was realized that, due to the glassy nature of the static pinned interface, a moving interface would have to overcome divergent barriers as the applied force is reduced [13][14][15][16][17] in contrast to much older theories that assumed that motion occured only through finite barriers [18]. This lead to the proposal of a phenomenological theory of creep resulting in a highly non-linear v−f characteristics of the form v ∝ exp (−(U c /T )(f c /f ) µ ).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[12]) when f ∼ f c , and to a creep motion of the interface when f ≪ f c . Indeed it was realized that, due to the glassy nature of the static pinned interface, a moving interface would have to overcome divergent barriers as the applied force is reduced [13][14][15][16][17] in contrast to much older theories that assumed that motion occured only through finite barriers [18]. This lead to the proposal of a phenomenological theory of creep resulting in a highly non-linear v−f characteristics of the form v ∝ exp (−(U c /T )(f c /f ) µ ).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…where the discretized Laplacian for all x, it is pulled at the boundary at the origin, H(0) → H(0) + 1. This is an example of interface depinning which has been widely studied [9,10,5]. The difference here is that rather than being driven uniformly, the interface is driven by being slowly dragged at the boundary.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Nonetheless, the existing literature suggests that IA children are at risk, and a significant minority experience long-term difficulties in one or more domains. This is not surprising, since the reasons that children are available for international adoption have often included extreme poverty, social disorganization, and other traumas (Altstein & Simon, 1991;Feigelman & Silverman, 1977, 1983Sokoloff, Carlin, & Pham, 1984). Many IA children experience abuse, neglect, malnutrition, and poor medical care prior to adoption, all of which place them at risk for subsequent disorder (Chisholm, Carter, Ames, & Morison, 1995;Groza, Ryan, & Cash, 2003;Hoksbergen et al, 2003b;Lin, Cermak, Coster, & Miller, 2005;MacLean, 2003;.…”
Section: Characteristics Of Internationally Adopted Childrenmentioning
confidence: 88%