La comprensione della comunicazione non verbale nei bambini bilingui
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The main objective of the present study was to highlight possible advantages determined by experience with two diverse linguist codes in the comprehension of non-verbal communication. This specifically, in those communicative acts that, to be understood, require: good meta-cognitive competence, meta-representational ability, inferential ability and the capability to attribute to this and to other cognitive states, and to forsee the behaviors on the basis of these inferences. The communicative acts investigated were: direct, indirect, deceitful and ironic actions. Two different groups were examined, one in Canada and one in Italy. The group in Canada consisted of 100 children; 50 French-English bilingual and 50 monolingual English children. The group in Italy consisted of 50 children; 25 French-Italian bilingual and 25 monolingual Italian children. Results of the present study indicate that the ability to speak two languages aids in the comprehension of non-verbal communicative acts. In particular, this advantage is evident in those communications that require comprehension of intentions in complex situations (deceitful and ironic actions)
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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; both teacher heads 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".