Reviews and practice of college students regarding access to scientific knowledge: A case study in two Spanish universities
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>This study analyzes the concepts, attitudes, and practices of 327 pedagogy students from two major Spanish universities related to the process of finding academic information utilizing open access. A training program has been developed through an innovation project (PIMCD) to address the problem of the lack of university training designed to enable students to access reliable sources of scientific knowledge. A mixed questionnaire with a pretest-posttest design, applying a descriptive analysis, a factor analysis, and a Wilcoxon test was administered to students. The results show that it is essential to provide information and training to encourage university students to learn how to find and manage rigorous and reliable sources of information. While searching for academic information, Spanish students tend to focus on the use of Google and, to a lesser extent, Google Scholar. Although there are no significant limitations of access to Spanish language articles, students’ attitudes remain very positive towards the concept of open access. In short, in accordance with the study results, the promotion of educational activities relating to the search for and selection of information and the use of reliable and rigorous academic content is highly recommended in the university context.</p>
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 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 | 0.017 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it