MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1503422782 · doi:10.1111/cdep.12128

Young Children's Thinking About the Future

2015· article· en· W1503422782 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueChild Development Perspectives · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicIdentity, Memory, and Therapy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGovernment of Ontario
KeywordsPsychologyConstruct (python library)Episodic memoryCognitionChronesthesiaCognitive developmentEarly childhoodCognitive psychologyDevelopmental psychologyCognitive science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Thinking about the future has become a focus of study in both adult and childhood cognition. Of special interest is the capacity to mentally pre-experience future events that involve the self (or episodic future thinking) and how this capacity relates to other aspects of cognition, including memory. In this article, I review developmental psychologists’ approaches to exploring this construct in preschool-age children. I highlight the strengths and limits of these approaches and suggest ways to further develop tasks that test future thinking. I then provide a brief overview of theories arguing for close links between episodic future thinking and memory, and episodic future thinking and theory of mind, along with relevant developmental data. I conclude by discussing challenges and directions in this area of research, including the need to identify more clearly the behaviors that reflect future thinking ability and when these develop.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.741
Threshold uncertainty score0.889

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.270 · 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