MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1489357286 · doi:10.7202/016410ar

Système de valeurs et rapports au temps des adolescents québécois

2007· article· fr· W1489357286 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Gilles Pronovost

Bibliographic record

VenueRecherches sociographiques · 2007
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPhilosophy, Sociology, Political Theory
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’article présente certains résultats d’une enquête par questionnaire menée auprès de 1 847 jeunes québécois âgés entre 11 et 15 ans. Pour la majorité d’entre eux, les parents représentent leur principale source de soutien. Ils se font de leur vie adulte une image à la ressemblance de celle de leurs parents : d’abord l’amour et un travail valorisant, de nombreux amis ; quand tout cela sera jugé satisfaisant, ils auront des enfants. Le refus de la famille, sorte de négation des valeurs familiales, renvoie à des rapports difficiles à l’institution familiale et à l’institution scolaire, l’une des résultantes étant une identité plus problématique. Les amis constituent la deuxième source de soutien des jeunes ; cette source prend de plus en plus d’importance avec l’âge, mais sans pour autant effacer le rôle des parents. Ils intériorisent très tôt les rapports au temps de la vie adulte et ils se disent stressés. Les aspirations scolaires sont fortement reliées à leurs représentations de l’avenir, dans la construction d’une perspective sur soi qui reconnaît l’empreinte du temps.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.848
Threshold uncertainty score0.305

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.163
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.245 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRecherches sociographiquesSame topicPhilosophy, Sociology, Political TheoryFrench-language works237,207